From pbond at mail.ngo.za Tue Jul 1 00:25:59 2008 From: pbond at mail.ngo.za (Patrick Bond) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 08:25:59 +0200 Subject: [Marxism] Stating obvious, SADC says Zimbabwe vote not will of people In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4869CDF7.1080202@mail.ngo.za> Jscotlive at aol.com wrote: > I'm sorry you feel that an analysis which points to the role of Western > imperialism in Africa as leading directly to the current crisis in Zim is > simplistic. I wonder if you could tell me if you feel that Western imperialism does > bear any responsibility for what is happening? > Simplistic does not mean wrong, it means insufficient. Of course imperialism bears responsibility for putting unbearable pressure on Zim and other African societies, and I can send you a million words or more I've penned to document this. But it doesn't mean you can leave out (as do so many Mugabe-fronters) the compradorisation and neoliberal restructuring of the Zim economy that Mugabe and his cronies embraced, until repayment of WB/IMF debt became impossible in 1999. The way local overaccumulation crisis and post-liberation development policy were managed - into a classical structural adjustment attack on wages, social programmes and living standards, and the manufacturing economy - reflects imperialism's Bretton Woods redistributive agenda, which in turn built up a class of parasitical rentiers. As a result, Zimbabwe has Africa's highest rate of capital flight by elites, even higher in relative terms than Nigeria: www.*peri*.umass.edu/236/hash/61e07e4377/publication/301/ > ... You mention that pressure needs to be brought to bear against Mbeki. What do > you think his reasons are for failing to criticize or come out against > Mugabe up to now?... > See below. And below that, some evidence of pressure by trade unions. > Does Mugabe have any popular support either within or without Zimbabwe from > any section of the people? > Sure, he runs a patronage state (with 9 million % inflation so that can't continue) which takes care of a few thousand rich cronies, along with a few tens of thousands of police/army/bureaucrats, and quite a few more peasants and occasional beneficiaries of state pre-election vote-buying programmes (this year tractors and hoes were given out, though petrol, seeds and fertilizer are very hard to come by). But the majority of the country's 12 million people (perhaps 3 million or so of whom are outside Zimbabwe now) want him out, that's quite evident. > Has there been any indication of a weakening in the resolve of the security > services and army in their repression? Any sign of them beginning to turn > against the regime? > Sadly, not much more than a few isolated cases of those with a conscience leaving for exile. Since Rhodesian times, the security force discipline, augmented the last decade by the paramilitary Green Bombers, grew to formidable levels. *** http://www.counterpunch.org/bond03272007.html March 27, 2007 Mugabe: Talks Radical, Acts Like a Reactionary Zimbabwe's Descent By PATRICK BOND If you want to know what's going on in Zimbabwe, you could try taking seriously the view commonly argued by the independent left in this region, namely that Mugabe talks radical -- especially nationalist and anti-imperialist--but acts reactionary, especially to the urban poor and working people. Fortunately, we have a fresh version of this argument, made to millions of viewers on Sky News Sunday Live with Adam Boulton on March 18. Boulton interviewed Moeletsi Mbeki, the younger brother of South Africa's president Thabo Mbeki. Exiled from apartheid South Africa as a member of the African National Congress, Mbeki lived in Harare for many years, and was once a Mugabe supporter. But explaining the current situation, he did not mince words: Mbeki: Mugabe is prepared to use force, any amount of force, he's prepared to kill the opposition, he's prepared to do anything that he considers necessary to stay in power, so that's why he's still in power. He's prepared to rig the elections which he does when they are held, so those are the reasons why Mugabe is still in power, and as you saw the beating of the leader of the opposition and his other leaders of the opposition during the last few days. Boulton: Whose job is it to do something about it? Is it simply a question of waiting for a movement within Zimbabwe? Should it be neighbouring countries like South Africa that increase pressure? Mbeki: Southern Africa is the most industralised part of Africa and therefore it has a very huge labour force, working class labour force, wage earners. What is the new phenomenon we are seeing in southern Africa is that this labour force they are all joining trade unions, many of them are members of trade unions. Now these trade unions have become politically active and have started forming their own parties, so all the governments in southern Africa are faced with the threat to their power from the trade union movement. MDC, the Movement for Democratic Change, Morgan Tsvangirai, for example, was the leader of the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions. In Zambia we saw a trade union setting up a political party which out voted the then President, Kaunda. So we are seeing in southern Africa the trade unions being the main opposition to the ruling parties and this is really the situation whereby all the countries have a vested interest, all the ruling parties in our region, have a vested interest in ensuring that the opposition does not win in Zimbabwe because they see this as a threat to themselves as well. Boulton: And that would apply to Thabo Mbeki as well, the South African President, that effectively he's worried you would say about the MDC possibly infecting or strengthening a trade union movement within South Africa? Mbeki: Well absolutely, the biggest opposition in reality in South Africa to the government is actually the trade unions and they have threatened to form their own party, they have threatened to encourage the Communist party, which is an alliance with the ANC to stand on its own and compete against the NC in the election. So it's not just South Africa of course, Mozambique, Botswana all of these countries, Namibia, are faced with the same challenge. Boulton: Now I've spoken to President Mbeki about the situation in Zimbabwe a number of times and his argument always is first of all that the whole question of land reform is one which affects the whole region and therefore he has sympathy with what Robert Mugabe is trying to do... Mbeki: There's no land reform in Zimbabwe, what there is, is a confiscation of private property owned by Zimbabwean citizens by a small clique that surrounds Mugabe. There is no land reform in Zimbabwe. Boulton: So given that the situation is deteriorating do you think the time has come now for heavier intervention by South Africa? Mbeki: Well as I explained to you, you are very unlikely to get any meaningful intervention by South Africa or other southern African countries, because all of them the trade union inspired political party led by Morgan Tsvangirai is a threat also to them. Mbeki concludes that Tsvangirai -- who suffered a fractured skull in a police beating on March 11 (see it here: http:slowthoughts.wordpress.com -- is too optimistic about the beginning of Mugabe's end: "I know his willingness to use violence, he has an endless appetite for the use of violence and he sees this as a wonderful opportunity for himself, for the use of violence." And as for big brother Thabo, Moeletsi is just as cynical: "You know our own government is faced with challenges from the trade unions, so if you are faced with that situation I think the priority for any politician is his own power, his own opportunity to stay in power rather than issues of conscience. So I think in terms of South Africa the issue of how to frustrate the trade unions taking power and challenging the power of the ruling parties is more of a priority than the beating of opposition demonstrators and their leader." It may not warrant further elaboration, but Moeletsi Mbeki has reduced last week's arguments by Mr Stephen Gowans of Ottawa to nonsense, and in the process shamed the good name CounterPunch (and indeed 286 other outlets between 22 and 26 March, according to a Google search of "Milosevic" "Mugabe" "Stephen Gowans" -- though Gowans has rewritten this thesis for several years now with Milo as his reference hero). To illustrate the selective analysis that fatally flaws Gowans' work, he cites only Zimbabwe's state-owned press (the Sunday Mail and Herald) and three western newspapers. This is as farcical as trying to draw truth by balancing two extremists with blatant political agendas. Hence Gowans claims that the country's economic crisis is due to "sanctions [that] bar Zimbabwe from access to economic and humanitarian aid, while disrupting trade and investment." What kind of "economic aid" to African countries get from the imperialist powers, one might ask? (Answer: not empowering to any ordinary folk.) And in reality there is plenty of humanitarian aid -- especially food--flowing into Zimbabwe, allowing people to barely survive. Moreover, aside from trivial personal sanctions against ruling party elites traveling to -- or maintaining foreign bank accounts in--the US or Europe, there are only minor financial sanctions against Zimbabwe in place today. What are they? To be sure, the US Congress has prohibited the Bretton Woods Institutions from lending to Zimbabwe, but anyone wanting the IMF and World Bank back in Zimbabwe is no friend of the commoner. Other bank sanctions can be circumvented by cooperating institutions such as South Africa's ABSA and others which funnel vast amounts of remittances from exiled Zimbabweans back home. The Chinese government last year advanced a $200 million loan. Equatorial Guinea provides oil as thanks for foiling a 2004 coup plot. To Gowans point that the MDC has a neoliberal streak, tell us something new. This was first witnessed in February 2000, when the party's then economic secretary promised to privatise all parastatals plus the educational system within five years. And the subsequent backlash allowed former Trotskyist student leader Tendai Biti -- now MDC general secretary--to successfully advocate a social democratic program instead. Because Tsvangirai's MDC is a large multi-class front with backing from the Bush and Blair regimes as well as from the urban masses, it's not to be trusted if it takes part in some form of unity government--perhaps as early as March 2008, in the event Mugabe loses his grip on the ruling party, a distinct possibility in coming days. But it's more likely, as Moeletsi Mbeki says, that Tsvangirai's people will suffer more of the state's thirst for violence that killed 20 000 Zimbabweans in Matabeleland during the early and mid-1980s, a point it seems Mr Gowans does not want to reveal to his readers. In contrast, those whose instincts are left and who are genuinely concerned about Zimbabwe's future would do better to consult websites like kubatana.net or Sokwanele.com or Pambazuka.org, and support the April 3-4 general strike called by the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions, or aid regular protests by Women of Zimbabwe Arise and the National Constitutional Assembly, or talk up last week's occupation of City Hall steps by the Combined Harare Residents Assocation, or witness the progressive forces regularly assembling in the Zimbabwe Social Forum. As far as I can tell -- sitting across the Limpopo River -- there is indeed a nascent left in Zimbabwe, it is beleaguered and beaten, and it doesn't need any distractions from lads in Ottawa who can't tell the difference between talk left and walk right. Patrick Bond coauthored Zimbabwe's Plunge: Exhausted Nationalism, Neoliberalism and the Search for Social Justice. He directs the Centre for Civil Society at the University of KwaZulu-Natal in Durban, South Africa: http://www.ukzn.ac.zaccs and can be reached at bondp at ukzn.ac.za *** Violence on labour leaders in Presidential Run-Off W.T. Chibebe, 30 June 2008 The Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) has learnt with dismay the harassment of labour leaders during the Presidential Run Off by ruling party militia, supporters and State security agents. The current information we have is: 1. The ZCTU district chairperson for Chivhu, Tinashe Murau, was seriously beaten up by Zanu PF militia just before the 27 June Presidential Runoff and has had his hand broken and is currently seeking medical attention. He was beaten after the militia questioned why he wears ZCTU t-shirts and attends ZCTU meetings. 2. Forty-six (46) members of the General Agriculture Plantation Workers? Union of Zimbabwe (GAPWUZ), an affiliate of the ZCTU, have sought shelter in Harare after being harassed and beaten up by youth militia. The members include men, women and children. The ZCTU and GAPWUZ are currently providing them with food. Indications are that more farm workers will be displaced. 3. The Progressive Teachers Union of Zimbabwe (PTUZ), also an affiliate of the ZCTU, has closed its office after its officials have been harassed by unknown people since the start of the Presidential Run Off. Two cars (registration Numbers ABD8989 and AAC5574) visited PTUZ general secretary, Raymond Majongwe, but fortunately he was not at his home. At the same time, other cars with unknown people visited the PTUZ treasurer?s wife claiming that they wanted to take her for ?a funeral?. 4. A ZCTU councilor, Rebecca Butau, based in Chegutu was also seriously beaten and had to seek medical attention. Those who beat her-up said they were looking for David Zunde, another union official from the food industry. Currently Zunde is on the run. The ZCTU expects and influx of its members as they face retribution from ruling party militia and youths. We deplore in the strongest terms what appears to be the targeting of ZCTU officials and union members. As per General Council Communiqu? of 21 June 2008 which among other things, called on the government to stop violence against innocent citizens, and noting that none of the ZCTU demands were met, the ZCTU declares that the elections were neither free no fair. W.T. Chibebe, ZCTU Secretary-General *** Solidarity with the people of Zimbabwe Jan Tsiane, 30 June 2008 The Congress of South African Trade Unions in Limpopo will hold a demonstration on Saturday, 05 July 2008 at the Beit Bridge Border Post. The demonstration is in solidarity with the people of Zimbabwe. The people of Zimbabwe have been subjected to violence by a regime which was supposed to be a progressive government. The recently held one-candidate elections in Zimbabwe were nothing but a violation of the democratic rights of the people to participate in choosing their own government without fear or intimidation. In this particular instance the people of Zimbabwe were subjected to torture, harassment and politically motivated violence; and as such could not have freely participated in the elections. We take note of the current AU Summit that is taking place in Egypt. We hope that African Leaders who are gathered there will be able to come up with a permanent solution to the problems of Zimbabwe. As a Federation we will continue to act in solidarity with the people of Zimbabwe until such time that they are able to determine their own leaders under conditions that are conducive to a free and fair elections. Contact Jan Tsiane, COSATU Provincial Secretary, 015 291 2981/2, 082 448 5099 From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Tue Jul 1 00:41:52 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 02:41:52 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] =?windows-1252?q?Houston=2C_Tex=2E=2C_is_God=92s_city?= Message-ID: <908b689f0806302341l12702232o91cd899412ca4cb6@mail.gmail.com> July 1, 2008 Grand Jury Clears Texan in the Killing of 2 Burglars By ADAM B. ELLICK HOUSTON ? A grand jury on Monday refused to indict a 62-year-old man who fatally shot two burglars last November as they fled his neighbor's house. In a case that raised questions of ethnic bias, self-defense and property rights, the jury rejected charges against the man, Joe Horn, who is white. Both victims were illegal immigrants from Colombia. "Joe is not some wild cowboy," Mr. Horn's lawyer, Charles T. Lambright, said at a news conference on Monday. "He was put in a place where he didn't have any other choice." But others reacted angrily to the decision. "There is not a snowflake's chance in hell that an African-American man could do what Joe Horn did and get away with it," said Quanell X, a local black activist. "The message that Harris County sent to the entire world is that Houston, Tex., is God's city. There is no longer a need for the criminal justice system, police, judge or jury. You can be all of that on your own." [...] Full: From Jscotlive at aol.com Tue Jul 1 01:09:45 2008 From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 03:09:45 EDT Subject: [Marxism] Stating obvious, SADC says Zimbabwe vote not will of people Message-ID: Patrick: Simplistic does not mean wrong, it means insufficient. Of course imperialism bears responsibility for putting unbearable pressure on Zim and other African societies, and I can send you a million words or more I've penned to document this. But it doesn't mean you can leave out (as do so many Mugabe-fronters) the compradorisation and neoliberal restructuring of the Zim economy that Mugabe and his cronies embraced, until repayment of WB/IMF debt became impossible in 1999. Reply: Agreed and exactly the point I make in my original piece: 'In short, Mugabe's real crime was not one committed against the white privileged minority with land expropriations, it was the crime committed against the Zimbabwean people back in 1980 with the passing of control of Zimbabwe's economy to the IMF and the World Bank, thus ensuring the continuance of a legacy of exploitation and pillage begun by Cecil Rhodes in the 19th century, and subsequently carried on with vigor by successive British governments thereafter' It seems that you feel we should be focusing our ire on Mugabe and his regime, which is the symptom of a generation of neoliberalism and imperialism which has ravaged that entire continent. In this I disagree with you. Yes, Mugabe has decided to remain in power regardless of the cost to the vast majority of the people of his country, and yes he has lost legitimacy as a result, but that in no way diminished the fact that this crisis has its roots in structural readjustment emanating from Washington DC through the agency of the IMF and World Bank. From walterlx at earthlink.net Tue Jul 1 01:20:37 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 00:20:37 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [Marxism] WSJ: Can African Leaders Solve Crisis in Zimbabwe? Message-ID: <27674459.1214896837830.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> (It looks like Washington and London are being frustrated in their hopes of getting the leaders of the African states to intervene on behalf of the US and UK to impose their desired solutions on the people of Zimbabwe. It would be unwise for the US and UK, not to speak of logistically difficult, to militarily intervene against the Zimbabwe government. As we read, Tsvangirai is ready to join Mugabe's government, but probably only if he had control over the army and police, something Mugabe would probably not agree with. African foot-dragging seems to be accomplishing what open defiance of the US and UK would not: giving Washington and London what they want of Mugabe, a push aside and down, though not quite out. As is evident, Mugabe DOES retain support in some sectors, which is why Tsvangirai and the MDC hope to achieve their goals through maneuverings. It's evident that these African heads of state are rather nervous over the precedent which their intervention against Mugabe would suggest for future interventions against themselves and their governments.) ============================================== "Mr. Tsvangirai, in an interview with the Sunday Telegraph, reiterated his willingness to sit in a national unity government with Mr. Mugabe's party and his proposal to give Mr. Mugabe a ceremonial position as president for life." ================================================== Can African Leaders Solve Crisis in Zimbabwe? By DAVID HALL THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ONLINE June 30, 2008 7:00 a.m. The Morning Brief, a look at the day's biggest news, is emailed to subscribers by 7 a.m. every business day. Sign up for the e-mail here. The African Union attracts an unusual amount of attention today as the world wonders if regional leaders can ease the crisis in Zimbabwe, where Robert Mugabe was sworn in as president after elections marred by violence and intimidation. Mr. Mugabe was inaugurated Sunday in a hastily convened ceremony, shortly after the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission announced the results of a presidential election run-off which was supposed to have pitted him against Morgan Tsvangirai. The opposition leader garnered more votes than Mr. Mugabe in the general election but withdrew last week from the run-off voting, citing ruling-party pressure on his supporters. During talks ahead of their annual summit in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, AU foreign ministers came up with a draft resolution generally condemning the recent violence in Zimbabwe, but avoiding any direct criticism of Mr. Mugabe, the BBC reports. The draft also called for dialogue, and African leaders are expected to urge Mr. Mugabe to accept some sort of power-sharing agreement between his ruling Zanu-PF party and Mr. Tsvangirai's Movement for Democratic Change. But many leaders have so far shied away from pressuring Mr. Mugabe, and the AU -- which, according to the BBC, has a rule not to accept leaders who haven't been democratically elected -- has yet to comment on a report issued by its own observers calling for new elections to be held "as soon as possible" to correct irregularities, The Wall Street Journal notes. Mr. Tsvangirai has voiced dissatisfaction with the region's official Zimbabwe mediator, President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa, saying he is biased in Mr. Mugabe's favor, the New York Times reports, noting that Mr. Mbeki has contended that he must maintain neutrality. There are those who have voiced strong criticism of Mr. Mugabe, including Zambian President Levy Mwanawasa. But Mr. Mwanawasa was rushed to a hospital in Sharm el-Sheikh suffering chest pains on the eve of the summit, and wasn't in attendance today. Another Mugabe critic is Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga, who has called for the AU to deploy troops to Zimbabwe, as Reuters reports. "What is happening in Zimbabwe is a shame and an embarrassment to Africa in the eyes of the international community and should be denounced," Mr. Odinga told a crowd in his home province in Kenya. That country's power-sharing agreement, reached after a disputed election, is touted as a possible example for Zimbabwe, Reuters notes. Mr. Tsvangirai isn't coming to Sharm el-Sheikh because Zimbabwean authorities haven't given him back his passport since he turned it in to have pages added, the Times reports. But his party has several hopes for the AU summit. One MDC strategist tells the paper: "If we get the African Union to condemn the June 27 election, that'd be good. ? If we can get them to appoint a mediator, we'd be ecstatic. If we can get them to explicitly say they don't recognize the election, and Mugabe shouldn't even be there as Zimbabwe's leader, that'd be historic." ================ Mugabe's Win Poses Problems For African Union After Fractious Vote, Leaders Must Reject Or Affirm Results By MARGARET COKER and FARAI MUTSAKA June 30, 2008; Page A6 When Robert Mugabe, fresh from a victory in a one-sided election and a hastily arranged presidential inauguration, joins an African heads-of-state summit Monday, his colleagues will face a choice: chastise him or cement his claim as Zimbabwe's legitimate ruler. The crisis in Zimbabwe is expected to overshadow the main agenda -- water and sanitation issues -- at the 53-member African Union's annual meeting in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt. But despite global denunciations that Zimbabwe's elections were a sham, it is unclear how decisively the African Union will handle the one-time liberation leader. At least six African presidents and a prime minister have condemned the actions of Mr. Mugabe, 84 years old, in his quest to extend his 28-year rule. Zimbabwe's electoral commission Sunday confirmed an overwhelming victory for Mr. Mugabe in a runoff held Friday. Mr. Mugabe was the only candidate after opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai withdrew from the race because of intimidation and violence against his supporters. Mr. Mugabe won 85.5% of the votes, according to the government commission, while Mr. Tsvangirai, whose name was left on the ballot, garnered 10%. Election officials reported a 42% voter turnout, similar to that in the first round of voting in March, when Mr. Mugabe placed second in official results, with 43% of the vote, behind Mr. Tsvangirai's 47%. The election results, described by Mr. Tsvangirai as an "exercise in self-delusion," triggered a fresh wave of international condemnation. President George W. Bush announced his intention to impose a new round of sanctions against Mr. Mugabe and top government officials. He also said the United Nations Security Council should enact an arms embargo against Zimbabwe. Canada also declared new sanctions on Mr. Mugabe and close military officials. Yet African leaders assembling in Egypt made no immediate comment about the poll numbers or a scathing report issued earlier Sunday by African Union election observers. The report recommended a new election be held "as soon as possible" to correct irregularities. The recommendation was backed by a 400-person observation team from the Southern African Development Community, a group traditionally close to Mr. Mugabe. African Union election observers, speaking at a news conference in Harare, also recommended the African Union promote a power-sharing accord between Mr. Mugabe's Zanu-PF party and Mr. Tsvangirai's Movement for Democratic Change to shore up stability in a nation crumbling under the weight of runaway inflation. "It's inconceivable under the present climate, the way the political landscape is, that Zanu-PF can go it alone," said the African Union election observers' spokesman, Marwick Khumalo. Mr. Mugabe appeared to acknowledge the cascade of complaints. During the swearing-in ceremony he curbed his trademark rhetoric of defiance and adopted a tone of reconciliation. "It is my hope that sooner rather than later we shall, as diverse political parties, hold consultation toward...dialogue," the president said, to the cheers of supporters and the trills of a military band. Diplomats in southern Africa said African Union officials were discussing behind closed doors a recommendation for a Zimbabwe power-sharing deal like one hammered out in Kenya, where election irregularities last year triggered widespread violence. Electoral officials said Mr. Mugabe won the June 27 runoff and he was sworn in for a sixth term. A major sticking point in the discussions is a role for Mr. Mugabe, diplomats said. Mr. Tsvangirai, in an interview with the Sunday Telegraph, reiterated his willingness to sit in a national unity government with Mr. Mugabe's party and his proposal to give Mr. Mugabe a ceremonial position as president for life. Yet African leaders so far have been unwilling to force such a solution on Mr. Mugabe, especially South African President Thabo Mbeki, who has a close relationship with Mr. Mugabe and is scheduled to take over the leadership of the African Union in August. Mr. Mbeki received special commendation in Mr. Mugabe's inauguration speech. Zimbabwe was "indebted" to Mr. Mbeki's mediation efforts, he said. Supporters of a tougher approach say Mr. Mbeki's soft diplomacy isn't an effective way to push Mr. Mugabe to a compromise. ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net Tue Jul 1 01:32:12 2008 From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 03:32:12 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Congress goes on vacation without acting on H.Con.Res.362 (naval blockade of Iran) Message-ID: <000001c8db4c$94a68e80$6401a8c0@office1pc> I don't know how long they are supposed to be out, but the resolution had been expected to pass the House with ease last week. I think it is reasonable to conclude that the recess without acting signals some loss of momentum for the bipartisan war resolution, which hac about 250 House and Senate sponsors the last time I saw a count and was initiated by House Democrats. What will happen when Congress gets back to "work" remains to be seen, naturally. Fred Feldman From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Tue Jul 1 01:41:55 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 03:41:55 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Stating obvious, SADC says Zimbabwe vote not will of people In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <908b689f0807010041u211f0e68wc09101d6b9cf50d7@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 3:09 AM, wrote: > Yes, Mugabe > has decided to remain in power regardless of the cost to the vast majority > of the people of his country, and yes he has lost legitimacy as a result, but > that in no way diminished the fact that this crisis has its roots in > structural readjustment emanating from Washington DC through the agency of the IMF > and World Bank. But we can't do anything much right now about the IMF/WB/USA, while with a concerted effort Mugabe could conceivably be ousted NOW and someone even a little better could conceivably replace him. That would save *some* Zimbabwean lives and alleviate *some* suffering. Artesian's incredible suggestion that the UN shouldn't be permitted to do anything in Zim just because the UN doesn't do anything about US or Israeli crimes, seems to me to be a classic case of cutting off the nose to spite the face. It also bespeaks a horrible disdain about the value of Zimbabwean lives, and about the benefit of saving at least a few of these needless deaths. No wonder third-word common people often don't trust Western leftists. From Jscotlive at aol.com Tue Jul 1 02:11:46 2008 From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 04:11:46 EDT Subject: [Marxism] Stating obvious, SADC says Zimbabwe vote not will of people Message-ID: Ruthless Critic: Artesian's incredible suggestion that the UN shouldn't be permitted to do anything in Zim just because the UN doesn't do anything about US or Israeli crimes, seems to me to be a classic case of cutting off the nose to spite the face. It also bespeaks a horrible disdain about the value of Zimbabwean lives, and about the benefit of saving at least a few of these needless deaths. No wonder third-word common people often don't trust Western leftists. Reply: I agree with Artesian's analysis. The UN is a discredited body, proven beyond doubt to be a de facto arm of US led imperialism. You can't just ignore its crimes and depredations carried out against the poor and oppressed of the developing world in Iraq (2 million killed as a result of UN sanctions); Haiti (the neo colonial removal of a legitimate democratically elected govt followed by UN occupation); Israel (no action or sanction against a state which has violated or ignored more UN resolutions - 130 and counting - than every other UN member state combined). No, I disagree with this knee jerk support for UN action in Zim by leftists. Haven't we learned anything from the debacle of the break up of Yugoslavia? The international left, with few exceptions, covered itself in shame and cowardice then. You mention saving lives in Zim. Very important, I agree. But let's not forget the 6 million children that perish year on year throughout sub-Saharan Africa due to hunger and preventable disease. The problem can never be the solution. The UN is inextricably linked to the strategic and geopolitical interests of the West. It therefore has no place as an honest broker in crises which emanate from imperialist capitals and chancelleries. The MDC are now calling for a negotiated settlement with Mugabe. The unanimous condemnation of Mugabe by leaders at the African Summit did not materialise as the West hoped and had called for. I welcome this rejection of Western meddling in African affairs. The moves by the MDC to engage Mugabe in negotiations is the right one under the circumstances. From sartesian at earthlink.net Tue Jul 1 03:21:28 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 05:21:28 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Stating obvious, SADC says Zimbabwe vote not will of people References: <000001c8da68$af5d4b40$6401a8c0@office1pc><48686198.40300@mail.ngo.za><080a01c8daa5$01bb99f0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad><908b689f0806301936i366c7453n75fe6612a7e56ceb@mail.gmail.com><001d01c8db28$ff79b440$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> <908b689f0806302232s4ae1ab9fn94ae478269519f0a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002901c8db5b$d7f00f40$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> This doctor happens to be Dr. Mengele. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ruthless Critic of All that Exists" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 1:32 AM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Stating obvious,SADC says Zimbabwe vote not will of people > From marvgandall at videotron.ca Tue Jul 1 05:29:55 2008 From: marvgandall at videotron.ca (Marvin Gandall) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 07:29:55 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Congress goes on vacation without acting on H.Con.Res.362 (naval blockade of Iran) References: <000001c8db4c$94a68e80$6401a8c0@office1pc> Message-ID: <005601c8db6d$c9387de0$0202a8c0@MARV> Fred writes: >I don't know how long they are supposed to be out, but the resolution had > been expected to pass the House with ease last week. I think it is > reasonable to conclude that the recess without acting signals some loss of > momentum for the bipartisan war resolution, which hac about 250 House and > Senate sponsors the last time I saw a count and was initiated by House > Democrats. > > What will happen when Congress gets back to "work" remains to be seen, > naturally. ============================= It's expected to pass after the break, but the Iranians for now don't seem too excited about it. According to the the government's English-language satellite channel: Iran ready for US 'War Resolution' Press TV July 1 2008 Iran is fully prepared to meet its domestic gasoline needs in the event of tougher US-imposed sanctions or a blockade on gasoline imports. "We are currently facing no problem in importing the gasoline we require and will be able to produce gasoline in the quickest time," said Iran's Oil Minister, Gholam-Hossein Nozari, in reference to bills in the US Congress. Supported by the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), House Resolution 362 (and the Senate version, Resolution 580), known as the 'Iran War Resolution' can be considered a means of imposing harsher sanctions on oil-rich Iran. The resolution demands that the US president "initiate an international effort to immediately and dramatically increase the economic, political and diplomatic pressure on Iran to verifiably suspend its nuclear enrichment activities..." The resolution instructs the US president to, among other things, prohibit the export to Iran of all refined petroleum products; impose stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains, and cargo entering or departing Iran. This resolution, which was introduced at an AIPAC annual policy conference, has gained 208 co-sponsors in the House and 29 in the Senate. It will likely be put to a vote after July 4. "There is enough gasoline on the international market. The United States can not pressure Iran's gasoline imports," Nozari stated. The Americans themselves are a net gas importer and consumer and have no extra gasoline for sale, he pointed out. "As long as oil-rich Iran can find customers among consuming nations for its crude, it will be able to import its gasoline requirements," Mohammad-Ali Khatibi, Iran's governor to the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), told the Persian daily Sarmayeh in an interview published on Tuesday. Khatibi, however, ruled out the possibility of Washington implementing such a decision 'as the oil market is experiencing such a tense period.' Akbar Torkan, a deputy oil minister, believes that the Oil Ministry could tackle such a potential blockade by cutting the gasoline quota under the current rationing program. "We can cut the quota and only consume our domestic gasoline production of 45 million liters per day," Torkan added. Since Iran has a limited gasoline refining capacity, it implemented a rationing program in June 2007 to limit fuel consumption and ease the burden on state coffers. Under the current program, government subsidies allow fuel to be sold at 1,000 rials (about 11 US cents) a liter. The quota is 120 liters a month for private vehicles. Since March, drivers have been able to purchase additional gasoline for 4,000 rials per liter. Iran's gasoline consumption stands at 65 million liters per day; the country needs to import an estimated 20 million liters of gasoline a day. "We must always be prepared to deal with sanctions. The Oil Ministry has considered all 'possible scenarios' and drawn up plans for the worst situation," Torkan concluded. http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=62150§ionid=351020101 From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Tue Jul 1 06:16:43 2008 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 13:16:43 +0100 Subject: [Marxism] Targeted Countries Message-ID: <6562B5751A184DB88CF2F857C6A9D2B4@home9sg93n9r5y> Surely all this ought ought to be taken for granted by Marxists? -- J. D. full at (30th June) http://gowans.blogspot.com/ Stephen Gowans provides the latest commentary on the misdirection by the Western media in its coverage of the Zimbabwean elections. Defending the Indefensible: Sham Democracy Promoter Defends Imperialist Ties ************** "What Zunes leaves out or does not understand is that non-violent pro-democracy movements are often powerless without imperialist governments first threatening or deploying military interventions, imposing sanctions and blockades and broadcasting anti-government propaganda, thereby turning the population of targeted countries against their governments. In other words, *the bad guys Zunes can rail against to establish his leftist credentials* (my emphasis - J. D.) do the dirty work while his people's forces come in at the end to effect the coup de grace. The result is never democracy, in the original sense of the word, but improved trade and investment conditions for Western economic elites - the same elites Sharp and Zunes are taking foundation lucre from". *************** ( Zunes says ) governments can't be brought down unless they lose popular support. Zunes' last point is true, but the pressure Western governments exert on foreign policy targets through threats of war, bombing campaigns, sanctions, and propaganda, go a long way toward alienating target governments of popular support, and thereby preparing the ground for Sharp- and Zunes-trained overthrow movements to go to work. Serbia, whose once social- and publicly-owned enterprises have been sold off to Western investors, is a model of what overthrow movements Zunes celebrates and assists produce. ************* J. D. From sartesian at earthlink.net Tue Jul 1 07:09:44 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 09:09:44 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Targeted Countries References: <6562B5751A184DB88CF2F857C6A9D2B4@home9sg93n9r5y> Message-ID: <008a01c8db7b$bb105810$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> " Zunes says ) governments can't be brought down unless they lose popular support. Zunes' last point is true," ___________ Not really. Mossadegh and Arbenz hadn't lost popular support. They didn't do enough to mobilize it, but they weren't brought down due to its lack. Yes, Marxists should be, need to be, the first to separate and distinguish the source of and solution for immiseration from the appeals to the democrats of imperialism; and do so in order to supplant such appeals with a program for economic, social emancipation. ----- Original Message ----- From: "james daly" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 8:16 AM Subject: [Marxism] Targeted Countries > From sartesian at earthlink.net Tue Jul 1 07:19:31 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 09:19:31 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Congress goes on vacation without acting on H.Con.Res.362 (naval blockade of Iran) References: <000001c8db4c$94a68e80$6401a8c0@office1pc> <005601c8db6d$c9387de0$0202a8c0@MARV> Message-ID: <009001c8db7d$18c41e00$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Here's an idea for gauging the depth and the number of US ruling class interests in further military action against Iran: Ask any candidate for a federal office, ask any editorial/policy board of any media/think tank etc etc: "Will you support an end to funding all covert military actions against Iran?" Anybody want to guess what the number one answer will be? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marvin Gandall" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 7:29 AM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Congress goes on vacation without acting on H.Con.Res.362 (naval blockade of Iran) From pance at rogers.com Tue Jul 1 07:25:16 2008 From: pance at rogers.com (Pance Stojkovski) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 09:25:16 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] The Paradoxes of Latin American Development Message-ID: A good summary of the situation in Latin America. Pance. ======================== The Paradoxes of Latin American Development By James Petras Latin American development presents us with a rich array of paradoxes, which befuddle the predictions, prescriptions, and commentaries of writers and academics from the right and left. Abrupt changes and shifts in the political correlation of forces is matched by striking structural continuities. PDF of the complete article: http://petras.lahaine.org/articulo.php?p=1740 HTML version: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9475 From binesi at gvtel.com Tue Jul 1 07:28:27 2008 From: binesi at gvtel.com (David Thorstad) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 08:28:27 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] social regression via religion Message-ID: <486A30FB.70204@gvtel.com> OY and VEY! More "identity politics" running amok. David ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ** * * * * *La France des diverses cit?s in rubrique ? ?a va mieux en le disant ?, Marianne, 28.06-04.07.2008, p. 17 par Guy Konopnicki * La commission charg?e de moderniser le pr?ambule de la Constitution ne remettra pas son rapport avec l?automne. La t?che semble plus complexe que ne l?imaginait Nicolas Sarkozy en confiant ? Simone Veil la direction de ce groupe de travail charg? d?int?grer la reconnaissance de la diversit? fran?aise ? l??nonc? des principes de la R?publique, une et indivisible. La diversit? a frapp? tr?s fort dans un quartier de Paris o?, depuis plus d?un si?cle, toutes les immigrations s?int?graient. A cet endroit, les jeunes juifs se prom?nent avec des signes distinctifs, ce qui n?est pourtant plus obligatoire depuis la reddition du g?n?ral von Choltitz, le 25 ao?t 1945. D?autres jeunes gens, souvent ?galement affubl?s d?oripeaux identitaires, leur disputent des territoires strat?giques, situ?s entre le Guignol et la pi?ce d?eau du parc des Buttes-Chaumont. ?a, c?est Paris aujourd?hui. Au pied des Buttes, tout est calme. On ne signale pas d?affrontements sur la ligne de d?marcation qui s?pare les quartiers h?t?ros friqu?s du r?duit gay branch?. Dans la capitale des ? diversit?s ?, les groupes ennemis s?accrochent ? leurs origines. Jadis, la municipalit? de Paris a tout fait pour conforter les groupes et creuser les diff?rences. Le maire, Jacques Chirac, alors soutenu par les ?lus socialistes, a favoris? et soutenu financi?rement l?implantation, dans le XIX?me arrondissement, du plus grand lyc?e loubavitch d?Europe. Jusque-l?, les juifs d?Europe orientale qui s?installaient ? Paris abandonnaient les obscures traditions de Pologne et d?Ukraine, barbes, papillotes, caftans et chapeaux. Ils parlaient parfois un fran?ais incertain, mais entre le boulevard de Belleville et les Buttes-Chaumont on rencontrait rarement des juifs v?tus comme leurs anc?tres des ghettos. Aujourd?hui, on pourrait croire que la rue de Crim?e doit son nom ? une population qui semble sortir des Contes d?Odessa d?Isaac Babel. On ne saurait pourtant parler de retour des traditions. Les descendants des immigr?s de Pologne et de l?Empire russe sont int?gr?s depuis longtemps, on les rencontre plus souvent ? Saint-Germain-des-Pr?s que dans la rue de Crim?e. Pour de myst?rieuses raisons, des juifs venus du Sud se sont d?guis?s en ashk?nazes de 1905 pour prendre leur part de ghetto en plein Paris. L?immigration juive d?autrefois ?tait, en tous domaines, un mod?le d?int?gration. Elle n?enfermait pas ses enfants dans les ?coles confessionnelles. Trop heureux de trouver un pays o? l??cole et l?universit? ignoraient les discriminations, les immigr?s juifs attachaient le plus grand prix ? la r?ussite scolaire. Ils ne r?clamaient pas de cantines casher, moins encore des ?tablissements o? l?on peut prier cinq fois par jour. Ils aimaient cette ?cole la?que qui permettait aux gosses des tailleurs polacks de devenir m?decins, ing?nieurs, d?int?grer l?aristocratie r?publicaine, celle du m?rite et du concours. Aujourd?hui, dans ces m?mes quartiers o? les jeunes juifs, vivant souvent dans des taudis, se pr?paraient aux ?tudes sup?rieures, on isole les enfants, de la cr?che au lyc?e. On les enferme dans des ?coles confessionnelles. Et cette d?sint?gration a ?t? con?ue, financ?e par la Ville de Paris et par l?Etat. Des ministres socialistes ont accord? le b?n?fice du contrat ? des ?tablissements o? le costume religieux est obligatoire, la mixit? interdite et o? l?on prend des libert?s avec l?enseignement de l?histoire et celui des sciences de la nature. Les ?lus parisiens, de droite et de gauche, ont subventionn? l?obscurantisme. Ils ont d?truit ces p?pini?res de la R?publique qu??taient les quartiers populaires de Paris. Alors, il y a des bandes, des affrontements. Tout le monde s?indigne, mais, quand on construit des ghettos, on pr?pare les pogroms. -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Attached Message Part Url: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/marxism/attachments/20080701/51fb9f2f/attachment.txt From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Tue Jul 1 07:49:54 2008 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 14:49:54 +0100 Subject: [Marxism] Stating obvious, SADC says Zimbabwe vote not will of people References: <000001c8da68$af5d4b40$6401a8c0@office1pc><48686198.40300@mail.ngo.za><080a01c8daa5$01bb99f0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad><908b689f0806301936i366c7453n75fe6612a7e56ceb@mail.gmail.com><001d01c8db28$ff79b440$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> <908b689f0806302232s4ae1ab9fn94ae478269519f0a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Ruthless omitted to say that the doctor caused both infections, and has taken out a life insurance on the patient. The doctor's name, by the way, is not Mengele but Shipman. http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/serial_killers/notorious/shipman/dead_1.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ruthless Critic of All that Exists" To: "James Daly" Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 6:32 AM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Stating obvious,SADC says Zimbabwe vote not will of people : On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 11:17 PM, S. Artesian wrote: : : > No. When the UN takes these steps regarding the actions of the the US, the : > UK, France, against their own and the world's peoples, talk to me again. : : So let's see...a doctor refuses to treat a patient's foot infection. : Patient's hand is also infected. : : Doctor is ready to treat the hand infection. : : Patient refuses. Says: "When you are ready to treat my foot infection : also, then and only then can I allow you to treat my hand infection!" : : How does that make sense? : : ________________________________________________ : YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. : Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu : Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/james.irldaly%40ntlworld.com : From glparramatta at greenleft.org.au Tue Jul 1 07:53:51 2008 From: glparramatta at greenleft.org.au (glparramatta) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:53:51 +1000 Subject: [Marxism] Friedrich Engels: the Che Guevara of his day | Links Message-ID: <486A36EF.6090402@greenleft.org.au> Most people know that Friedrich Engels (1820?1895) was the lifelong friend and collaborator of Karl Marx, and for most people the image of Engels that springs most readily to mind is of a heavily bearded, earnest old Victorian gentleman (most likely standing in the background of a group consisting of Marx and his family). In this excellent and inspiring biography, John Green sets out to ?remove much of the historical dust, in order to reveal the man of flesh and blood hidden beneath, someone we can readily identify with and who comes alive through his passionate historical intervention?. Throughout the book Green time and again returns to comparisons between the younger Engels and Che Guevara Full article at http://links.org.au/node/502 Subscribe free to /Links - International Journal of Socialist Renewal/ - at http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373 From sartesian at earthlink.net Tue Jul 1 08:03:30 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 10:03:30 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Stating obvious, SADC says Zimbabwe vote not will of people References: <000001c8da68$af5d4b40$6401a8c0@office1pc><48686198.40300@mail.ngo.za><080a01c8daa5$01bb99f0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad><908b689f0806301936i366c7453n75fe6612a7e56ceb@mail.gmail.com><001d01c8db28$ff79b440$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad><908b689f0806302232s4ae1ab9fn94ae478269519f0a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <00c401c8db83$3e569700$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Exactly: 1. First do no harm 2. Second, Physician heal thyself 3. Third, Doctor has dirty, and bloody hands, and might better be called a butcher 4. Fourth, the doctor is actually a vector for infection, not its cure. 5. Doctor is interested only in harvesting organs for resale. ----- Original Message ----- From: "james daly" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 9:49 AM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Stating obvious,SADC says Zimbabwe vote not will of people From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net Tue Jul 1 08:16:10 2008 From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 10:16:10 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Congress goes on vacation without acting on H.Con.Res.362 (naval blockade of Iran) Message-ID: <000001c8db85$036abfc0$6401a8c0@office1pc> Marvin wrote; It's expected to pass after the break, but the Iranians for now don't seem too excited about it. According to the the government's English-language satellite channel: and submitted: Iran ready for US 'War Resolution' Press TV July 1 2008 Iran is fully prepared to meet its domestic gasoline needs in the event of tougher US-imposed sanctions or a blockade on gasoline imports. Fred responds: Well, I am glad that the term "war resolution" is catching on. This is a sensible approach, considering that the resolution begins by supposedly banning use of force without authorization, and then authorizes a massive use of force -- a naval blockade, as well as other war measures. It was "expected to pass" the House last week. Now it is "expected" to pass after the break. So it seems like a reasonable speculation that something may be slowing the juggernaut on this. It is positive that it is beginning to be recognized as a "war resolution" and not a resolution against the use of force. We will see. Partly this is an election maneuver by the Democrats, aimed at proving that they are as tough or tougher than the administration on Iran and thus earning the votes of Muslim-haters and similar "decent hard-working white Americans." But, whatever represents a continuation and deepening of the deeply-rooted, currently escalating war drive against Iran. A war drive that goes deeper than what its immediate effects on oil prices, the national debt, and stock and bond prices will be, though these will be factors. Iran has dared to compete with US imperialism in the Middle East. This is a crime that is supposed to be punishable by death. It has dared to be independent in ways that Saddam's Iraq, from the time he took the full power into his hands, never was. Iraq was an easy target, easy to make an example of. Iran is a much more difficult target, but also a much more necessary one to a US attempting to prove that it can still cut the mustard as a world dominator. Retreating on Iran is possible for US imperialism, but it will be a watershed setback for US imperialism even if Iran makes many concessions as I am sure the regime is willing to do. The alternative to retreat is war witb Iran. We should not dismiss the explosive war character of a US naval blockade of Iran. It is a US military commitment of massive proportions. I am glad Iran is preparing. I know they can maintain their gasoline supplies. Iran is not an island, for one thing, and has an enormous land borders with Central Asian states, Afghanistan and Pakistan. But for us, that is not the issue. The issue is war, not gasoline supplies. A naval blockade means a war has begun. It is the signal Israel needs to be sure it can count on US backing for air attacks on Iran. It is the signal Israel needs to be sure the US will act militarily to block retaliation. Israel has no interest in the US government having "plausible deniability" about an Israeli attack on Iran. That could be ruinous for the Israeli state. Iran has its own reasons for shrugging off the threat. A naval blockade will not break them. But the dynamic of a naval blockade points to acts of massive human and material destruction against Iran. And without such destruction, the US will come out of a naval blockade as a loser, even if it gets some stopgap concessions on nukes or something, and it will not necessarily get any.` There's no basis for striking the pose of the "blithe spirit" in this situation. Fred Feldman From Midhurst14 at aol.com Tue Jul 1 09:32:44 2008 From: Midhurst14 at aol.com (Midhurst14 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 11:32:44 EDT Subject: [Marxism] Friedrich Engels: the Che Guevara of his day | Links Message-ID: See the review in the Islip News Letter of June George Anthony From Dbachmozart at aol.com Tue Jul 1 09:35:05 2008 From: Dbachmozart at aol.com (Dbachmozart at aol.com) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 11:35:05 EDT Subject: [Marxism] What Scott McClellan (and Jay Rockefeller) Didn't Tell Us Message-ID: The Story Behind George Bush's Lies By RICHARD W. BEHAN Long accused of signature dishonesty, the Bush Administration now stands twice indicted, by Scott McClellan?s book and by two damning reports from Jay Rockefeller?s Senate Select Committee on Intelligence?the ?Phase II? documents. These sources confirm beyond any doubt the Bush Administration, with propaganda and outright lies, deliberately misled the U.S. Congress into authorizing war. That is the truth, but not the whole truth, and the backstory is no less appalling. As much as seven months before the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the Administration was deeply involved in planning and mobilizing for the invasion and military occupation of both Iraq and Afghanistan. None of the activity was remotely related to Osama bin Laden or counterterrorism of any stripe. This is the fundamental truth, it is beyond dispute, and it is fully documented. The incursions into Afghanistan and Iraq were premeditated, hegemonic wars of conquest and territorial occupation, to gain the geostrategic control of Middle Eastern energy resources. Bald acts of unprovoked military aggression, they are direct violations of the charter of the United Nations. The wars are therefore international crimes, but they were not undertaken until the horror of September 11, 2001 provided a spectacular smokescreen. A fraudulent label--the ?war on terror??was concocted to disguise the premeditated violence, and it was quickly unleashed. full article -- _http://counterpunch.org/behan07012008.html_ (http://counterpunch.org/behan07012008.html) **************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars. (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007) From lnp3 at panix.com Tue Jul 1 09:43:39 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 11:43:39 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Michael Hudson interview Message-ID: <486A50AB.6060403@panix.com> http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney07012008.html From marvgandall at videotron.ca Tue Jul 1 10:09:44 2008 From: marvgandall at videotron.ca (Marvin Gandall) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 12:09:44 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Congress goes on vacation without acting on H.Con.Res.362 (naval blockade of Iran) References: <000001c8db85$036abfc0$6401a8c0@office1pc> Message-ID: <022801c8db94$e02939a0$0202a8c0@MARV> Fred writes: > Marvin wrote; > It's expected to pass after the break, but the Iranians for now don't seem > too excited about it. According to the the government's English-language > satellite channel: > > and submitted: > Iran ready for US 'War Resolution' > Press TV > July 1 2008 > > Iran is fully prepared to meet its domestic gasoline needs in the event of > tougher US-imposed sanctions or a blockade on gasoline imports. > > Fred responds: > Well, I am glad that the term "war resolution" is catching on... [...] > > There's no basis for striking the pose of the "blithe spirit" in this > situation. ========================================= I'm beginning to think you and Artesian like to create artificial differences because you live for polemics - the fiercer the better. There's no contradiction between making a balanced assessment of a situation and being prepared for the worst case scenario - in this case, a naval blockade and war. This is the pose being struck by the Iranians, whose public evaluation of the situation falls well short of your alarums, and corresponds with my own. They see the resolution, however inflammatory, as another bargaining chip and don't give much weight to the possibility of a blockade, both because it would be breached if even if the US attempted one unilaterally, which they see as unlikely because of overriding US interests. The same talk on this list gets you all agitated about "complacency", but you don't fight complacency by running around like a Chicken Little, which breeds it. Anyway, bait on. From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net Tue Jul 1 10:21:37 2008 From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 12:21:37 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] S.Af problems used to foster anti-African racism Message-ID: <000001c8db96$89ed0b50$6401a8c0@office1pc> Of course, as in all the individual cases in Africa, these problems include those that are relatively specific to the neoliberal plus Black-elite orientation of the Mbeki government. The US and British imperialists, as well as basically the others, would prefer a purely "nonracial" liberalism. But this would NOT be an improvement in South Africa today. I know this will be screamed at as apologizing for the Mbeki government, which I do not support, on the grounds that I have dared to think about anything else in the situation besides the unsatisfactory character of the government. But hell, it's not capital punishment, so why should I care? Fred Feldman http://www.lrb.co.uk/v30/n13/disk01_.html Cover title: On Not Liking South Africa Diary Jenny Diski When I was a student in the 1960s I wouldn't shop in Sainsbury's because they sold South African wine. After I married, my father-in-law in South Africa said: 'You've got to live here before you can understand what Africans are like.' I was shocked that anyone could talk about people like that. But I've grown to understand, now I've been living here. Mike is a retired GP from the UK who moved to Cape Town with his South African wife and child eight years ago. They were going for a short stay at Farm 215, an eco-friendly country-house 'retreat' two hours away from the city, and offered to drive me there and back. (The quotes that follow are all from that trip.) The 'you can't understand until you've lived there' argument had kept me from visiting South Africa quite effectively. If being there would make me understanding about apartheid, I preferred to stay away. But now it had to be a very different place, 18 years after Nelson Mandela walked free from prison, 14 years on from the day when South Africa had its first democratic election. I was going to be there anyway - Cape Town was the end point of another journey - and I thought I'd spend a couple of weeks and look around; be a regular tourist in a place where minds had been changed. My small hotel was in the suburbs, an elegant townhouse with high ceilings, a swimming-pool and African art on the walls, and for the first few days I did what tourists are supposed to do. I asked advice from the hotel staff, read the brochures and took the day trip that hit the main spots: the cable-car up Table Mountain, Boulders Beach to see the African penguins, and Cape Point, where hundreds of other tourists were taking it in turns to shoot the ocean and mug for the camera beside the noticeboard that said they were at the southernmost point of Africa. The following day I was directed to Greenmarket Square, where dozens of stalls sold 'African handicrafts': beaded animals and bracelets, drums and T-shirts that all looked as if they had come from the container marked 'Africa' in the Great Central Tourist Warehouse somewhere in China, which dishes out geegaws for every ethnicity of every continent. Then to the Victoria and Alfred Waterfront, identical to every modernised waterfront in the world: fast food outlets, inflated prices, tourists snapping 'authentic' oil-drum bands, and more of the same tat from the Endless Depot of International Crap. I left the waterfront so fast that I got back into the same taxi that had brought me there. The Indian taxi-driver, hearing that I was going to write about my trip, told me without my asking a question: Mandela's heart must be broken. This is supposed to be a democracy, but whites, coloureds and Indians are excluded. Mbeki's government is only interested in Africans. Zuma says what people want to hear, but he's crazy like Mugabe. Tell me any African heads of state who haven't gone corrupt and crazy? In seven years South Africa will be like Zimbabwe. Until then, like the tat in the tourist shops, I could have been anywhere in the world, which was disturbing because I was in South Africa, the miracle of truth and reconciliation, as I'd imagined. Certainly, it had problems - how could it not? - but I supposed that, except for an incorrigible few, South Africans were committed to making the country work. I was in a 'city of contrasts', everyone kept telling me (again without my asking), but the only indications I had of this in my first few days as a tourist were the electrified and razor-wire fences encircling all the houses; the constant barking of the guard dogs behind the defended walls; the signs on sturdy electronic gates that said the wealth indoors was being protected by ADT; and the warning from the people at the hotel not to go out alone at night, ever, anywhere, no matter how close by. I spent the afternoon at the botanical gardens in Kirstenbosch with Moira, a friend of a friend. She was in her late sixties, had grown up in southern Africa, raised her own family in Cape Town, all the while disapproving of apartheid. After the change of government, she taught nursery-aged black and coloured children of returnees from exile, in an impoverished part of town. 'The country is being ruined by the greed and resentment of the Africans,' she said as we had lunch. 'They've got bad values - which is the result of cultural collapse because of the loss of traditional structures, but then again, cheating is the nature of Africans.' She told me a 'true' story from a Zimbabwean farmer friend of hers, who got it from a friend of his, about an Englishman working as a foreman for a black landowner, who asked him: 'How come you never cheat me?' The Englishman, surprised, said: 'Well, I'm just an honest man.' The landowner roared with laughter. 'We have always been cheats. That's the only way to get rich.' Moira explained that the character of the Trickster appears in all the traditional African stories. 'They don't have tales about kings and queens and heroes.' She was adamant about this, though I suggested that the Trickster appears in some form or other in most traditions. Then she told me another story that she assured me was 'true'. An Englishman, a Thai and an African were all together at Oxbridge. After some years the Englishman goes to visit the Thai who is hugely rich. 'How come?' asks the Englishman. 'See that road? I own 10 per cent of it,' the Thai tells him. The Englishman goes to visit the African, who is also hugely rich. 'How come?' 'See that road?' says the African. 'What road?' the Englishman asks. Moira waited for me to burst out laughing, but it was a minute or two before I could make anything at all of this story. Besides, what were the overseas students doing in 'Oxbridge' in the first place if they weren't rich already? Before I left, Moira asked me if I'd been to Robben Island. I hadn't. 'I went once - quite decent accommodation, and they were allowed to have their study groups and books. I left thinking it wasn't nearly as bad as the Nazi concentration camps.' Moira doesn't think she's a racist and does her best to help the impoverished situation of Africans in Cape Town. She pays her gardener 150 rand a day instead of the more usual 100 rand: 'We each of us do what we can to help.' She is not the only person to tell me this. But people aren't satisfied, she says, they continue to complain. At 7.30 one morning she was putting out some rubbish when a homeless man to whom she regularly gives old newspapers, for selling to the recycling depot, called out to her: 'Missus, you give me papers, but I need food.' 'It was too early to cope with that sort of thing,' she told me. 'You see, people feel they are owed and they won't do anything for themselves.' The phrase 'culture of resentment and dependency' came up again and again, like 'the city of contrasts'. Faizal Gangat runs Cape Capers Tours, which includes visits to townships. I met him for coffee towards the end of my stay. He is Indian, born and brought up in Cape Town, but rejects the niceties of South African racial divisions and calls himself black. 'It's a matter of spirit. Anyone can be an African. You can be an African.' He's been a supporter of the ANC since the days when they were a guerrilla army of liberation and clings on to the old ideals now that they're in power and (another phrase) 'running down the first-world economy they started with'. When I ask him about some of the government's clumsier policies he instructs me, 'Make a table,' and then takes my notebook and makes it himself. It shows the population of South Africa in terms of race - 9.1 per cent whites, 2.4 per cent Indian/Asian, 8.8 per cent coloured, 79.7 per cent black - and unemployment: white 4.5 per cent, Indian/ Asian 9.6 per cent, coloured 19.4 per cent, black 30.5 per cent. 'That's why we have Black Economic Empowerment laws. If big businesses had really committed themselves to training and mentorship right at the beginning it wouldn't be necessary. So the government has to make laws to force them to co-operate. How else can those figures be changed?' Gangat believes that Mbeki must go, and is not against Zuma taking over. He knows that there is corruption and incompetence in government. But he reminds me of the weight of history and of the wealth still almost entirely in the hands of white South Africans. It was what I'd been suggesting to the white South Africans who told me of the terminal decline of their country under the ANC government. 'That was another generation,' I was told by the owner of the hotel, formerly an investment banker, a man in his mid-forties. 'You can't blame the whites living here now for the lack of training and education of the Africans.' For all the world as if 14 years were a generation or two. He had been planning to buy the house next door and enlarge the hotel, but with the economy in freefall and Zuma ('totally uneducated') about to get into power, he has decided not to. Indeed, like many whites, he is considering leaving South Africa for good, even though it would mean a drastic lowering of his living conditions. MIKE: We have this 'positive discrimination'. If there's a job advertised the first person to get it will be a disabled black woman; the white male is at the very bottom of the list. It's called Black Economic Empowerment. I call it 'reverse racism'. You don't hear about it but these days there are poor whites living in coloured townships, people who have lost their jobs to blacks. This government has got rid of the educated whites and put untrained blacks in their place. So now the country's collapsing. They just haven't got a head for business. There are no African businesses. The coloureds who have brains are more like the white man. They want to make a profit. It makes them the main criminals - but they know how to do business . . . Blacks have different brains from whites. They don't think in the same way. I read about the suppressed brain research in The God Delusion. They are more inclined to rest. You can see them lying out on the streets, in full sun. They can't even be bothered to go into the shade. Those dead blacks lying on the streets that were on the news during the apartheid era were really blacks sleeping. Some people say that blacks are not more evolved than animals - I don't believe that nonsense. Of course, you meet stupid people everywhere - there are plenty on English council estates . . . We lead a life we couldn't possibly live on my pension in England. But we're thinking about going back to the UK if the situation gets any worse. I looked at various attempts at ecological tourism as a way of salvaging something less discouraging from my stay. They were all admirable efforts to save the planet but none of them really occluded my sense of being in a wealthy nowhere-in-particular. It wasn't until I took one of Faizal Gangat's tours - a visit to Langa Township (population 250,000) and a night at Ma Neo's B&B - that I found I was somewhere very particular after all. There was much astonishment from Moira, Mike, the people at the hotel and others that I was going to spend the night in a township. I was brave, they said (meaning naive or 'liberal', I think), but wasn't it patronising to walk around Langa looking at poverty? I was worried about that, too, until every white person I spoke to said the same thing. MIKE: The blacks are prejudiced against the whites. Some Afrikaners (who are very narrow-minded people) hate the blacks. We are all born racists. It's innate. We're naturally sceptical of outsiders. The Africans are killing and burning immigrants from other parts of Africa and Zimbabwe. We can try and get rid of our racism but it's impossible to lose it completely, however much we want to. Ma Neo welcomed me to her house (a proper one-storey house, not a tin shack, though there were plenty of those in Langa) and told me, as we sat on the sofa, about her life, mostly her experiences as a trained, though now retired Aids nurse. The stories are unbearable, but she wants you to listen to them in all the detail. Retirement hasn't stopped what she calls the 'traffic': every fifteen minutes or so local people knocked at the door, came in hesitantly, looking anxious, keeping their eyes averted and spoke to Ma Neo in Xhosa. She answered calmly, sometimes sending them into the kitchen, where they sat on a stool eating a plate of food; sometimes they listened to what she had to say and left. 'They have trouble remembering when to take their medication. One of my visitors got me some mobile phones and I set the alarms and gave them out.' She recommends malted chocolate for people who come complaining they can't sleep. 'It works in the head,' she says, pointing to her temple. Her B&B has five comfortable rooms and a bathroom at the back, which she built with her pension money. In the evening she hooked her arm firmly through mine and we walked to the local shebeen for a supper of mealy meal porridge with chillies. It was pretty quiet. Just a few men drinking beer at the bar. The woman who owned the shebeen and served us said she had travelled through Heathrow on her way to Singapore to buy clothes to sell in the township. 'She's rich,' Ma Neo told me when she went to the kitchen. 'She doesn't live in the township any more. They move out to the white suburbs, but they don't enjoy it. They come back here for fun.' What would you like me to say when I write about you, I asked her. 'Say that I want whites from Cape Town to come and stay here. No one has ever come. But they should see what it's like in Langa, and stay in my B&B for the weekend so they know about us and support what we're doing. The whites still don't want to accept blacks. Mbeki is corrupt, we have nowhere to turn. My B&B has made the papers, been in the books, but no one in Cape Town seems to care.' Her visitors' book is signed by people from all over the world, but hardly any South Africans. During the day I was taken around the township by Thembalakha from the Tsoga Centre, which trains people to run small businesses. Prince Charles visited years ago, planted a tree and promised to send them a computer. They're still waiting, Thembalakha says, smiling at the severely stunted trunk with the prince's name on its label. He showed me around the old hostels where men working in the city used to live three to a room, 15 people to a unit. Dark concrete and stinking of too many people. They were still inhabited, one bed per family, with children sleeping on mats on the floor, though some have been converted into one-room apartments with a kitchen and bathroom. There was Beverley Hills, a row of solidly built houses for 'doctors and professional people', put up by the apartheid government to conceal the hostels from passing white eyes. And there were the tin shacks of Joe Slovo informal settlement (the government-approved name for 'shanty towns'), where, by arrangement, I was invited to look around while a young woman sat on a bed texting as her mother stood outside with a small stall of bracelets and beads to sell to the few tourists who come by. I felt quite as uncomfortable, white and rich, and patronising, as the white South Africans suggested I would; that was my problem, one of the very few problems that those who lived there didn't have. Passing the most destitute-looking of the shacks, I was certain that they'd been abandoned, that no one lived in them, until I noticed the washing hanging outside. T-shirts and trousers, dresses and sweaters, drying in the dusty heat. Everywhere there was washing hanging up, as if keeping clothes clean was the sole purpose of living. MIKE: I asked our maid: 'Would you rather live in a house like ours, or in your mother's mud hut that won the best in the township?' 'Are you crazy?' she answered. I said to her: 'But you would have to pay rent, and water rates and so on, it wouldn't be a free and easy life like in a mud hut.' 'I'd rather live in a house and work,' she replied. But the blacks complained when they were given houses by Mandela's government. They thought the state should pay for the furniture and upkeep too. They didn't want to work to support their lifestyle. I went to see a friend whom I know from his visits to London. 'You've been meeting the wrong people,' he told me. But the point was I was just being a tourist, happening upon whatever people had to say. My friend was a member of the ANC back in the day, but is now a supporter of the Democratic Alliance. 'There's something to be said for the view that you have to live here to understand what's happening. After apartheid, we were left with a brilliant infrastructure, and natural resources the world envied us for. Now we are having electricity cuts, purely because of incompetence. They sacked expert whites and put undertrained Africans in their place. There has been a black middle-class rush for wealth, and they aren't interested in helping the poor.' We were standing on his balcony up in the hills, looking down at the lights of Cape Town. 'That house has an even better view,' he said, pointing to the one above us. 'That's owned by a coloured man,' he said, after a pause, laughing at me for my political naivety. He has built a house for the man he employs as his gardener, a Zimbabwean refugee. 'Now his wife and half his family have arrived, and they all live there. They take care of the house, but basically I'm responsible for them all. It's not what I would have chosen, but we each do what we can in our own way. Call it paternalistic, if you like, but a white man like me is manna from heaven to them.' I called him paternalistic. 'There is new legislation,' he said. 'The government is taking the multinational oil companies into public ownership. In return they are given a lease, but the law says that the right to the lease could be rescinded at any time. How can anyone expect business to stay and support the government? They just say nothing, smile and make plans to leave.' He agrees that Bantu education was a disaster, possibly the worst mistake of the apartheid regime, apart from thinking that they could hold the country against such a massive black majority. 'But there's a real entitlement problem among the Africans. They think they're owed. But we'll get through this crisis. We've been on the edge of catastrophe for as long as I can remember. People have always been predicting catastrophe. But there are plenty of resources still, and disaster never quite happens. Individuals are all right - people with wealth will always survive. It's the masses who suffer. Always been that way. I do what I can, and I love South Africa. I have a physical relationship with it. It's the most beautiful place in the world. I stand on the balcony and watch the animal life, the view, the plants, the ocean. There's nowhere in the world like it.' And this is true. In fact, when I respond to anyone who asks about my trip to Cape Town by saying, as I do, 'It was awful, really awful,' those who have been there always say, 'But it's so beautiful,' as if I'm being too negative and not appreciating what is good about the place. It makes me feel strangely guilty and graceless. But it was awful, really awful. Jenny Diski has finally finished her novel Apology for the Woman Writing, which will be published in November. F From jbustelo at gmail.com Tue Jul 1 10:59:51 2008 From: jbustelo at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Joaqu=C3=ADn_Bustelo?=) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 12:59:51 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] just back from the national assembly conference...., In-Reply-To: References: <48693D59.3060400@comcast.net> <48694DFB.6040002@optonline.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Mark Lause wrote: > As I have repeatedly said, anyone wanting a pdf scan can ask me > privately and I will send it. I've already done this for about a > half a dozen people who requested it. But clearly it's more fun to > shriek .... Well, when you come right down to it, Mark, it IS More fun... But seriously, I owe Mark an apology. I hadn't seen his offer (or perhaps seen but not registered it because I was quite frustrated by what I guessed was some sort of weird game on his part). This is probably a better way to handle what could be something that misrepresents the campaign and that only a few of us on the list care a great deal about. I'll contact Mark offlist as he suggests. Joaquin From walterlx at earthlink.net Tue Jul 1 11:15:52 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 13:15:52 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Marxism] REAL NEWS NETWORK: Video -Hersh on Iran covert operation Message-ID: <8349693.1214932552537.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> July 1, 2008 Secret war against Iran underway Seymour Hersh says Democratic Party leaders signed on to secret war against Iran In an article in the "New Yorker", Seymour Hersh says that the President got up to 400 million dollars in a ?Presidential Finding? and that top democrats were involved. An unidentified source told Hersh:"The Finding was focused on undermining Iran's nuclear ambitions and trying to undermine the government through regime change." The funds were requested at the same time that a US National Intelligence Estimate late last year stated that Iran had halted any kind of Nuclear Weapons program they may have had by 2003. Despite the report the Bush administration and many in congress continue to talk about Iran as a nuclear threat. In an interview with CNN, Hersh talked about Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney: "They believe that their mission is to make sure that before they get out of office next year, either Iran is attacked or it stops its weapons program," As well, a non binding resolution with bipartisan support is moving quickly through the house. The resolution calls on the White House to ban the export to Iran, of refined petroleum or gasoline and for "stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains, and cargo entering or departing Iran," and would give the President free reign in dealing with Iran including a naval blockade. http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=1809 ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From sartesian at earthlink.net Tue Jul 1 11:29:00 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 13:29:00 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Congress goes on vacation without acting on H.Con.Res.362 (naval blockade of Iran) References: <000001c8db85$036abfc0$6401a8c0@office1pc> <022801c8db94$e02939a0$0202a8c0@MARV> Message-ID: <004801c8db9f$f3647830$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> You're the one who does that Marvin, creates polemics out of nothing but your own wishful thinking.. If you care to refer to the actual context and content of remarks, what was stated that there are major interests in and among the US ruling class that favor military attack on Iran. Obviously, the article by Hersh provides substance to that contention. And obviously, such attacks have already begun. Nobody is baiting here. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marvin Gandall" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 12:09 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Congress goes on vacation without acting on H.Con.Res.362 (naval blockade of Iran) From jbustelo at gmail.com Tue Jul 1 11:35:40 2008 From: jbustelo at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Joaqu=C3=ADn_Bustelo?=) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 13:35:40 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] President Cristina's speech at Mercosur Message-ID: I had the pleasure this morning of listening to Argentine President Cristina Fernandez's speech as host of the Mercosur summit currently being held in Argentina. I say pleasure not because she proposed a program of radical democratic and transitional demands, but because she very honestly described how the last six months had made clear the great challenges facing the Mercosur alliance and the third world generally, that energy and food security and independence are two of the topmost real issues of the 21st Century. I also got to hear a completely zilch speech by Paraguay's foreign minister, who was in a tough position representing a president who has resigned (among other things, to get under the umbrella protection of legislative immunity by becoming a Senator) but is still in office because the current opposition, soon to be government, has boycotted the sessions, preventing the establishment of a quorum, and so his resignation hasn't been accepted by the Congress. This was followed by Tabare from Uruguay, who I must say significantly underfulfilled my very modest expectations. Maybe I just listened to a particularly vacuous and pompous section and the rest was better, but the only thing I can say positive about him is that in comparison with that racist rat Alan Garcia from Peru, at least he came. Unfortunately I lost access to the signal before hearing the others at the summit, including Lula, Evo, Chavez and Bachelet. CNN en Espa?ol carried Cristina's speech live and had promised to carry some of the others, but I was watching a direct raw feed, so I'm not sure whether they followed through. I hope they did carry some of the others. They spend so much time carrying every inconsequential statement by Bush the least they can do is let Latin Americans listen to their own presidents, such as they are. Perhaps Nestor knows where to find the speech in print, so at least those that can read Spanish can find it. Joaquin From walterlx at earthlink.net Tue Jul 1 11:44:35 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 13:44:35 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Marxism] Prensa Latina reports on Zimbabwe Crisis Message-ID: <30270510.1214934275169.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Zimbabwe Crisis at AU Summit By Ulises Canales Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, Jul 1 (Prensa Latina) The 11th Summit of the African Union (AU) focused Tuesday final debates to the political crisis gripping Zimbabwe, so far reluctant to obey Western pressures to condemn the Harare government. Without hiding strong divergences, African leaders ended issues initially included in the meeting's agenda and focused on the complex situation between United States and the European Union. According to diplomatic sources consulted by Prensa Latina, there will be a statement at the end of today's morning session on the dispute in the southern nation, apparently exhorting dialogue. According to criteria by hundreds of reporters in this city, the summit could produce criticism of the Zimbabwe government, but not accusations or sanctions against President Robert Mugabe. At the beginning of the event's top segment Monday, heads of state and government received their Zimbabwean counterpart in the Maritim Sharm El Sheik International Congress Center, who ignoring insistent warnings of attack. AU Commission president Jean Ping discarded that silence on this issue will lacerate the organization's credibility, and advocated for a united African mandate to satisfactorily solve all affairs. Gabon 's President Omar Bongo told journalists Monday that Africans are capable of deciding by themselves and discredited attacks by UN representatives and sanctions by Washington and London. AU Peace and Security commissioner Algerian Ramtan Lamamra slammed punishments, saying sanctions are not the best tool of modern diplomacy. Mugabe was sworn in again as president on Sunday, after winning the June 27 elections, from which Morgan Tsvangirai, opposition candidate from the Movement for Democratic Change, withdrew. The 11th AU Summit ends today, after a week of sessions at the level of experts, permanent representatives and foreign ministers, in which document of vital importance for the integral development of Africa have been analyzed. nm/iff/ucl/mf Zimbabwean Govt Favors Dialogue Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, July 1 (Prensa Latina) Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe is willing to meet with opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai, but he rejected any foreign interference, the president's spokesman, George Charamba, said here on Tuesday. Charamba told reporters at the 11th African Union Summit, being held in this Egyptian coastal resort, that the Zimbabwean government is willing to find a peaceful solution to the conflict. He noted that dialogue must be "free of foreign interference" and slammed Great Britain for criticizing President Mugabe and his party, in an attempt to revive the former metropolis's treatment during the colonial period. My country is sovereign and independent (since 1980), said Charamba, who declined to say whether Mugabe is willing to share power with Tsvangirai, although he made it clear that the president has to sit at the negotiating table first. "Kenya is Kenya and Zimbabwe is Zimbabwe," the spokesman said, ruling out that the same formula implemented in Kenya, which was also hit by postelection violence early this year, has to be implemented in Zimbabwe as well. He admitted that there were outbreaks of violence promoted by followers of Tsvangirai's Democratic Change Movement (DCM) and the governing Zimbabwean African National Unity-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF). In any case, those violent expressions were encouraged by foreign forces interested in destabilizing the Zimbabwean government, added Charamba, who called on Great Britain and the rest of the western world to keep their hands off Zimbabwe. Charamba criticized the motions of condemnation approved by the UN Security Council and rejected Washington's announced sanctions, because the heart of the matter is to try to overthrow Mugabe. nm/jg/ucl ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From jbustelo at gmail.com Tue Jul 1 11:57:16 2008 From: jbustelo at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Joaqu=C3=ADn_Bustelo?=) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 13:57:16 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Zizek, Critchley, "open borders" and finite/infinite demands In-Reply-To: <908b689f0806301845y736c70b2sd60a38a1f984adc0@mail.gmail.com> References: <908b689f0806301845y736c70b2sd60a38a1f984adc0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: "Is 'open borders now' a demand Marxists should be making?" On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 9:45 PM, Ruthless Critic of All that Exists wrote: > I know I am risking the ire of Mike Friedman and others by raising > this question, but I think this question is an important one and Zizek > has a very interesting point about this that is worth discussing. > > Is "open borders now" a demand Marxists should be making? > > (Of course, it's an irreproachable demand). > > > A recent article from the ISO said, "The slogan "No one is > illegal" is not merely a moral imperative, but one based on the idea that so > long as workers allow themselves to be pitted against each other, so long > will they remain weak, exploited victims of capitalism." > > But if border controls were removed, so many workers from elsewhere > would immediately move to the USA that US workers' wages would still > plummet down even more from current levels. Some outfit in Spain, called something like to commission to help refugees or immigrants or something like that, points out that Spain is screwing itself by going along with the new expulsion of immigrants diktat from the European parliament, because immigrants provide a basis of cheap labor which allow the privilege jobs REAL Spaniards hold to be created. There is nothing ultra-radical or "infinite" about the idea that people should be able to live where they want to live. If Ecuadorean president Correa can see his way clear to enunciating this principle and denouncing the euroscoundrels for wanting borders to be open to their goods, their gods (both monetary and religious), their ideology, and even their tourists but NOT workers, then certainly self-professed Marxists can do no less. Joaqu?n PS: On "finite" versus "infinite" demands. It never ceases to amaze me how many ways there are to say "white." From lnp3 at panix.com Tue Jul 1 12:05:36 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:05:36 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Prensa Latina reports on Zimbabwe Crisis In-Reply-To: <30270510.1214934275169.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <30270510.1214934275169.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <486A71F0.5060707@panix.com> Walter Lippmann wrote: > Zimbabwean Govt Favors Dialogue > > Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, July 1 (Prensa Latina) Zimbabwean President > Robert Mugabe is willing to meet with opposition leader Morgan > Tsvangirai, but he rejected any foreign interference, the president's > spokesman, George Charamba, said here on Tuesday. > > Charamba told reporters at the 11th African Union Summit, being held > in this Egyptian coastal resort, that the Zimbabwean government is > willing to find a peaceful solution to the conflict. Garbage reporting from revolutionary Cuba. From skeyesvogt at gmail.com Tue Jul 1 12:16:44 2008 From: skeyesvogt at gmail.com (Sky Keyes-Vogt) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 14:16:44 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] The Police Strike Back: Strangle Detainee In His Cell Message-ID: Perfect example of how the police are just like any street gang; when one of theirs gets killed they strike back. The same goes for corrections officers in prisons. Aside from that, I feel I should say something like "so much for innocent until proven guilty," but we all knew that was BS anyway. *Attorney: Family 'Outraged' Over Inmate's Death* *UPPER MARLBORO, Md. -- *An attorney said the family of a man found strangled in his cell a day after he allegedly ran over and killed a Princes George's County police officer is "outraged" over his death and the events that followed. Bobby Henry, the attorney representing 19-year-old Ronnie White's family, is calling for "a thorough and exhaustive investigation." White's death is being investigated as a homicide by the FBIand Maryland State Police. The state medical examiner said White died from asphyxiation and strangulation. He suffered two broken neck bones. Henry angrily denounced the actions that led to White's death, saying "a yet-to-be-identified person or persons took it upon themselves to be both the judge, the jury and the executioner." Officials said seven guards had access to White at the time of his death, as did an unspecified number of supervisors. Authorities also are investigating whether anyone from the outside had access to White. White had been charged with first-degree murder in the death of Prince George's County police Cpl. Richard Findley , 39. Police said White was the driver of a pickup truck that struck Findley on Friday. Henry opened by saying, "The family of Ronnie L. White, wishes to extend, first and foremost, their deepest sympathy to the family of Officer Richard Findley." State police are leading the probe at the request of county officials. The FBI is focusing on possible civil rights violations. "We are going to do everything within our powers to assure that justice is served," said Prince George's County Executive Jack Johnson. "We are going to work hand in hand with the FBI and Maryland State Police to ensure that those who are involved to be brought to justice. "If we have vigilante justice, our society will fall apart. If we tolerate these kinds of acts, then the courts are superfluous," Johnson said. The jail also will conduct an internal investigation. Prince George's County officials said Monday night seven guards were being questioned in connection with White's death. "The surrounding circumstances mean that we take a full and complete look and pull all the evidence together, and we'll make a decision at the end of that process," said Prince George's County State's Attorney Glenn Ivey. Curtis Knowles of the Prince George's County Correctional Officers Association defended the jail's employees. "It's going to be hard for me to believe that any one of my employees, my members, had it in their hearts to do harm to Mr. White," Knowles said. The Prince George's County chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People called for a full investigation into the practices at the jail. "He stayed in the custody of the Department of Corrections way too long," said June White-Dillard of the Prince George's County NAACP. "He should have been transferred immediately. Obviously, his civil rights have been violated." Henry said White did not see an attorney while he was at the jail. Prince George's County jail spokeswoman Vicki Duncan said White was found unconscious in his cell about 10:30 a.m. Sunday. She said White was alone in his cell and there were no signs of trauma. White was admitted to the jail at 12:24 a.m. Saturday and given a medical assessment before being placed in a cell. Henry said White's family learned of his arrest through the media on Saturday. Jail officials said he had been classified as a "high-profile offender" and was being housed alone in a maximum-security cell. Guards checked on him every 30 minutes. Guards checked on White about 10:15 a.m. Sunday. At the time, he was sitting on the edge of his bunk and appeared alert, according to a press release. When they returned at 10:30 a.m. with his lunch, corrections officers found White "sitting on the floor" of his jail cell, unresponsive, the release said. Guards could not revive him or detect a pulse. An ambulance took him to the Prince George's County Hospital Center at 11:08 a.m. He was admitted at about 11:28 a.m. and pronounced dead at 11:39 a.m., the release said. Henry said the family also was upset by the delay in notification. He said it wasn't until about 2 p.m. that the jail's chaplain notified White's family and told them to go to Prince George's County Hospital Center. When they arrived at the hospital, they learned White's body was no longer at there but in the possession of the medical examiner's office in Baltimore. "At this very moment, the family has not even seen the body of their loved one," Henry said. "Something is wrong. They have been denied the opportunity to start the grieving process, which naturally must occur." County Public Safety Director Vernon Herron said White was in a solitary cell at the jail and that he was separated from other inmates in the facility. Herron said no video cameras were in the area where White was being held. White was one of four people taken into custody Friday after Findley, a veteran police officer, was struck and killed by the driver of a stolen pickup truck. Findley had been monitoring the truck on Laurel-Bowie Road when at least two men returned to the vehicle, police said. Findley attempted to block the truck during an attempted traffic stop, which is when he was struck and dragged by the truck, according to charging documents. Findley fired upon the truck, striking one of the people inside, according to court documents. That man identified White as the driver. According to court records, White pleaded guilty to illegal possession of a firearm last year and to drug possession in another case. In 2006, he was charged with first-degree assault and armed robbery, but the case was dropped, records show. Last November, he was sentenced to more than six months in prison, but it's not clear when he was released. It was unclear if White had an attorney, and family members could not be immediately located. Prince George's County Police Chief Melvin High said the other three people who were taken into custody have been released. A funeral service for Findley is set for 11 a.m. Thursday at St. Joseph's Church in Beltsville with interment at Lakemount Memorial Gardens in Davidsonville. Viewings will be held from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. and again from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. Wednesday at Borgwardt Funeral Home in Beltsville. Gov. Martin O'Malley has ordered the Maryland flag be lowered in memory of Findley, a 10-year veteran of the Prince George's County Police Department and a volunteer with the Beltsville Volunteer Fire Department. The state flag is to be flown at half-staff until sunset Thursday. From jbustelo at gmail.com Tue Jul 1 12:27:32 2008 From: jbustelo at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Joaqu=C3=ADn_Bustelo?=) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 14:27:32 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] (no subject) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:53 PM, abu hartal wrote: > > Don't see what is Maoist about Fletcher's critical support of Obama or how > his putatively being a Maoist invalidates that critical support. Fletcher is well known as being a friend, I think is the word the comrades use, of the Freedom Road Socialist Organization, a regroupment of various groups that emerged from the shipwreck of the New Communist Movement in the 1970's, commonly called the Maoists by other currents on the left as they looked to China and Mao Tse Tung thought for inspiration and political lessons. Their web site carries articles by him and I know his thinking has a lot of influence in their circles. If you go to freedomroad.org, you will see that on their home page they feature an article by him. If you look at their columns page, you'll see that he has the most columns posted, six. I think Fletcher's approach is clearly marked by the thinking of Maoist currents of the 1970s, in particular, his counterposition of the politics that don't exit to the politics that do. The electoral politics that do exist are strictly bourgeois-imperialist politics, as I am sure you yourself must realize from the small-change reforms you have cited as reasons to back Barrack. Certainly Bill understands this also, although he tries to avoid this sort of terminology so that his articles are more accessible to a broader layer of people. Illuminating Bill's approach is the idea of forming a multi-class progressive or left movement or block, which the Obama campaign represents a step towards, in his view. That is his strategic perspective. But does something that remains within a bourgeois-imperialist framework in this country really deserve to be called "progressive" in some fundamental way? Illuminating the perspective of many of the people on this list, certainly the majority among long term subscribers who are posters, is that the strategic road is a different one: cohering the working class into a social movement allied with other social movements that achieves political independence and struggles for political power. Be it said in relation to Bill's approach that something like it is valid in developing countries that suffer economic and political domination by imperialism whether they are formally independent or not. That gives rise to national movements which, by their very nature, are multi-class, and the struggle between social classes then is for hegemony of the national movement. That is a struggle which is fought out within the movement and on the terms of the national movement, rather than on explicitly class terms to begin with. But contrary to the Maoist theses, I do not believe there is some separate stage of economic or social development and political forms that corresponds to "the national movement" as distinct from a national-democratic revolution led by the working class, i.e., displacing capitalist property relations with ones that, in principle, point towards building socialism. I think the logic of such movements was demonstrated in an almost clean-room, laboratory way by the Cuban revolution, which, as it was posed prior to Jan 1., 1959, when the dictator Batista fled, seemed to aim for purely democratic reforms that did not challenge the capitalist framework of Cuban society, and looking backwards a couple of years later, after the Bay of Pigs invasion in April of 1961, looks like it was always meant to be a socialist revolution that tackled democratic tasks --eliminating racial discrimination, achieving real national independence, agrarian reform, etc.-- almost in passing, as a byproduct of the socialist transformation. There is a parallelism to the situation of oppressed peoples in the United States, such as Black and Latinos. That makes political questions, including electoral tactics, more complicated, because you're not dealing with just the question of the working class movement, but also the movements of oppressed peoples, national movements. But there is no parallelism to the U.S. as a whole. There is no overall national-democratic structural transformation that is needed in the United States as such to consolidate it as a country, prevent its natural wealth from being looted by other countries and so on. Indeed, the U.S. is not in the slightest oppressed as a country, but is rather an oppressor country, the chief oppressor country, in fact. This puts a rather different light on Fletcher's dismissal of the politics that don't exist in the United States. Fletcher cites a "concrete analysis" of how undemocratic US elections are, winner-take-all and the rest of it, to justify his strategic approach, which, in my view, is superficial. In my view, the real obstacle is the extremely strong political-ideological hegemony the imperialists wield over this society, a hegemony rooted in the tremendously privileged position of people in the U.S. in general --including working people generally but especially white males-- in relation to regular people the world over. And although you can say in the last analysis working people do not benefit from imperialism and so on, that isn't true in an immediate way. For example, working people in this country would directly and materially benefit if "their" imperialists had greater control over the world's oil resources, and could dictate prices and production levels, as well as limit supplies to other countries that compete with the US for oil supplies and drive up the price. This would result in lower prices for gasoline and an easing of price pressures overall. This identification of working people with the interests of what we consider their class enemy is not new. Marx and Engels observed something similar in Britain where they lived during the second half of the 1800's, and saw its roots in Britain's dominant position in the world market. While details and mechanisms are different, the sort of situation that led to what might be called a "bourgeoisification" of British workers in the second half of the 1800's have been reproduced in the countries that today we call imperialist, and most of all here in the USA. Be it said in favor of the US "Maoist" currents, that among them there was often a greater sensitivity to and understanding of issues of privilege and its corrupting influence in the working class, especially as it relates to the Black question in the United States. Despite that, I do not believe any of those currents succeeded in charting a clear strategic approach to U.S. politics, and in FRSO's case in particular, they have wound up politically with a very similar approach to that of the CPUSA, which these currents originally started out rejecting as reformist (meaning, limiting the struggle to reforms of the system, although some groups took this too far and rejected the struggle for reforms altogether). I don't believe any group or current has yet successfully described a comprehensive and fairly complete outline of a strategic perspective for the United States. But certainly a central axis has to be to get to independent political expressions of working people including in the electoral arena. It might be that the motion that Obama has stirred among young people and in the Black community may eventually wind up there, but for now, Obama's campaign is clearly NOT it. Obama is presenting, at most, a different way of defending imperialist interests abroad and at home, one that he projects as being more thoughtful, considerate, ameliorating a little extremes of wealth and poverty and so on. Compared even to many of the proposals accepted by the capitalist parties in the 1960's and 70's, when there was a large radicalization in this country, or in the 1930's, his program falls way short of the mark. And compared to Clinton and Edwards, the programs are very similar, the centerpiece being a health care reform idea that basically Edwards and his folks came up with. But there are two additional aspects of Obama's campaign that should be noted. One is his mantra about change, and the change being about the way politics is done in this country. His appeals for unity, for a different sort of political climate and governance find widespread resonance, but there are two visions of this: what's good for working people is good for the country and what's good for GM is good for the country. That's why I stressed earlier that there are no big progressive national tasks for the U.S. as a whole in contrast to developing countries, where there are. So those two visions of what is good for the country don't really share any common ground. And that's also why I stressed that in an immediate sense, many working people back "their own" imperialism because they benefit from living in one of the wealthiest, if not the wealthiest, country in the world. Even though strategically it is entirely against their interests. The other is the fact that he is Black. Because Black people historically in this country, and even within living memory, have been denied the right to political participation and representation, and even the right to vote. The struggle by Blacks to be represented is a progressive struggle of Black people that Marxists should look for ways to support, even when it takes place through the framework of the capitalist parties. Because experience shows that it does make a difference to the Black community whether the government is full of Blacks or whites --not all the difference in the world, not nearly as much as it should, but some. Otherwise the behavior of the Black community, which votes in much larger numbers than the comparable white socio-economic strata, and votes Black pretty much every chance it gets of putting a Black person in office, is simply inexplicable. From acpollack2 at gmail.com Tue Jul 1 12:32:20 2008 From: acpollack2 at gmail.com (Andrew Pollack) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 14:32:20 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] the mysterious pro-McKinney document found in Cleveland Message-ID: <2fa1449b0807011132k1a50bdc2h2101b060ec1d7fed@mail.gmail.com> So I finally got around to reading the first three pages, which were sent to me offlist. I recognized it as the Socialist Organizer editorial I had previously seen posted elsewhere. The original is at: http://www.socialistorganizer.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=139&Itemid=5 From marvgandall at videotron.ca Tue Jul 1 12:31:39 2008 From: marvgandall at videotron.ca (Marvin Gandall) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:31:39 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Congress goes on vacation without acting onH.Con.Res.362 (naval blockade of Iran) References: <000001c8db85$036abfc0$6401a8c0@office1pc> <022801c8db94$e02939a0$0202a8c0@MARV> <004801c8db9f$f3647830$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Message-ID: <040a01c8dba8$b3ffbed0$0202a8c0@MARV> Artesian: > You're the one who does that Marvin, creates polemics out of nothing but > your own wishful thinking.. > > If you care to refer to the actual context and content of remarks, what > was > stated that there are major interests in and among the US ruling class > that > favor military attack on Iran. > > Obviously, the article by Hersh provides substance to that contention. > And > obviously, such attacks have already begun. Nobody is baiting here. =========================================== There is no dispute that the US has had a long history in Iran, as elsewhere, of seeking regime change through a combination of special forces military operations, economic sanctions, and political subversion of the kind described by Hersh in his article. The Clinton administration used these tactics in relation to Iraq. Whether an Obama administration will attempt to resolve outstanding differences with the clerical regime, as he promised earlier he would, or will step up US efforts to overthrow it by these means remains to be seen. There is considerably more agreement in political and media circles about pursuing "low intensity warfare" against Iran than about a unilateral naval and land blockade which would take the conflict to a much higher level. It would almost certainly invite serious retaliation by the Iranians and their allies throughout the Middle East, as well as strong opposition by Russia and China and also quite possibly from US allies in the Gulf states and OECD countries threatened by a cutoff of oil supplies from the region. This is clear from the piece I posted yesterday from Thomas Powers, reporting on opposition within the US political and military establishment to an open war with Iran, from the standpoint of someone who thinks "it is very important that we increase as much as possible the financial pressure, the diplomatic pressure, the political pressure, and at the same time keep all the military options on the table." This thread began with your sweeping assertion, supported by Fred, that the HR resolution calling for a naval blockade meant that open war with Iran was "certain". I intereceded to suggest instead that other motives were involved, notably stepping up the pressure on those negotiating with Iran to put curbs on its nuclear program. You and Fred angrily treated the suggestion as somehow representing a capitulation to US imperialism, without attempting to engage with the substance of the argument. I call that baiting. But big deal. I've dealt with worse. From rfidler_8 at sympatico.ca Tue Jul 1 12:51:47 2008 From: rfidler_8 at sympatico.ca (Richard Fidler) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 14:51:47 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] The Paradoxes of Latin American Development In-Reply-To: <6tcecr$qpo99@ipo3smtp.cc.utah.edu> References: <6tcecr$qpo99@ipo3smtp.cc.utah.edu> Message-ID: Sometimes it's hard to take Petras seriously. Compare and contrast the dyspeptic article cited below with this one, written just a little more than two months ago: http://www.lahaine.org/petras/b2-img/petrasven.pdf Excerpt: Venezuela?s President Hugo Chavez remains the world?s leading secular, democratically elected political leader who has consistently and publicly opposed imperialist wars in the Middle East , attacked extra-territorial intervention and US and European Union complicity in kidnapping and torture. Venezuela plays the major role in sharply reducing the price of oil for the poorest countries in the Caribbean region and Central America, thus substantially aiding them in their balance of payments, without attaching any ?strings? to this vital assistance. Venezuela has been in the forefront in supporting free elections and opposing human right abuses in the Middle East, Latin America and South Asia by pro-US client regimes in Iraq, Afghanistan and Colombia. No other country in the Americas has done more to break down the racial barriers to social mobility and the acquisition of land for Afro-Latin and Indio Americans. President Chavez has been on the cutting edge of efforts toward greater Latin American integration ? despite opposition from the United States and several regional regimes, who have opted for bilateral free trade agreements with the US. Even more significant, President Chavez is the only elected president to reverse a US backed military coup (in 48 hours) and defeat a (US-backed) bosses? lockout, and return the economy to double-digit growth over the subsequent 4 years.1 President Chavez is the only elected leader in the history of Latin America to successfully win eleven straight electoral contests against US-financed political parties and almost the entire private mass media over a nine-year period. Finally President Chavez is the only leader in the last halfcentury who came within 1% of having a popular referendum for a ?socialist transformation? approved, a particularly surprising result in a country in which less than 30% of the work force is made up of peasants and factory workers. President Chavez has drastically reduced long-term poverty faster than any regime in the region,2 demonstrating that a nationalist-welfare regime is much more effective in ending endemic social ills than its neo-liberal counterparts. A rigorous, empirical study of the socio-economic performance of the Chavez government demonstrates its success in a whole series of indicators after the defeat of the counterrevolutionary coup and lockout and after the nationalization of petroleum (2003). GDP has grown by more than 87% with only a small part of the growth being in oil. The poverty rate has been cut in half (from 54% in 2003 at the height of the bosses? lockout to 27% in 2007; and extreme poverty has been reduced from 43% in 1996 to 9% in 2007), and unemployment by more than half (from 17% in 1998 to 7% in 2007). The economy has created jobs at a rate nearly three times that of the United States during its most recent economic expansion. Accessible health care for the poor has been successfully expanded with the number of primary care physicians in the public sector increasing from 1,628 in 1998 to 19,571 by early 2007. About 40% of the population now has access to subsidized food. Access to education, especially higher education, has also been greatly expanded for poor families. Real (inflation adjusted) social spending per person has increased by more than 300%. 3 His policies have once and for all refuted the notion that the competitive demands of ?globalization? (deep and extensive insertion in the world market) are incompatible with large-scale social welfare policies. Chavez has demonstrated that links to the world market are compatible with the construction of a more developed welfare state under a popularly-based government. The large-scale, long-term practical accomplishments of the Chavez government, however have been overlooked by liberal and social democratic academics in Venezuela and their colleagues in the US and Europe, who prefer to criticize secondary institutional and policy weaknesses, failing to take into account the world-historic significance of the changes taking place in the context of a hostile, aggressively militaristdriven empire.4 No reasonable and rigorous contemporary analysis can seriously provide an accurate assessment of Venezuela while glossing over the tremendous accomplishments achieved during the Hugo Chavez presidency. [...] And so on.... And unlike the article below, this one is referenced, with no fewer than 53 footnotes. It came on the heels of Petras?s month-long sojourn in Venezuela, which included some personal conversations with Ch?vez. Of course, it includes Petras?s usual litany of policy prescriptions, which he has been handing out freely throughout his many decades of ?membership in the class struggle?. Perhaps a more appropriate title on the piece below should be: "The paradoxes of the petulant Petras". -- Richard -----Original Message----- From: marxism-bounces+rfidler_8=sympatico.ca at lists.econ.utah.edu [mailto:marxism-bounces+rfidler_8=sympatico.ca at lists.econ.utah.edu ] On Behalf Of Pance Stojkovski Sent: July 1, 2008 9:25 AM To: rfidler_8 at sympatico.ca Subject: [Marxism] The Paradoxes of Latin American Development A good summary of the situation in Latin America. Pance. ======================== The Paradoxes of Latin American Development By James Petras Latin American development presents us with a rich array of paradoxes, which befuddle the predictions, prescriptions, and commentaries of writers and academics from the right and left. Abrupt changes and shifts in the political correlation of forces is matched by striking structural continuities. PDF of the complete article: http://petras.lahaine.org/articulo.php?p=1740 HTML version: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9475 ________________________________________________ YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/rfidler_8%40sym patico.ca From markalause at gmail.com Tue Jul 1 13:16:33 2008 From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 14:16:33 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] the mysterious pro-McKinney document found in Cleveland In-Reply-To: <2fa1449b0807011132k1a50bdc2h2101b060ec1d7fed@mail.gmail.com> References: <2fa1449b0807011132k1a50bdc2h2101b060ec1d7fed@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Right. It is an extremely strange choice for a campaign document. ML From lnp3 at panix.com Tue Jul 1 13:25:41 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:25:41 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Obama on the Vietnam antiwar movement Message-ID: <486A84B5.3060407@panix.com> Meanwhile, some of those in the so-called counter-culture of the Sixties reacted not merely by criticizing particular government policies, but by attacking the symbols, and in extreme cases, the very idea, of America itself - by burning flags; by blaming America for all that was wrong with the world; and perhaps most tragically, by failing to honor those veterans coming home from Vietnam, something that remains a national shame to this day. full: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/06/30/obamas_patriotism_speech.html From markalause at gmail.com Tue Jul 1 13:34:12 2008 From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 14:34:12 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] just back from the national assembly conference...., In-Reply-To: References: <48693D59.3060400@comcast.net> <48694DFB.6040002@optonline.net> Message-ID: Andy and others have correctly pointed out that the first three pages of the nine-page circular was lifted from http://www.socialistorganizer.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=156&Itemid=28 Most of the rest is a variant on a six-month old draft from the Reconstruction Party. http://www.runcynthiarun.org/ReconstructionManifesto Oddly enough, the most objectionable part I found was the first three of the nine pages. Aside from the heading, McKinney herself isn't even mentioned until well into the third page. Most of the initial punch is a discussion of Obama that seems to me to carry a very mixed message. Imagine my surprise to find it was written by Trotskyists. Well, maybe it's a language barrier problem. And, of course, there is not a single mention of the Greens anywhere in it. As to the last part, I've never seen any campaign distributing a six-month old rough draft. To say nothing of leaving a black at the end instead of contact information. What's disturbing is what it tells us about the level of organization of the McKinney campaign. Even now, there's all sorts of questions about what this document actually was. Disturbing because, as I've often said, I wish the campaign well, though I'm supporting Nader-Gonzales. The reason's very simple. As much as people on the coasts or from Atlanta tell me there's a black insurgency behind McKinney, none of the black activists I know here actually know who she is without my having to explain it and they just don't care that she's running. They're going for Obama, without illusions, they say, but they find it impossible not to vote for the first black president of the U.S. On the other hand, the only local supporters McKinney has are the same whites in the Green Party who backed David Cobb for the nomination in 2004 and went home to vote for John Kerry. You don't have to be a weatherman to see which way the wind will blow them when the issue is really pressed. So, that would leave the McKinney campaign in this area...ultimately, maybe, in this state...as me. So, it makes about as much sense as my backing the Vegetarian Workers Party. More generally, I think that a national endorsement should reflect national possibilities and I don't equate that with what seems like a good idea in NYC or Chicago or LA. Still, I see a principled basis for supporting McKinney and what I find disturbing is to see the campaign simply unable to intervene coherently in a national antiwar conference. Solidarity! Mark L. From walterlx at earthlink.net Tue Jul 1 13:38:43 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 15:38:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Marxism] Obama on the Vietnam antiwar movement Message-ID: <5130729.1214941123008.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> We already know Obama's not a Bolshevik anti-Zinovievist Marxist but thanks for the two thousand three hundred seventeenth reminder. http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/06/30/obamas_patriotism_speech.html ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From sartesian at earthlink.net Tue Jul 1 13:40:00 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 15:40:00 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Congress goes on vacation without acting onH.Con.Res.362 (naval blockade of Iran) References: <000001c8db85$036abfc0$6401a8c0@office1pc><022801c8db94$e02939a0$0202a8c0@MARV><004801c8db9f$f3647830$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> <040a01c8dba8$b3ffbed0$0202a8c0@MARV> Message-ID: <000c01c8dbb2$401f3db0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Marvin, As I said before you really need to pay more attention. This thread began with Fred posting an article on Bolton's threats, with the self-proclaimed ruthless critic questioning warlike intentions when major ruling class interests are so opposed to such action, and my response that major interests are in favor of military action, while at the same time, no matter who wants what, what matter is what capital requires. You then entered, doubting also the interests of the ruling class in military action, and I responded including in the response characterization of the HR as "carte blanche" which you found to be grossly misleading to say the least. Now you dismiss the escalation of military actions against Hersh. That escalation is the point of Hersh's article, in that congress has allowed/sanctioned/funded a qualitatively different type of engagement, including bypassing the military command structure, and approved "defensive lethality" without any understanding what that means, or so the elite eight claim, but that's just diversion. Everybody knows what killing is. Fred and I have maintained focus on precisely the substance of the issue. You apparently can't even be bothered to read about it. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marvin Gandall" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 2:31 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Congress goes on vacation without acting onH.Con.Res.362 (naval blockade of Iran) > Artesian: From sartesian at earthlink.net Tue Jul 1 13:44:40 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 15:44:40 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Obama on the Vietnam antiwar movement References: <5130729.1214941123008.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <002001c8dbb2$e6f7cbc0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> I'll remember your exhaustion with repetition the next time you reproduce some article about positive economic relations between Cuba and China, the EU, Russia, Iran; about some bourgeois twit urging easing sanctions, for the two thousand three hundred eighteenth time. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Walter Lippmann" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 3:38 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Obama on the Vietnam antiwar movement > From walterlx at earthlink.net Tue Jul 1 13:54:56 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 15:54:56 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Marxism] Venezuela priests open pro-Chavez church Message-ID: <14334356.1214942096369.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Venezuela priests open pro-Chavez church By Christopher Toothaker The Associated Press June 30, 2008 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/30/AR2008063002359.html CARACAS, Venezuela -- A fledgling church that openly backs President Hugo Chavez is raising the ire of Venezuela's Roman Catholic hierarchy, preaching the Gospel alongside socialism. Founders of the newly created Reformist Catholic Church of Venezuela, based in the western city of Ciudad Ojeda, say that supporting Chavez's socialist ideals goes hand-in-hand with Christian aims of helping the poor. "We don't side with any political banner, but we cannot fail to recognize and support the socialist achievements of this government," Enrique Albornoz, a former Lutheran minister who helped start the church, said in a telephone interview on Monday. "We back the social programs of this revolutionary government." A group of dissident Catholic priests, Lutherans, and Anglicans quietly formed the church several years ago, but its first three bishops were sworn in last weekend, Albornoz said. The church has five sanctuaries in Venezuela and about 2,000 parishioners _ most of them in the oil-rich western state of Zulia, he said. An iron-shuttered, concrete house of worship in a working-class neighborhood of Ciudad Ojeda serves as headquarters for the movement, which borrows heavily from liberation theology and the Church of England's Book of Common Prayer. Venezuelan Cardinal Jorge Urosa Sabino accused the reformists of attempting to divide the Catholic Church, which has consistently criticized Chavez's push toward socialism while retaining its status as one of the country's most widely trusted institutions. "The apparent political goal of this association distances it from the true expression of Christian faith," Urosa Savino said in a statement on Sunday. "Jesus Christ's true church is spreading the word and the gift of Christ to the whole world, separately from political issues and party affiliation." Monsignor Roberto Luckert, one of Chavez's most outspoken critics, accused the government of financing the new church in a bid to curb the influence of Roman Catholic leaders. "They want to destroy the Catholic Church, and they haven't been able to do it," Luckert told Caracas-based Union Radio. The Vatican has issued no formal reaction. Reformist Albornoz strongly denied that the government funds his church, challenging Luckert to present evidence. The new church takes no political line, he added, saying Catholic leaders have been the ones to take sides in Venezuelan politics by voicing opposition to Chavez. The Reformist church shares certain values with the president's version of socialism, for example stressing the needs of the poor in sermons and with community service. It also describes itself as "Bolivarian" _ referring to 19th-century independence hero Simon Bolivar, whom Chavez considers his own movement's spiritual father. In contrast to Catholicism, members of the new church do not shun homosexuality. Divorce is allowed in cases of adulterous or abusive relationships and chastity vows for priests are optional. Chavez has consistently sparred with Catholic leaders since taking office in 1999, accusing them of turning their backs on the poor while siding with an "oligarchy" bent on ousting him. . ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From gw57 at cornell.edu Tue Jul 1 14:12:41 2008 From: gw57 at cornell.edu (Gavin Walker) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 16:12:41 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Popov's report - request for reference Message-ID: Can any comrades help with the following bit of reference material? In answers to written questions appended to his March 12, 1919 speech to the Petrograd Soviet, Lenin references "Popov's report" on the taxes paid by different strata of the peasantry. According to the speech, this report was "repeated at a sitting of the Central Executive Committee in the presence of workers." After finding another mention of Popov's study of the Russian peasantry in the years immediately before the revolution (though unfortunately without a reference), I would like to try to find out exactly which Popov this might be. Can anyone with a better grasp of early Soviet history take a guess? References in any language would be fine. Thanks in advance and comradely greetings, Gavin From markalause at gmail.com Tue Jul 1 14:51:02 2008 From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 15:51:02 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] Obama on the Vietnam antiwar movement In-Reply-To: <002001c8dbb2$e6f7cbc0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> References: <5130729.1214941123008.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <002001c8dbb2$e6f7cbc0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Message-ID: Well, thanks. I really appreciate these stories because they're getting wide circulation among my coworkers and friends. And everyone who gets the forwards appreciates being informed. So thanks. ML From lnp3 at panix.com Tue Jul 1 14:57:10 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:57:10 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Marxists for Obama Message-ID: <20080701205706.8AD09102EB@mailbackend.panix.com> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20080630/011019.html From marvgandall at videotron.ca Tue Jul 1 15:24:07 2008 From: marvgandall at videotron.ca (Marvin Gandall) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:24:07 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Congress goes on vacation without acting onH.Con.Res.362 (naval blockade of Iran) References: <000001c8db85$036abfc0$6401a8c0@office1pc> <022801c8db94$e02939a0$0202a8c0@MARV> <004801c8db9f$f3647830$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> <040a01c8dba8$b3ffbed0$0202a8c0@MARV> <000c01c8dbb2$401f3db0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Message-ID: <058b01c8dbc0$cb75adf0$0202a8c0@MARV> Artesian: > Now you dismiss the escalation of military actions against Hersh... ================================== Oh, man, can't you read or is it you don't want to? I wrote: "...the US has had a long history in Iran, as elsewhere, of seeking regime change through a combination of special forces military operations, economic sanctions, and political subversion of the kind described by Hersh in his article. Whether an Obama administration will attempt to resolve outstanding differences with the clerical regime, as he promised earlier he would, or will step up US efforts to overthrow it by these means remains to be seen." and "There is considerably more agreement in political and media circles about pursuing "low intensity warfare" against Iran than about a unilateral naval and land blockade which would take the conflict to a much higher level." I'll leave it to Louis to decide if we should continue this sniping offlist, where I can choose to ignore it. I may not be the only one who is finding these exchanges tiresome and unproductive. From lnp3 at panix.com Tue Jul 1 15:28:33 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 17:28:33 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Congress goes on vacation without acting onH.Con.Res.362 (naval blockade of Iran) In-Reply-To: <058b01c8dbc0$cb75adf0$0202a8c0@MARV> References: <000001c8db85$036abfc0$6401a8c0@office1pc> <022801c8db94$e02939a0$0202a8c0@MARV> <004801c8db9f$f3647830$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> <040a01c8dba8$b3ffbed0$0202a8c0@MARV> <000c01c8dbb2$401f3db0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> <058b01c8dbc0$cb75adf0$0202a8c0@MARV> Message-ID: <20080701212829.D353219EC8@mailbackend.panix.com> >I'll leave it to Louis to decide if we should continue this sniping offlist, >where I can choose to ignore it. I may not be the only one who is finding >these exchanges tiresome and unproductive. Just a reminder. Threads that go on for more than 2 days tend to get very stale. We have to float like a butterfly and sting like a bee in Marxist polemical terms, not hang around like a wet miasma as Edgar Allen Poe would say. From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Tue Jul 1 15:40:30 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 17:40:30 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Zizek, Critchley, "open borders" and finite/infinite demands In-Reply-To: References: <908b689f0806301845y736c70b2sd60a38a1f984adc0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <908b689f0807011440j5dcfe162gddf93803f01e4cd2@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 1:57 PM, Joaqu?n Bustelo wrote: > PS: On "finite" versus "infinite" demands. It never ceases to amaze me > how many ways there are to say "white." Huh? From sartesian at earthlink.net Tue Jul 1 15:47:49 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 17:47:49 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Congress goes on vacation without acting onH.Con.Res.362 (naval blockade of Iran) References: <000001c8db85$036abfc0$6401a8c0@office1pc><022801c8db94$e02939a0$0202a8c0@MARV><004801c8db9f$f3647830$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad><040a01c8dba8$b3ffbed0$0202a8c0@MARV><000c01c8dbb2$401f3db0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> <058b01c8dbc0$cb75adf0$0202a8c0@MARV> Message-ID: <006401c8dbc4$1b956e30$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> I can read. What you missed, despite your apparent ability to read, was the escalation, and the change in operations. You acknowledge something, covert operations, only dismiss its significance: a change in its direction. But, I agree. 2 days and out. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marvin Gandall" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 5:24 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Congress goes on vacation without acting onH.Con.Res.362 (naval blockade of Iran) From elishastephens at hotmail.com Tue Jul 1 15:52:58 2008 From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 14:52:58 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Obama on the Vietnam antiwar movement Message-ID: Thanks to Louis for catching this (i.e., bothering to read this drivel), but it shouldn't be a big surprise, since Obama said something very similar back in January: http://lefti.blogspot.com/2008_01_01_archive.html#898445430426742762 "I didn't come of age in the battles of the 60s. I'm not as invested in them...Even when you discuss war, the frame of reference is all Vietnam. Well, that's not my reference. My frame of reference is 'what works.' Even when I first opposed the war in Iraq, my first line was, 'I don't oppose all wars,' specifically to make clear that this was not just an anti-military, 70s love-in kind of approach, rather, that I thought strategically it was a mistake for us to go in." And Walter, do you really have to be a "Bolshevik anti-Zinovievist Marxist" in order to have supported the fight against the war in Vietnam, or to realize that the claim that the antiwar movement "fail[ed]to honor those veterans coming home from Vietnam, something that remains a national shame to this day" is just one more repetition of the right-wing lie based on the non-existent "spitting on the GIs"? Do you really have to be a "Bolshevik anti-Zinovievist Marxist" to recognize that opposition to the war in Vietnam was not "an anti-military, 70s love-in kind of approach"? Face it, us antiwar activists and especially those of us who are remnants of the "counter-culture" (or, as Obama puts it, "so-called counter-culture"), are to be the "Sister Souljah's" of the 2008 campaign. _________________________________________________________________ Making the world a better place one message at a time. http://www.imtalkathon.com/?source=EML_WLH_Talkathon_BetterPlace From suarsos at alphalink.com.au Tue Jul 1 16:14:16 2008 From: suarsos at alphalink.com.au (Tom O'Lincoln) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 08:14:16 +1000 Subject: [Marxism] Stating obvious, SADC says Zimbabwe vote not will of people Message-ID: <002101c8dbc7$ce800390$0201a8c0@gx270> I hope I'm not repeating things already said somewhere else in the thread, but briefly in reply to this: >Shouldn't this depend on *what* the proposed actions are? If the >actions consist of such things as diplomatic de-recognition, freezing >foreign bank accounts, etc, that will hurt the Mugabe-associated elite >but not the common people. Why shouldn't that be supported?< Because diplomatic de-recognition will help legitimise sanctions, without affecting Mugabe & co in practice because informal diplomatic relations would undoubtedly continue. Likewise, freezing bank acounts is itself a kind of sanction and would legitimise other sanctions. >it all depends on the concrete actions that are proposed It also depends on the politics, since one thing leads to another. And also in reply to this: >Artesian's incredible suggestion that the UN shouldn't be permitted to >do anything in Zim just because the UN doesn't do anything about US or >Israeli crimes, seems to me to be a classic case of cutting off the >nose to spite the face. It also bespeaks a horrible disdain about the >value of Zimbabwean lives, and about the benefit of saving at least a >few of these needless deaths. No wonder third-word common people often >don't trust Western leftists. I suspect that the "international community" (imperialists and their subordinates) are waiting till Mugabe smashes up the opposition completely, then when the damage is done they might decide to waltz as saviours, and cement their own control. That's essentially what happened in East Timor. Orwell wrote somewhere that no situation is so bad it can't be made worse by the arrival of a policeman. Ditto for imperialist "humanitarian intervention". From lnp3 at panix.com Tue Jul 1 16:18:49 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 18:18:49 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] On the United Nations Message-ID: <20080701221845.60D7BFE52@mailbackend.panix.com> I wrote this for Phil Ferguson's magazine in 2003 or 2004. http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/fascism_and_war/unitednations.htm From suarsos at alphalink.com.au Tue Jul 1 16:38:42 2008 From: suarsos at alphalink.com.au (Tom O'Lincoln) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 08:38:42 +1000 Subject: [Marxism] On the United Nations Message-ID: <002b01c8dbcb$382ee2e0$0201a8c0@gx270> >>Within the broader antiwar movement in the United States, more moderate >>voices have raised the idea of substituting United Nations troops for the >>Anglo-American occupation forces in Iraq. << In Australia too, of course. I remember this issue arose during the disarmament campaigns of the eighties, in a debate about how to deal with the U.S. military communications (spy) bases in this country. The left wing of the movement demanded their closure. The right wing, wishing to be more "realistic", suggested they be transferred to the United Nations, which would ensure they weren't used for imperialist wars. Comes the 1991 Gulf War. Guess what, it had UN backing. Had those bases been transferred to the UN they would have been used exactly the same. From jbustelo at gmail.com Tue Jul 1 16:52:26 2008 From: jbustelo at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Joaqu=C3=ADn_Bustelo?=) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 18:52:26 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] the mysterious pro-McKinney document found in Cleveland In-Reply-To: <2fa1449b0807011132k1a50bdc2h2101b060ec1d7fed@mail.gmail.com> References: <2fa1449b0807011132k1a50bdc2h2101b060ec1d7fed@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 2:32 PM, Andrew Pollack wrote: > So I finally got around to reading the first three pages, which were > sent to me offlist. > I recognized it as the Socialist Organizer editorial I had previously > seen posted elsewhere. The original is at: > http://www.socialistorganizer.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=139&Itemid=5 An interesting editorial -- the first part captures, I think, the essence of the case that I think could be made for calling for a vote for Obama, but then, instead of a materialist discussion of electoral tactics and whether there is anything to be gained thereby, and how it would be achieved, things shift to purely ideological (idealist) grounds, to the effect of therefore we have to counterpose ourselves to the overwhelming majority of people, especialy youth and Blacks, who have gone into motion inspired by these aspirations and ideals we have been describing. In "normal" political activities --coalitions, demonstrations, campaigns for political prisoners or some specific reform-- we're perfectly willing to go through the experience with people, even fighting for things that are a lot less than a real solution to the problem being addressed, understanding that it is from lived experience and not mere preaching that people learn and radicalize. That was certainly true of my generation in the 60's. We ALL started from mildly "liberal" or "progressive" opposition to segregation or McCarthyism or The War, and it was from engagement in the movement around such issues, and exchanges with people we met there, that we radicalized. But when it comes to politics in the electoral arena, all of a sudden this changes. And maybe that's right: nothing less than something that is at least in some sense independent from the bourgeois parties counts. But what made me increasingly skeptical of this received wisdom, and brought me to a place where I often feel estranged even from someone I completely identified with politically a few years ago, like our moderator Louis, is precisely McKinney and her trajectory. By the sorts of arguments presented in the editorial and similar arguments we see on this list virtually every day, socialists and radicals in the Atlanta area and especially advocates of independent political action such as the Greens should have rejected and sharply counterposed themselves to her. But that isn't what actually happened. Especially influenced by my friend and comrade Badili Jones (who was then national co-chair of the Greens and is now a prominent figure associated with the Freedom Road Socialist Organization) many radicals and socialists supported McKinney. ACTIVELY supported her. This was not uncritical support, but the key "criticism" was that McKinney should be building a political structure independent of the Democrat machine, which was necessary because it was precisely the traditional Democrat circles and structures (including in the Black community) that were trying to knife her in the back. And when McKinney got back her congressional seat the last time around, some of her staffers came out of the Greens, including the person who was effectively the head of the Georgia Greens, as well as a Black comrade who was (at least briefly) in Solidarity and so on. Which is one reason why there's no Green Party (that I know of) left in GA today, and when McKinney decided to run as a Green for President, she moved to California, because there was nothing to build on here. I think it is fair to say that McKinney is where she is today because of that "intervention" by radicals of various traditions (not just "Maoists" but also, for example, a Workers World comrade who had been one of the most prominent leaders of the "Proletarian Orientation" opposition in the SWP in the early 70's, in addition to people somewhat closer to traditional Trostkyist and "socialism from below"-type ideas). I think Sister Cynthia grew NOT JUST from being involved in those fights but ALSO from the contact and exchanges she had with those supporting her from these Maoist, Trot, and State-Capitalist traditions. As well, I'm sure, from "Stalinists" (current or former followers of the pro pre-1989 Moscow CP). But I'm also of the opinion that one of the main reasons there isn't anything left here to build on in any immediate way from that experience is the way that intervention was carried out. Of course I think it is also true that McKinney was an exceptional individual and the circumstances were exceptional -- the established representative in Congress of the DeKalb county Black community, which was being deprived the right of having the person it wanted in Congress by a cabal of traditional Democrats who allied with Republicans in manipulating Georgia's open primaries to promote --with Zionist and other bourgeois financing-- Black opportunists so that in the general election in the fall, people in this district didn't have the option of voting for their Congresswoman, Sister Cynthia McKinney. Many comrades, I know, viewed the McKinney case in those elections a few years ago as the exception that proved the rule of never, ever voting for a Democrat EXCEPT in this one and completely unique case where the central issue was really the right of the Black community to have the person it wanted in Congress, AND it just so happened that this person was the ONE member of the Black Caucus who REFUSED to submit to Democrat Party discipline, and in fact was entirely willing to not just criticize but DENOUNCE "her" party. But for me, it proved just the opposite, that voting in bourgeois elections, even for a straight-up bourgeois party candidate (not even just BOURGEOIS "workers" party fakers, like the old social democratic parties of Lenin's time after WWI), but actually, a candidate of the OLDEST bourgeois party in the world, is strictly and purely a TACTICAL question. But of course, I say that with the understanding that tactics must always be at the service of a strategic line designed to attain grand objectives. As we are all Marxists or aspire to be, I think we can define that objective as the founders of our movement defined it in the our founding Manifesto: "The immediate aim of the Communists is the same as that of all other proletarian parties: formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, conquest of political power by the proletariat.... "[T]he first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class[,] to win the battle of democracy." What is meant here by "formation of the proletariat into a class"? Clearly not assuring that all working people are employed as wage workers, but rather transforming the working class from a merely objective reality, what a younger Marx had called a "class in itself" into a "class for itself," an organized and self-conscious political force, a PARTY, but not merely in a bourgeois-electoral sense of a group aiming to administer (and profit from administering) existing social and political institutions, but one that will bring into being its own institutions and transform the structure of society, which is why Marx and Engels follow the bit about "winning the battle of democracy" ("winning the battle of democracy" because working people were then, are now, and have always been the MAJORITY) with this: "Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the mode of production." So while all tactics are permissible "in principle," not all tactics are equal. Only those tactics will do which serve to advance the "immediate aim" of us Marxists, "formation of the proletariat into a class," into a self-conscious political force, into a class-for-itself movement -- or will take us at least a little bit closer to that goal. But something else needs to be added here: We have to judge the efficacy of proposed tactics in a MATERIALIST not an IDEALIST way. That is why I quoted the rest of the material from the Communist Manifesto. Because some people might imagine that, for example, since our ultimate aim is to expropriate the capitalists, nothing less than demand for nationalization will do, and doing what Peter Camejo was doing a few years ago when he was running for governor of California as a "watermelon" green (Green on the outside, red on the inside) with a central plank in his platform calling for rich people to pay at least as much in taxes as "regular people do" (as Peter put it), to be the crassest sort of bourgeois-reformist betrayal. Marx and Engels follow what I quoted with this: "These measures will, of course, be different in different countries. "Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable. "1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. "2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax." That number two is precisely what Peter was advocating, given the structures of U.S. taxation. Given the (in reality) more or less 15% social security and medicare "payroll" tax (up to around $100K+ in income, beyond that it drops to 0%), Peter's program was for a progressive, graduated income tax, just like Marx said. How "heavy" it was is, of course, a matter of opinion, but judging from the outraged howls of his bourgeois opponents, I think it was, in that context, "heavy" enough to make the point. Returning now to electoral tactics, it is fairly straightforward to devise these once working people have begun to cohere into at least the beginning of "a party." There's lots of discussions and debates and different approaches that have been tried once the ball gets rolling, so to speak. Where --frankly-- "the classics" are of very little use is where the ball ISN'T rolling, in fact, where the ball is nowhere to be found. Like in our case, where not only don't we see the beginnings of a class party, we see absolutely NO real motion on a clear and explicit CLASS basis towards independent politics. And never mind independent politics. We see no evidence of clear and explicit working class motion towards anything whatsoever. None. Zero. Zilch. Absolutely and utterly NOT THERE. So much so that what are clearly (to be brutally frank) predominantly petty-bourgeois efforts based mainly in radicalized sectors of the intelligentsia seem to be light years ahead of where "the working class" is at. So for lack of anything more, we relate to them, and come up with formulations like "motion towards independent political action by a sliver of the working people" to describe what we're actually pushing in terms that might make some sense from a Maxist perspective. And THEN there's the Black and (mostly) immigrant communities, which have historically been and today REMAIN the hard core of the U.S. proletariat, the layers that, in THIS social setting (albeit not viewed more broadly) have "nothing to lose but their chains." The Black community has in every way --socially, politically, ideologically-- been the vanguard of the entire proletariat but most of all this "hard core" super-exploited layer for an entire historical epoch, blatantly, even outrageously so for more than half a century. And it has fought a dogged fight for political empowerment, inclusion and representation which, in the narrow confines of the electoral arena, has BOTH found expression in the Democratic Party AND been curbed by being expressed in and through the Democratic Party. And now here comes Barack Obama. The first African-American to have a clear, clean shot at the White House, because he claims to represent TWO things WE understand to be in complete contradiction: he is both Black and a genuine, sincere, effective and committed defender of the racist bourgeois-imperialist European-colonial-settler-dominated American socio-economic formation AND state AND its ruling class. We say, it can't possible be --that's like combining matter and anti-matter-- but that IS the way it is, that is the way he presents, NOT as an individual politician, that is easily enough disposed of, as Louis and others never seem to tire of demonstrating at least three times a day on this list, but as a political phenomenon, as a social reality. Devising tactics on the basis that he's just a bourgeois SOB is easy enough. Devising tactics that are EFFECTIVE in a MATERIALIST way with the layer of most conscious Black militants who will readily admit he is a bourgeois SOB, but nevertheless want him to win because he is THEIR bourgeois SOB, is an entirely different matter. Because what a completely conscious Black militant would say is, sure, he is a bourgeois-imperialist politician, but why should only white folks be allowed to be top dog among bourgeois imperialist politicians? Down with white privilege among bourgeois imperialist politicians! And then there's the underlying subtext of the message of the Obama campaign addressed to his left, that as a BLACK bourgeois imperialist politician in THIS society, he will be a kinder, gentler, more reasonable, less warmongering bourgeois imperialist politician than a white one from either party. AND you've got the Black community, and I mean solidly, perhaps Lenin and Trotsky might have had more support in the Petrograd working class on Nov. 8 or 9, 1917, but by the 11th or 12th, if they had had public opinion surveys back then in Russia, they would have had a hard time matching Barrack's numbers in the Black community, you've got the Black community, the most heroic, combative, conscious sector of the working people of the United States saying, that's right, and that's why we we want him. And they've been at this game of backing Blacks through the Democrats for four decades now, and the most conscious, perceptive, insightful and committed militants will freely admit it won't make all the difference in the world and there is a possibility it will make no difference at all. But their experience says that, on average, it will make SOME difference, and MOST OF ALL some difference for the Black community. Not nearly as much as they want, not nearly as much as it should, not even in the same universe, never mind planet as the suffering and heroism of the community entitles it to, but, yes, SOME difference. You EITHER recognize that or say that even the most conscious, far seeing militants of the most combative, heroic, etc. etc. etc. section of the working people in the U.S. have got their heads stuck up their behinds so much that any formulation that suggests there might, in theory, conceivably, be SOME hope for a revolutionary change in the United States has got to be replaced with formulations that make clear that there is absolutely, categorically and irrefutably NO HOPE WHATSOEVER, and that the solution to humanity's American problem is simply to rub it out, to destroy it completely, utterly and irrevocably. But this is an opinion I hold only when I'm not at the peak of my political manic-depressive cycles. What can I say? Tuesday afternoons are my good time. But if we take for good coin the Black community's belief that it does make some difference (not all the difference in the world, not a QUALITATIVE difference, but, yes, SOME) and especially FOR the Black community, then we have to think clearly about our strategic objectives and what the intermediate steps in achieving them are. Is the next step towards political independence cohering the CLASS movement across the color line? I know a lot of people are going to rend their garments and say this is blasphemy, treason to Marxism, but so be it. I think not. I think the NEXT step is cohering the COLOR movement, the national movements of oppressed peoples, EVEN across "class" lines. WHY? Because, atomized and dominated as they may be by bourgeois forces, at least the national movements of Blacks and Latinos as peoples EXIST. There is a space to wage the fight. Anyone who thinks that there is a CLASS movement in this country (apart from, of course, the IMPERIALIST movement, but also in national form, the white American national movement) is FOOLING THEMSELVES. That's what I think, that's the conclusion I draw from 40-some years of political activity as a rebel in this country, about 39 of those as a conscious Marxist and revolutionary (even if not always a very skillful, insightful or effective one, as I see things now). There is not --NOT YET!-- even the beginnings of a conscious class movement in this country EXCEPT as a manifestation of the national movements of oppressed peoples. Does this mean I think that "we" SHOULD support Obama? ("Critically" of course!). Actually, no. What I REALLY think is that the Marxist/socialist/radical left's complete inability to mount even a PRETEND intervention in this situation should lead us all to redouble our efforts to provide the materials that might help to lay the foundation for a real left and a real socialist movement in this country in the future. That's much more important than anything we could mount now. Personally, I think this should be done subtly, with tact and grace, for example by going to the very next meeting of whatever group, league, party, organization or circle that might have the honor of counting one of us among its members and putting the following motion on the floor: "WHEREAS: The capitalist system has now placed the world in such a state that the very survival, not just of civilization. but of most species and conceivably even the ecosystem as a whole has been put into question; and "WHEREAS: The [name of group] in [city or other jurisdiction] has proved itself completely ineffective in convincing even a half-dozen people in the last few [days/weeks/months/years/decades] of the absolute necessity of socialism to avert this catastrophe; "Therefore be it "RESOLVED: That the [place] [branch, cell, local or other unit] of the [name of group] considers that the best contribution it can make to the bright communist future of humanity is to dissolve." Joaquin From arthurymer at yahoo.com Tue Jul 1 17:22:42 2008 From: arthurymer at yahoo.com (Arthur Rymer) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 16:22:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Marxism] National Assembly conference In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <168496.37523.qm@web30208.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Paul LeBlanc?s report on the National Assembly meeting in Cleveland (posted by Fred Feldman) hints vaguely that ?some amendments that passed add complications to what the National Assembly is trying to accomplish.? He also takes a swipe at unnamed socialist organizations for ?being mired in destructive and sectarian dynamics.? Normally one would ignore charges that don?t name names, but in this case Paul uses them to dodge reporting the debates and narrowly decided votes that actually took place. I wasn?t there, but I?ve spoken to a couple of comrades who were, and here is the gist of what they said. 1. The first debate was over the leadership?s proposal to set a date in December for a national mass anti-war protest. There was a counterproposal to have the demo in October. The debate was really between protesting before or after the election; the opposition argued that the leadership wanted to avoid a pre-election demonstration in order to avoid embarrassing the supposedly anti-war Democratic Party. (That?s always been the reason for the absence of anti-war demonstrations during election years.) The leadership motion passed, but not by much: the vote was 112-94. 2. The second big debate was over Palestine, long a contentious issue in the anti-war milieu. It became clear that the debate was between the Coordinating Committee's effort to restrict the Assembly to the narrow single issue of Iraq, and the other side's insistence on embracing solidarity with the Palestinian struggle as an essential part of the anti-war movement. This vote the leadership lost, 114-87. 3. Then there was a debate over ?Afghanistan?. The official name of the Assembly was "National Assembly to End the Iraq War and Occupation" ? with the war and occupation of Afghanistan notably omitted. Again, the obvious reason for the omission was to keep the pressure off Democrats who favor the ?justified? imperialist war in Afghanistan but not the U.S.?s quagmire in Iraq. Motions were introduced to change the name of the organization to include Afghanistan, and to add ?and Afghanistan? to ?Iraq? in the action proposals wherever appropriate. These motions were combined into one, and it passed decisively, without need for a count. These last two are presumably what Paul LeBlanc means by amendments that ?add complications to what the Assembly is trying to accomplish.? The complication appears to be that a major fraction of the conference wasn?t willing to accommodate to Democratic politicians who perpetually fund and support imperialist wars. Arthur Rymer League for the Revolutionary Party From elishastephens at hotmail.com Tue Jul 1 17:53:46 2008 From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 16:53:46 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Marxists for Obama Message-ID: Considering the source of this article, a notorious right-wing "press," it is entirely possible that this "Marxists, socialists, and communists for Obama" has as much reality as "Billionaires for Bush" and other such spoofs, that is, it could very well be a bunch of right-wingers trying to make Obama look bad. Or, it could be Joaquin and Walter and Marvin. ;-) WorldNetDaily JERUSALEM ? Marxists, socialists and communists have created a safe space online to congregate, exchange ideas ? including a stated revolution against the U.S. "oppressive" regime ? and support their favored presidential candidate. Their meeting spot? Sen. Barack Obama's official campaign website, which allows registered users to form groups and post content in online "community" blogs. _________________________________________________________________ Use video conversation to talk face-to-face with Windows Live Messenger. http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/connect_your_way.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_messenger_video_072008 From christopher.hutch at gmail.com Tue Jul 1 17:58:09 2008 From: christopher.hutch at gmail.com (Christopher Hutchinson) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 19:58:09 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] National Assembly conference In-Reply-To: <168496.37523.qm@web30208.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <168496.37523.qm@web30208.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I thought the conference was overall successful in forging unity within the movement and by that i mean there were no splits, no one walked out and it operated in a very democratic fashion. We in CT spent the last few months going door to door and sponsoring fundraisers so that we could take a chartered bus from CT (42 activists many new of them new to activism) to Cleveland. One thing was made abundantly clear from the day to day outreach we did to working class families and individuals and that was the need expand the antiwar movement in the broadest possible layers of society. Believe it or not but most of the workers and students I spoke with still harbor illusions in the Democratic Party. As activists it is our responsibility to win this layer of the population over to the perspective of mass action and educate about how the Democratic Party is the place "where social movements go to die". However, we need to start at a place where everyone can agree and unsurprisingly that single issue is Iraq. It has nothing to do with "accommodating Democratic politicians" but it does have everything to do with relating to the masses of working people and students who might not understand the connections between Palestine and Iraq. The below statement that Arthur makes is not accurate... "1. The first debate was over the leadership's proposal to set a date in December for a national mass anti-war protest. There was a counter proposal to have the demo in October. The debate was really between protesting before or after the election; the opposition argued that the leadership wanted to avoid a pre-election demonstration in order to avoid embarrassing the supposedly anti-war Democratic Party." The debate was seriously limited because the October 11th proposal was absorbed into the coordinating committees action proposal. There was no "counter proposal". The reason for calling the ddemonstrations in December was to win union support...the union bureaucracy would never agree to build a demonstration when they send their members out hustling votes for Democrats. As everyone should know that throughout antiwar history during the fall of an election year it is extremely difficult to mobilize people it has nothing to do with "embarrassing the supposedly anti-war Democratic Party". In the end there was support for both October 11th and the December demonstrations. All in all it was a great weekend especially to have such a broad representation of the movement in one room together. Lets continue to build the movement! I am looking forward to Nationally Coordinated and Unified Mobilizations in the spring! Christopher Hutchinson CT On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Arthur Rymer wrote: > Paul LeBlanc's report on the National Assembly meeting in Cleveland (posted > by Fred Feldman) hints vaguely that "some amendments that passed add > complications to what the National Assembly is trying to accomplish." He > also takes a swipe at unnamed socialist organizations for "being mired in > destructive and sectarian dynamics." > > Normally one would ignore charges that don't name names, but in this case > Paul uses them to dodge reporting the debates and narrowly decided votes > that actually took place. I wasn't there, but I've spoken to a couple of > comrades who were, and here is the gist of what they said. > > 1. The first debate was over the leadership's proposal to set a date in > December for a national mass anti-war protest. There was a counterproposal > to have the demo in October. The debate was really between protesting before > or after the election; the opposition argued that the leadership wanted to > avoid a pre-election demonstration in order to avoid embarrassing the > supposedly anti-war Democratic Party. (That's always been the reason for > the absence of anti-war demonstrations during election years.) The > leadership motion passed, but not by much: the vote was 112-94. > > 2. The second big debate was over Palestine, long a contentious issue in > the anti-war milieu. It became clear that the debate was between the > Coordinating Committee's effort to restrict the Assembly to the narrow > single issue of Iraq, and the other side's insistence on embracing > solidarity with the Palestinian struggle as an essential part of the > anti-war movement. This vote the leadership lost, 114-87. > > 3. Then there was a debate over "Afghanistan". The official name of the > Assembly was "National Assembly to End the Iraq War and Occupation" ? with > the war and occupation of Afghanistan notably omitted. Again, the obvious > reason for the omission was to keep the pressure off Democrats who favor the > "justified" imperialist war in Afghanistan but not the U.S.'s quagmire in > Iraq. Motions were introduced to change the name of the organization to > include Afghanistan, and to add "and Afghanistan" to "Iraq" in the action > proposals wherever appropriate. These motions were combined into one, and it > passed decisively, without need for a count. > > These last two are presumably what Paul LeBlanc means by amendments that > "add complications to what the Assembly is trying to accomplish." The > complication appears to be that a major fraction of the conference wasn't > willing to accommodate to Democratic politicians who perpetually fund and > support imperialist wars. > > Arthur Rymer > League for the Revolutionary Party > > > > > > ________________________________________________ > YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu > Set your options at: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/christopher.hutch%40gmail.com > From cpiml_elo at yahoo.com Tue Jul 1 18:05:01 2008 From: cpiml_elo at yahoo.com (CPI (ML) Intl Liaison Office) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 17:05:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Marxism] MLIN [July-Aug] Price Hike Protests | Election Analysis | SA Taxi Drivers | and More | Message-ID: <81844.20948.qm@web35508.mail.mud.yahoo.com> ? ML International Newsletter July-August 2008 ? *********************************************************************** An update on news and ideas from the revolutionary left in India . Produced by: Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation international team *********************************************************************** Websites: and Emails: and ? Table of Contents 1)?????? Soaring Prices and Manmohan?s Nuclear Chess 2)?????? Nationwide Outrage Against Oil Price Hike 3)?????? Murder of NREG Activists in Jharkhand 4)?????? Sri Lanka and Nepal : A Tale of Two Conflicts 5)?????? South Asian Taxi Drivers Demand Better Safety Measures 6)?????? Letter from Jaipur 7)?????? Women?s Assertion Rally by AIPWA in Patna 8)?????? Karnataka Assembly Elections 2008 9)?????? Message from West Bengal Panchayat Polls 10)?? Homage to Vijay Tendulkar ? Politics in India ? Soaring Prices and Manmohan?s Nuclear Chess ? - Liberation, July, 2008. ? They had been talking about double-digit economic growth. Instead, it is inflation which has crossed the double-digit barrier and the upward climb of the price spiral shows no sign of slowing down. As we go to press, officially measured inflation has reached a thirteen-year high, equalling the 1995 level when Manmohan Singh was the Finance Minister in Narsimha Rao?s cabinet. The official measurement of inflation is based on the wholesale price index which is obviously quite removed from the actual prices that consumers have to pay at the retail market. But a quick look at the major segments accounting for the rise in wholesale prices ? food and food products: 24%, petro products: 17%, iron and steel: 10% ? gives us a clear idea of how badly the poor and fixed-income consumers are being hurt. ? Even as prices of all essential commodities soar sky-high, the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government keeps telling us that this inflation is a global phenomenon and we have to bear with it. Instead of taking urgent measures to douse the flame, the government has instead chosen to fan the fire by dutifully passing on the ?global? burden to the people at home. How does it help to know that the fire raging in the Indian market is ?imported? from abroad when prices of every local produce are going through the roof! Having broken down every potential protective barrier and opened up the entire economy to all kinds of external assaults, the UPA government can now hardly excuse itself by attributing the inflationary surge to global economic factors. ? History tells us that when Rome was burning, Emperor Nero was busy playing his violin. In today?s India , when the market is aflame, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is busy playing nuclear chess. Media reports have it that Singh has offered to resign if he cannot push through his favourite nuclear deal with the US . The mainstream media is also more perturbed over the future of the deal than the crushing blow inflicted by soaring prices. Indeed, inflation is being seen as a spoilsport of sorts by the pro-deal lobby. The deal enthusiasts are wary that clinching the deal at this stage might lead to somewhat early elections and many in the ruling coalition do not seem to be ready to risk an election in conditions of double-digit inflation and face the ire of the electorate. ? It is this utterly callous and anti-people attitude that best indicates the current degree of disconnect between the powers that be and the people and their plight. This disconnect has today become the hallmark of the UPA model of ?secular governance? and ?aam aadmi? (common person) rhetoric. Soaked neck-deep in the ideology of ?corporate industrialisation and development?, the CPI (M) in West Bengal has also begun to revel in this disconnect. The panchayat results have merely provided some early electoral confirmation of the emerging popular mood in West Bengal . In a way the situation seems tailor-made for the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) and the National Democratic Alliance (NDA). True to the ideology and historical tradition of fascism, the BJP is evidently capable of exploiting any and every popular resentment for its own sectarian and retrograde agenda. Karnataka has once again confirmed this basic truth regarding the BJP. ? What should be the Left and democratic response to this political challenge thrown up by the unfolding situation? More doses of ?secular partnership? with the Congress? Bihar and Karnataka have clearly revealed the basic fallacy in this approach. A decade ago elections had produced a ruling arrangement in the shape of a United Front (UF) backed from outside both by the Congress and the Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI (M)]. On the face of it the UF had managed to keep the BJP out of power, but only for a few months. If today the UPA experiment seems headed in the same direction, it must compel Left and democratic forces to look beyond such suicidal tactical shortcuts. The way forward lies only through a bold, consistent and vigorous espousal of the cause of the people against the growing economic and national crisis home-delivered by the comprador Indian votaries of imperialist globalization. ? Struggles in India Nationwide Outrage Against Oil Price Hike - Liberation, July, 2008. ? There has been nationwide protest against the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government?s decision to hike the prices of petrol, diesel and cooking gas. Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) [CPI (ML)] had given a call for an all-India protest on 6th June, and on that day and since, the party has organised independent protests and joined other Left parties in resisting the oil price hike.???? ? In Delhi on 5 June, immediately after the announcement of the hike in prices, the CPI (ML) held a protest demonstration at Parliament Street and burnt the effigy of the UPA Government. ? In Bihar , the CPI (ML) along with other Left parties including CPI and CPI (M) called a bandh on 10 June. The bandh was a great success, and was vigorously implemented with demonstrations at almost all district headquarters. In Patna alone, 6 separate, massive contingents comprising more than 2000 people marched on the streets to implement the bandh. Over 1000 CPI (ML) activists were arrested in Patna including the State Secretary Nand Kishore Prasad, central committee members (CCMs) Ram Jatan Sharma, K D Yadav and Meena Tiwari and All India Progressive Women Association (AIPWA) leader Shashi Yadav, while around 85 activists from CPI and CPI (M) were arrested. All the National Highways were blockaded by people, and train routes blockaded at Buxar, Muzaffarpur, Siwan, Ara, Leheriasarai, Narkatiaganj, Hilsa, Bihar Sharif, and Masaurhi. At Jehanabad, CPI (ML) activists clashed with the police during the bandh.??????? ? In Jharkhand, the CPI (ML) gave a call for bandh on 7 June, which was highly effective. As many as 1,000 party activists and leaders were arrested by the police in different parts of the state, who were later released. In Ranchi , party activists blockaded the Main Road and brought traffic to a standstill. The bandh got a very good response in Bokaro, Ramgarh and Dhanbad districts. In Giridih district, the bandh was led by CPI (ML) member of legislative assembly (MLA) Vinod Singh with over 2,000 activists. CCM and former MLA Bahadur Oraon led the workers in the bandh in Chakradharpur. The bandh had an effect in Lohardaga, Garhwa, Barwadih, Nirsa and many other places. The traffic on the Ranchi-Tata Road came to a halt for over an hour as over 100 workers blocked the road at Bundu. ? In Uttar Pradesh, a demonstration was held and an effigy of the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) Government burnt outside the assembly building at Lucknow on 6 June. CPI (ML) State Secretary Sudhakar Yadav condemned the lathicharge against CPI (ML) demonstrators protesting at the Mirzapur district headquarters and the arrest of several activists including the party?s district secretary Nandlal and Revolutionary Youth Association (RYA) National President Mohd. Salim. In spite of these arrests, protest demonstrations were held at the block headquarters at Ahiraura and Narayanpur in Mirzapur. Demonstrations were held and effigies of the central government burnt at the Sonebhadra District headquarters at Robertsganj, as well as at the block headquarters at Anpara, Duddhi, Babhani, Gherawal and at Mughalsarai and Chakia block headquarters in Chandauli district. At Varanasi , CPI (ML) activists burnt the effigy of the UPA Government near the Cantt. Railway Station. In Lakhimpuri Kheri town, as well as in Gorakhpur, Devaria, Maharajganj, Gazipur, Mau, Jalaun, Moradabad, Bijnaur, Sitapur and other districts, protest marches were held. Earlier on 4 June, immediately after the hikes in prices were announced, effigies of the UPA Government were burnt at Jamalpur in Mirzapur, as well as at Faizabad and Mau. ? In Tamilnadu, demonstrations were held against petrol price hike in Chennai, Tiruvallore, Kanchipuram, Villupuram, Cuddalore, Nagappattinam, Coimbatore , Salem , Namakkal, Tirnelveli, Krishnagiri, Kanyakumari and Madurai districts. In Krishnagiri, on 5 June, 30 comrades were arrested for burning an effigy, and were released later. In Kanyakumari, comrades pulled an auto by ropes. In Chennai more than 100 workers mobilised by CPI (ML) participated in the protest. Demonstrations were also held in Pudukottai district in two points on 6 June against petrol price hike. The CPI (ML) supported the CPI ? CPI (M)?s call for statewide bandh on 7 June, and our comrades were active in implementing the bandh at Vridhachalam (Cuddalore), Kotakuppam (Vilupuram), and Tirupanandal (Thanjavur). In Pondicherry too the bandh was a success and our comrades actively participated in it. ? In Orissa, a road blockade was held at Rayagada on 6 June in which 100 people participated. A dharna was held at Laxmipur Block, Korapur district, in which 300 people protested against price rise, corruption and irregularities in issuing of below poverty line (BPL) cards and National Rural Employee Guarantee Act (NREG) implementation.?? ? In Andhra Pradesh, the CPI (ML) Liberation along with CPI (ML) New Democracy, and MCPI held a rasta roko (road blockade) in Vijaywada on 6 June. In Prathipadu district of East Godavari, in Jaggampeta, in Gollaprolu, in Kakinada Rural, CPI (ML) held rasta roko programmes. In Vissampeta (Krishna District), a dharna was held at the Tehsildar?s office. In Jangareddygudem (West Godavari District), and in Visakhapatnam also, CPI (ML) Liberation, CPI(ML) ND, and MCPI held a rasta roko. ? In Rajasthan, demonstrations were held and memoranda submitted on 6 June at district headquarters of Pratapgarh, Udaipur , Jaipur, Ajmer , and Bhuhana (Jhunjhuna). In Ajmer , the demonstration comprised a large number of women activists.?? ? At Rewari in Haryana, CPI (ML) activists held a demonstration and burnt the effigy of the UPA Government on 6 June. In Gwalior (Madhya Pradesh), a street corner meeting was held and an effigy of the central government burnt. In the Andamans, CPI (ML) conducted a protest demonstration at the Secretariat gate in Port Blair on 5 June. At Gangavati in Karnataka on 6 June, a demonstration was held and an effigy of the Prime Minister burnt. ? Struggles in India ? Murder of NREG Activists in Jharkhand ? - Liberation, July, 2008. ? On 14 May, a young activist Lalit Mehta, who had been active in the right to food campaign and had the previous day initiated a social audit to expose corruption in implementation of National Rural Employement Guarantee (NREG) in Palamu District, was killed on 14 May while on his way from Daltonganj to Chatarpur. The social audit threatened to expose corruption in high places. His murder was met with outraged protests all over the country, and eventually, after much delay, the demand for a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) enquiry into the murder was accepted by the State Government.??? ? Lalit Mehta?s killing was no exception. On 7 June, Kameshwar Yadav, of Khatauri village of Deori Block (Giridih District Jharkhand); a Block Committee member of CPI (ML) in Giridih; also an activist on NREG-related issues, was shot dead as he was returning home from Kisgo on a motorcycle in the evening. He is survived by his wife Babita Devi, two sons and a daughter. ? The suicide of adivasi Turia Munda, due to failure to get his due wages under NREG act, exposed the sorry state of implementation of NREG scheme in Jharkhand. The murders of Lalit and Kameshwar are part of a spate of such killings and harassment of activists exposing rural corruption. There have been several recent murders of rural activists in Giridih itself. Last month, Rajinder Das, a dalit activist of CPI (ML) at Rajdhanwar, Giridih, who had been at the forefront of the struggle against grabbing of land allocated to dalits by local land mafia, was killed. Two months back, another dalit CPI (ML) activist Munshi Tori had been killed. In these two cases, the perpetrators of the murder ? leaders of the Jharkhand Vikas Morcha (Babulal Marandi?s party) ? have been named in the first information report (FIR), yet they are yet to be arrested. Deuri Block is the same area where CPI (ML) waged a powerful struggle against public distribution system (PDS) black-marketeering, and a key leader of this movement, Comrade Osman Ansari is in jail since May 2007. ???? The CPI (ML) conducted a campaign for justice for Kameshwar from 16-25 June culminating in a Giridih March on 25 June. In Delhi , party mass organisations participated in a protest at the Jharkhand Bhawan along with other groups. Following this, a delegation comprising Central Employment Guarantee Council member Annie Raja, Kiran Shaheen and CPI (ML) CCM Kavita Krishnan met with Rural Development Minister Raghuvansh Prasad Singh to apprise him of the situation in Jharkhand. The Minister claimed that Jharkhand was one of the few states where corruption was least because all wage payments were being done through bank or post office ( PO ) accounts. This rosy picture was challenged by the delegation, and a comptroller and auditor general (CAG) enquiry, especially for NREG in Jharkhand was demanded. ? Letter to PM from Activists and Intellectuals Activists and intellectuals submitted a letter to the Prime Minister, Rural Development Minister and Jharkhand Governor, excerpts of which are below:????? We the undersigned would like to bring to your notice the serious problems in the functioning of NREG act in Jharkhand. These also include the murders of prominent activists like Lalit Mehta and a general atmosphere of terror against those who expose corruption in NREGA. ? The announcement of a request for a CBI enquiry into Lalit Mehta's murder by the Jharkhand government is a welcome development but insufficient. However the extent of terror and corruption in Palamu and adjoining districts is very high. A CBI enquiry into Lalit Mehta's murder is not sufficient. There should be a high level enquiry by the CAG's office into the corruption in the NREGA scheme in Palamu and elsewhere. A special CBI task force should also investigate the? murders of other social activists in Jharkhand like Kameshwar Yadav [CPI (ML)] and Jawahar Singh (People?s Union of Civil Liberties) and the general atmosphere of terror unleashed against activists and labourers who expose corruption and stand up for their rights. ? Regarding NREG Act (NREGA) and the safety of activists we have the following demands: ? 1] The safety of activists and others monitoring NREGA should be ensured, especially in districts like Palamu,? Koderma and Singhbhum. ? 2] A political intervention be made to remove all hindrances to establish the panchayati raj institutions in Jharkhand at the earliest. ? 3] The Central Employment Guarantee Council should meet in Palamu and suggest measures to the Central Government regarding the eradication of corruption and the security of activists. It should also do an overview of the functioning of NREGA in Jharkhand and the weakness thereof. In particular it should ensure that social audits are conducted regularly and reports be made public. ? 4] Within 30 days necessary action be taken against NREGA irregularities, brought out during the investigations and on the registered complaints. Signed by Aruna Roy, Arundhati Roy, Nikhil Dey, Swami Agnivesh, Subhashini Ali, Kuldip Nayar, Annie Raja, Medha Patkar, Prof. Kamal Chenoy, Dunu Roy, Babu Mathew, Kavita Krishnan, and others. ? South Asia Sri Lanka and Nepal : A Tale of Two Conflicts ? - S. Sivasegaram. ? Both Sri Lanka and Nepal have faced long periods of insurgency, but the armed conflicts concerned different issues and the degree of success in resolving them differs vastly. They, nevertheless, have lessons for each other. Important social and political differences between the two tower over obvious geographical factors, despite the importance of the geographic location of each to its course of social and political development. Sri Lanka ?s strategic location in the Indian Ocean caused it to be subject to one of the longest, (if not the longest) uninterrupted colonial rules, by three successive colonial masters, lasting over four centuries. Landlocked Nepal , although subject to British Colonial domination from the 19th Century, was only a protectorate, declared independent in 1923 by treaty with Britain . ? Modernisation of the Sri Lankan polity started in the late 19th Century under colonial rule, much after the Kandyan Kingdom , the last feudal monarchy, ended early that century. But vestiges of feudalism like the caste system and modes of agricultural production remained untouched by colonialism, which also created an elite class of landed gentry with feudal links. Nepal was slower to modernise; and the Indian successors to the British Raj, helped to restore the Shah dynasty in 1951 and dominated Nepal, whose geography made its trade and hence economy dependent on India. ? Sri Lanka had universal suffrage in 1931, three years after Britain , an influential left party soon after, and a mature political party system when the British left in 1948. But, failure to address the national question made chauvinism and narrow nationalism emerge as major forces, and only the left was truly national in approach.? Nepal had its first general elections in 1959, but royal interference ensured that, despite popular protests leading to restoration of democratic elections to parliament, the monarch prevailed and elected governments were dismissed at will. Thus democracy itself became a central political issue. ? The Sri Lankan national question was deliberately aggravated by Sinhala chauvinists to degenerate into war by 1983. Despite heavy blows to the economy by a quarter century of war and untold suffering of the people, especially in war-affected regions, the dominant players lack the will to resolve the national question. Nepal , besides its complex national question, faced oppression by class, ethnicity, religion, caste and gender, certainly more severe than in Sri Lanka at any stage. Attempts to resolve some of the grievances were frustrated by the monarchy aided by the ruling elite and reactionary political parties. The withdrawal of the Maoists from parliament in 1995 to launch its People?s War in 1996 transformed Nepal ?s political landscape in one decade. ? Sri Lankan parliamentary democracy though severely eroded is still formally intact. The weakening of the Sri Lankan left started in 1964 with its bulk losing its way in parliamentary politics. The left failed the working class and the minorities, since electoral alliances with bourgeois parties meant compromise and accommodation of policies pandering to base communal sentiments. Its decimation at the 1977 elections demoralised the working class; and the reactionary government that came to power in 1977 escalated the ethnic conflict, and used it as a smokescreen to negate the achievements of progressive and popular struggles led by the left, including democratic and fundamental rights, and to introduce a disastrous open economic policy. The Nepali left was, in electoral terms, stronger than that in Sri Lanka , but it too indulged in parliamentary folly. The parliamentary left failed to learn from the royal subversion of its short-lived government in 1992, and the country paid the price. ? The first and only successful armed struggle in Sri Lanka was the Marxist-Leninist mass campaign (1966-1970) against caste oppression in the North. Care for the safety of the masses ensured that the number of deaths was small. Since then, the adventurist insurgencies led by the chauvinistic Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna in 1971 and 1987-89 claimed nearly 100,000 lives, anti-Tamil violence several thousands, and the war of national oppression and internecine killings since 1983 well over 100,000. The war also displaced around a million internationally, besides up to 500,000 displaced internally. But there is little to show by way of progress on the national question, despite various political deals up to 1983, and efforts since 1983 to resolve the armed conflict, including the Indian intervention in 1987 and the Ceasefire Agreement of 2002, ritually abandoned early this year. In contrast, ten years of armed conflict in Nepal cost 13,000 lives, with the state?s armed forces answerable for over 10,000; and a peace process, born of a crisis created for the parliamentary political parties by the monarch who assumed absolute power, made way for the securing and consolidation of important victories for the people and an end to the monarchy. ? Escalation of national oppression, war and armed struggle in Sri Lanka , along with the weakness of the Sinhala left, let the initiative be with the Sinhala chauvinists, irrespective of party label, and the Tamil militants. With the genuine left in disarray and chauvinism dominating politics in the South, and democracy denied on the pretext of the armed conflict in the North-East, the national question remained over-simplified as a Sinhala-Tamil conflict to the neglect of all else. The war, now portrayed as war against terrorism, takes precedence over mounting economic problems and the denial of democratic, human and fundamental rights. All peace initiatives including the failed ceasefire came about under external pressure; and subject to interference by hegemonic powers. Negotiations did not progress beyond formal cessation of hostilities and a vague demarcation of domains of authority that allowed the two sides to conserve and rebuild. Where even humanitarian relief to the victims of war and tsunami has faced stiff chauvinist resistance, efforts to resolve the national question will certainly be sabotaged by disruptive forces within the country and without. As long as the present group of players dominate the scene, there is scant hope for any peace and even less for a solution to the national question; and foreign intervention will use pretexts of human rights and democracy to control the country rather than resolve the national question. ? In Nepal, a mass struggle aimed at ending a dictatorial monarchy under a leadership with a working class perspective also dealt constructively with several contradictions, some hostile like that between landlords and agricultural labour, and others ?friendly? like those based on identity. But there can be no complaisance since vested interests will kindle ethnic, caste and religious conflict, as seen in the Terai region a year ago, and the opportunist ?left? joining hands with the right to undermine the people?s democratic structures secured through mass struggle. Besides subversion in the form of foreign investment, ?development projects? and ?aid?, the corrupting influence of the bourgeois parliamentary system on individuals is a potential danger from within. Yet, even if the new democratic structure anticipated by the Maoists fails to materialise, the politicisation and empowerment of the masses through struggle will act as an immune system to combat attempts to subvert democratic rights and restore oppression by class, gender, ethnicity, caste and religion. ? Sri Lanka?s hope could be embedded in its impending tragedy. The deterioration of the political situation will sooner than later make it necessary for the entire people to struggle for democratic and fundamental rights against a reactionary repressive regime backed by one hegemonic power or another. Given the record of narrow nationalism on all sides thus far, only a genuine left leadership can show the way out of the morass. ? The lessons for Nepal can be from the experiences of the Sri Lankan left and the dangers of allowing issues of identity dominate over issues of class and class struggle. Such a risk can be averted only through the Maoists holding on to their revolutionary initiative. ? ? ? South Asian Diaspora ? South Asian Taxi Drivers Demand Better Safety Measures ? - Lionel Bopage. ? Adelaide and Melbourne witnessed thousands of South Asian students, predominantly Indians holding direct action to demand better safety conditions in the pursuit of their role as taxi drivers. In Adelaide they held up traffic at the airport after a colleague was bashed and robbed. In Melbourne they staged a sit down protest at peak hour in the middle of the central business district (CBD) after a colleague was stabbed. In Melbourne their action was spontaneous, vocal, passionate and peaceful. Their action took the state government and the police by surprise. Even though government concessions did not go far enough and was limited to boosting driver safety and security it served as an example for our pensioners, who staged a similar protest in the CBD to get their concerns across. They followed the taxi drivers? example in taking off their clothing in protest to prove they were ?fair dinkum?. The reason for the taxi drivers protests are not hard to discern. ? The state government has not addressed the broader issues of the overseas students that underpin these protests. Globalisation allows capital to freely move but does not allow labour to do so. In India the process has exacerbated the gap between the rich and the poor but also has created a bourgeoning entrepreneurial middle class caught up in trappings of consumerism. Traditional jobs do not provide sufficient opportunities to maintain such life styles. Hence, those who miss out try moving overseas to countries like Australia . ? Overseas students are allowed to work a maximum of 20 hours a week to repay their loans and to pay their exorbitant tertiary fees! Of course, they cannot survive by working 20 hours. If they get caught working more hours they are taken to a detention centre and are instantly deported with no chance of appeal. Melbourne alone has over three thousand such students who mostly work night shifts. Driving taxis is not considered a safe or well paid job by the majority community. ? If overseas students are considered Australian for tax purposes, they should be given the same opportunity and security provided to the majority of taxpayers. However, taxi drivers in the majority of cases are considered independent contractors. As such, they do not enjoy the employment rights most other workers are entitled to. The federal minimum wage and work conditions do not apply to them. Hence most drivers are paid less and work longer shifts. After deregulation taxi licences were bought by speculating investors causing licence plates to be sold at extremely high prices, the current costs running up to about $500,000 per plate. In their desire for profit maximisation, the licence-owners not only take advantage of drivers in terms of their pay and conditions, but also passengers in terms of the service provided, to pay for the over-priced licenses. ? Many of these protestors have not played an active role in any of the previous protest actions held by the organised trade union movement against the employers and the state implementing their neo-liberal industrial relations agenda which is to sack workers as and when necessary. Nevertheless, the trade union movement needs not only to learn from these exploited students on how to stage direct action but should organise and harness their enthusiasm and guts to raise the consciousness of their own workers. ? The trade union movement should immediately start a campaign to ensure taxi drivers are entitled to the normal wage and working conditions enjoyed by the rest of the Australian drivers such as working eight hour shifts enjoying minimum wage and working conditions with entitlements for superannuation. An industrial union for the whole transport industry covering all types of drivers is in the order of the day. ? Struggles in India ? Letter from Jaipur ? - Srilata Swaminathan, Liberation, July, 2008. ? Tuesday, 13 May, 1900 hours saw the first of a series of bomb blasts in the crowded Pink City of Jaipur. In all, seven powerful blasts shook the old city, one after the other, and all within thirteen minutes and within a one kilometre area. An eighth bomb was found and diffused by the police. ? From markalause at gmail.com Tue Jul 1 20:34:06 2008 From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 21:34:06 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] National Assembly conference In-Reply-To: References: <168496.37523.qm@web30208.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: As I've posted elsewhere, I share Paul's sense with some differences of emphasis. For example, I don't think the resolutions passed from the floor were a problem. Most fundamentally, the success of the conference in producing unity is confusing. I suppose it was successful, if your yardstick is whether the 300-325 people from different currents could pass some time together with killing each other. My yardstick is whether it will result in united mass actions in the streets, and that depends on the responses of the existing coalitions. Without broad local coalitions to build success from the a bottom-up, we find ourselves counting on success through a top-down arrangement of national bodies. There are also a couple of other observations. During Vietnam, we held these conferences during the school year. Had this conference been called, built and held earlier--maybe six to eight weeks earlier--we'd might well have had five times as many participants. Of course, student resistance is not what it was in the 1960s, but it's very real, very intense, and very needing of a focus. Finally, I wasn't pleased with the dates for the actions, and would have loved to see a national mass action before the elections. However, I understand that this was what the coalitions wanted or said they'd consider for united actions. Let's hope they have the sense of following through on them. When they do, we can honestly regard the conference as a real and substantive success. ML From walterlx at earthlink.net Tue Jul 1 20:36:03 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 19:36:03 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [Marxism] Fidel Castro: The McCain Tour and the Manifest Destiny of the U.S. Fourth Fleet Message-ID: <32802492.1214966163597.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> (Some seem to think that Obama is the main danger and endless denunciations of Obama must be prioritized. That approach isn't held universally today, however.) ======================================================== REFLECTIONS BY COMRADE FIDEL http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/reflexiones/2008/ing/f300608i.html THE MCCAIN TOUR AND THE MANIFEST DESTINY OF THE U. S. FOURTH FLEET While I was preparing a reflection about McCain's relationship with the anti-Cuban terrorist mafia in Miami and other related subjects of historical interest, fresh news was flowing about this character that is being projected by the empire?s hawks as Bush?s replacement: his visit to Colombia and Mexico which will begin tomorrow. It is not possible to avoid them since they confirm the opinions we have sustained. ?McCain will be in Colombia for two days, starting tomorrow on Tuesday, and then he will travel to Mexico?, the Panamanian newspaper La Prensa informs us. ?The United States Fourth Fleet returns to patrol Latin American waters?, Clar?n, the Argentine newspaper with largest circulation, publishes; ?this time under the command of Rear Admiral Joseph Kernan. Kernan who, up till now has been Commander of Naval Special Warfare Command, has a background that is rather worrying?, the newspaper comments. ?The naval officer belongs to the Navy SEALs, an elite commando team made up of men chosen for the toughest of special operations, trained to act in the most adverse and challenging conditions. They were in action in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos. The choice of Kernan to command the Fourth Fleet, according even to the Pentagon's own admission, is absolutely unusual..." "Furthermore, with this decision, the Southern Command reaches the same level of importance as the Central Command operating in the Persian Gulf with the U.S. Fifth Fleet?. ?What reason could the United States have to send such a powerful naval force to a region in peace, without nuclear power, without any real military conflicts or threats??, the newspaper wonders. ?They are never going to admit that it is because of natural resources, but it is no coincidence that this decision comes up just when a structural change in world economy is beginning, where reserves of fresh water, food and energy resources take on a position of important strategic value?, replies Professor Khatchik Der Ghougassian of the Argentine University of San Andr?s, an expert on security issues. The professor adds that ?they do not hide the enormous importance of the oceans of the southern Western Hemisphere and they admit that this will increase their capacity for action since the U.S. Fourth Fleet will be supervising ships and aircraft, including both civilian and commercial navigating south of the United States.? ?James Stavridis, the current Commander of the Southern Command?, Clar?n continues, ?added drug trafficking, the fight on terror and the possibility to respond to the massive migration of refugees from countries such as Haiti or Cuba. James Stevenson, Commander of the United States Naval Forces Southern Command, specified that his vessels would even reach the extensive system of rivers in South America, navigating more in fresh waters than in the traditional salt waters. In other words, they shall have a vast control of the Latin American hinterland. ?United States Naval Forces Southern Command carries out social activities such as the distribution of food or medical supplies that would allow them to convince the U.S. Congress that such penetration is justified?, the Argentine newspaper adds. El Universal of Mexico, under the headline ?John McCain will go from the Basilica to Iztapalapa?, writes: ?John McCain will travel to Mexico not just to makes politics. Or perhaps not just party politics. The Republican candidate will visit the Basilica of Guadalupe. He will also tour one of the tough neighbourhoods in Mexico City.? ?The visit McCain will make to Colombia and Mexico has had his team of collaborators working overtime, even on weekends?, the newspaper comments. ?On Saturday night an event that had been planned as a farewell reception for the closing ceremony of the conference of the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (known as NALEO in English), turned into a discussion roundtable about the scope of his trip to Latin America?he would be getting up early to do an interview with a Televisa news program. Then he would head to the northern part of the city where a half-hour visit to the Basilica of Guadalupe is scheduled?he would attend a luncheon with members of the American Chamber of Commerce in Mexico. Later he would be meeting with Mexican and American businessmen?he would end the day with a visit to the Iztapalapa neighbourhood where he would be briefed about strategies to fight organized crime and support community harmony.? Amidst a torrent of comments relating to the Republican candidate, 52,521 people with more than a million dollars live in South Florida, according to the latest detailed report by an important research firm. Almost all the capital came from Latin America. McCain, not known to be a piously religious man, thinks that by offering a prayer at the Basilica of Guadalupe he will fool Catholics, Protestants, whites, blacks, Indians and mestizos in the countries where, by contrast, extreme poverty grows on a daily basis. Today the front page of Granma reads: ?U.S. airline fined for violating blockade against Cuba?, while a Mexican press agency refers to some 57 thousand Cubans arriving in that country between 2005 and 2007. It is well known that 20 thousand Cubans of all ages, except those fulfilling some inescapable social duty, are legally authorized each year to emigrate to that country; they travel safely, both the children and the adults have received education and are in good health. With the aim of family reunification, Cuba supports this sacrifice. Those who have been enticed by the cynical Cuban Adjustment Act do so directly or through third countries, either secretly or under some legal cover; not only are they committing a despicable lack of ethics but they are depriving our peoples? economy of their specialists and qualified workers. It is an outrageous brain drain and it takes away our productive members; our homeland, in its heroic struggle, must fight this with determination. I shall publish the reflection I prepared earlier some other day. It is worthwhile to know the real story. Fidel Castro Ruz June 30, 2008. 5:16 p.m. ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Wed Jul 2 04:56:09 2008 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 11:56:09 +0100 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses Message-ID: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> Full at: http://www.raceandhistory.com/historicalviews/2008/1006.html The Movement for Democratic Change: The Continuity of its Theoretical and Practical Weaknesses By Sehlare Makgetlaneng* June 10, 2008 "The fight against Zimbabwe is a fight against us all. Today it is Zimbabwe, tomorrow it will be South Africa, it will be Mozambique, it will be Angola, it will be any other African country. Any government that is perceived to be strong, and to be resistant to imperialists, would be made a target and be undermined. So let us not allow any point of weakness in the solidarity of the SADC, because that weakness will also be transferred to the rest of Africa." -Thabo Mbekii(1) The Movement for Democratic Change is characterised by unique and frightening theoretical and practical weaknesses. It is as if it is not an opposition political party in the former settler colonial society in the region which was the victim of settler colonial rule. It has no position on imperialism, colonialism, neo-colonialism, racism, globalisation and north-south relations. Despite acute problems confronted by the masses of the Zimbabwean people on a daily basis, its strategy and tactics have been failing to meet their demands and needs. The consequence has been that they do not recognise them as expressions of their own experience. Its remaining alternative to defeat the Zimbabwean African National Union - Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) to be in power in Zimbabwe is the ballot box. The purpose of this work is to demonstrate that the MDC's profound theoretical and practical weaknesses have continued increasing. In its achievement in the March 2008 presidential and parliamentary elections, the MDC have exposed the continuity of its theoretical and practical weaknesses. It is as if it does not have serious organic intellectuals capable of articulating appropriate strategy and tactics, nationally, regionally, continentally and internationally. Who are its leading intellectuals and strategists? From lnp3 at panix.com Wed Jul 2 06:44:20 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 08:44:20 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> Message-ID: <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> > http://www.raceandhistory.com/historicalviews/2008/1006.html > > The Movement for Democratic Change: The Continuity of its Theoretical and > Practical Weaknesses > By Sehlare Makgetlaneng* > June 10, 2008 > > "The fight against Zimbabwe is a fight against us all. Today it is > Zimbabwe, tomorrow it will be South Africa, it will be Mozambique, it will > be Angola, it will be any other African country. Any government that is > perceived to be strong, and to be resistant to imperialists, would be made a > target and be undermined. So let us not allow any point of weakness in the > solidarity of the SADC, because that weakness will also be transferred to > the rest of Africa." > -Thabo Mbekii(1) "Any government that is perceived to be strong, and to be resistant to imperialists, would be made a target and be undermined." Really? I haven't noticed any campaign against the government of South Africa, which has had the same relationship to imperialism as any other client state on the continent. Odd that James Daly--a sharp critic of Sinn Fein--would get suckered by an article that begins with a quote by the Gerry Adams of South Africa. From lnp3 at panix.com Wed Jul 2 07:08:26 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 09:08:26 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Fidel Castro: The McCain Tour and the Manifest Destiny of the U.S. Fourth Fleet In-Reply-To: <32802492.1214966163597.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <32802492.1214966163597.JavaMail.root@elwamui-mouette.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <486B7DCA.5010302@panix.com> Walter Lippmann wrote: > (Some seem to think that Obama is the main danger and > endless denunciations of Obama must be prioritized. > That approach isn't held universally today, however.) Nobody thinks that Obama is the "main danger", whatever that means. McCain is clearly worse than Obama, just as George W. Bush was worse than John Kerry, and so on and so forth. There have been frequent reminders both during the primary and now after the primary that Obama is a typical DP candidate for president despite all the rhetoric about "change". Furthermore, this view is becoming fairly generalized not just among the unrepentant Marxists. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/memo-to-obama-moving-to-t_b_110026.html Arianna Huffington Memo to Obama: Moving to the Middle is for Losers Posted June 30, 2008 | 03:14 PM (EST) Last Friday afternoon, the guests taking part in Sunday's roundtable discussion on This Week had a pre-show call with George Stephanopoulos. One of the topics he raised was Obama's perceived move to the center, and what it means. Thus began my weekend obsession. If you were within shouting distance of me, odds are we talked about it. I talked about it over lunch with HuffPost's DC team, over dinner with friends, with the doorman at the hotel, and the driver on the way to the airport. As part of this process, I looked at the Obama campaign not through the prism of my own progressive views and beliefs but through the prism of a cold-eyed campaign strategist who has no principles except winning. From that point of view, and taking nothing else into consideration, I can unequivocally say: the Obama campaign is making a very serious mistake. Tacking to the center is a losing strategy. And don't let the latest head-to-head poll numbers lull you the way they lulled Hillary Clinton in December. Running to the middle in an attempt to attract undecided swing voters didn't work for Al Gore in 2000. It didn't work for John Kerry in 2004. And it didn't work when Mark Penn (obsessed with his "microtrends" and missing the megatrend) convinced Hillary Clinton to do it in 2008. Fixating on -- and pandering to -- this fickle crowd is all about messaging tailored to avoid offending rather than to inspire and galvanize. And isn't galvanizing the electorate to demand fundamental change the raison d'etre of the Obama campaign in the first place? This is how David Axelrod put it at the end of February, contrasting the tired Washington model of "I'll do these things for you" with Obama's "Let's do these things together": "This has been the premise of Barack's politics all his life, going back to his days as a community organizer," Axelrod told me. "He has really lived and breathed it, which is why it comes across so authentically. Of course, the time also has to be right for the man and the moment to come together. And, after all the country has been through over the last seven years, the times are definitely right for the message that the only way to get real change is to activate the American people to demand it." Watering down that brand is the political equivalent of New Coke. Call it Obama Zero. In 2004, the Kerry campaign's obsession with undecided voters -- voters so easily swayed that 46 percent of them found credible the Swift Boaters' charges that Kerry might have faked his war wounds to earn a Purple Heart -- allowed the race to devolve from a referendum on the future of the country into a petty squabble over whether Kerry had bled enough to warrant his medals. Throughout the primary, Obama referred to himself as an "unlikely candidate." Which he certainly was -- and still is. And one of the things that turned him from "unlikely" upstart to presidential frontrunner is his ability to expand the electorate by convincing unlikely voters -- some of the 83 million eligible voters who didn't turn out in 2004 -- to engage in the system. So why start playing to the political fence sitters -- staking out newly nuanced positions on FISA, gun control laws, expansion of the death penalty, and NAFTA? In an interview with Nina Easton in Fortune Magazine, Obama was asked about having called NAFTA "a big mistake" and "devastating." Obama's reply: "Sometimes during campaigns the rhetoric gets overheated and amplified." Overheated? So when he was campaigning in the Midwest, many parts of which have been, yes, devastated by economic changes since the passage of NAFTA, and he pledged to make use of a six-month opt-out clause in the trade agreement, that was "overheated?" Or was that one "amplified?" Because if that's the case, it would be helpful going forward if Obama would let us know which of his powerful rhetoric is "overheated" and/or "amplified," so voters will know not to get their hopes too high. (clip) From lnp3 at panix.com Wed Jul 2 08:15:16 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 10:15:16 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Slow motion recession Message-ID: <486B8D74.90203@panix.com> NY Times, July 2, 2008 Deepening Cycle of Job Loss Seen Lasting Into ?09 By PETER S. GOODMAN As automakers dropped their latest batch of awful sales numbers on the market on Tuesday, reinforcing the gloom spreading across the economy, the troubles confronting American workers seemed to intensify. Plummeting home prices have in recent months eliminated jobs for hundreds of thousands of people, from bankers and real estate agents to construction workers and furniture manufacturers. Tighter lending standards imposed by banks in the wake of huge mortgage losses have made it hard for many Americans to secure credit ? the lifeblood of expansion in recent years ? crimping the appetite of consumers, whose spending amounts to 70 percent of the economy. Joblessness has accelerated, and employers have slashed working hours even for those on their payrolls, shrinking the size of paychecks just as workers need them the most. Now, add to that unsavory mix the word from automakers that sales plunged in June ? by 28 percent for Ford, 21 percent for Toyota and 18 percent for General Motors ? a sharp sign that consumers are pulling back, making manufacturers more likely to cut production and impose more layoffs. Until recently, the weak labor market has been marked more by the reluctance of employers to create new jobs than by mass layoffs. Among economists, the sense is broadening that the troubles dogging the economy will be stubborn, leaving in place an uncomfortable combination of tight credit and scant job opportunities perhaps well into next year. ?It?s a slow-motion recession,? said Ethan Harris, chief United States economist for Lehman Brothers. ?In a normal recession, things kind of collapse and get so weak that you have nowhere to go but up. But we?re not getting the classic two or three negative quarters. Instead, we?re expecting two years of sub-par growth. Growth that?s not enough to generate jobs. It?s kind of a chronic rather than an acute pain.? Mr. Harris expects tepid economic growth and a shrinking labor market to persist through the fall of 2009. The national unemployment rate climbed a full percentage point over the last year to 5.5 percent in May, according to the Labor Department. That does not include people who are jobless and have given up looking for work, or people who have been bumped to part-time jobs from full-time. Add in those people and the so-called underemployment rate rises to 9.7 percent, up from 8.3 percent in May 2007, according to the Labor Department. Goldman Sachs forecasts that the unemployment rate will peak at 6.4 percent late in 2009 before the picture improves, meaning that the painful process of shedding jobs may be only half-way complete. ?The labor market is clearly deteriorating, and it?s highly likely to keep deteriorating,? said Andrew Tilton, an economist at Goldman Sachs. ?It?s clear that the housing downturn and credit crunch are still very much under way. Clearly, there are more jobs to be lost in housing, finance and construction ? hundreds of thousands of more jobs to be lost collectively.? On Thursday, the Labor Department will release its snapshot of the job market for June. Economists generally expect the report to show 60,000 more jobs lost, marking the sixth consecutive month of decline. But many anticipate the unemployment rate will nudge down a little bit, swinging back from an abrupt climb that could have been exaggerated by survey glitches in the previous month, when the rate jumped by half a percentage point ? the sharpest one-month spike in 22 years. If the unemployment rate were to hold steady or rise, that would likely spook markets, underscoring the impact of the economic slowdown. ?Slowing wage growth and falling employment is absolutely toxic if your business is selling anything to consumers,? said Ian Shepherdson, chief United States economist for High Frequency Economics. Recent indications lend credence to the view that the job market is in the grip of a sustained downturn. Three weeks in a row, new unemployment claims have exceeded 380,000, a level generally associated with recession. Construction spending fell in May. The University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment Survey, which tracks attitudes about business and personal finance, has dropped to a depth last seen in 1980. On the factory floor, a weak dollar has been fanning export sales. The I.S.M. Manufacturing Index ? a widely watched gauge of factory activity ? nudged up in June to 50.2 from 49.6 in May, entering barely positive territory, which indicates a slight expansion. But that mostly reflected a buildup of inventories and higher prices for raw materials, and not an improvement in orders for factory goods, said Stuart G. Hoffman, chief economist at PNC Financial Service Group in a note to clients. If business stays weak and orders do not materialize, factory layoffs could accelerate. Indeed, the employment component of the index declined to its lowest level in five years. The slide in the labor market has become both symptom and cause of a weak economy, pulling many families into a downward spiral. Back when housing prices were still rising, Americans borrowed exuberantly against the value of their homes to finance renovations, vacations and shopping sprees. But that artery of finance has constricted considerably along with access to credit cards, forcing a reversion to the traditional limits of household finance. Millions of American families must now confine their spending to what they can bring home from work. With job losses growing and working hours shrinking, many paychecks are eroding, prompting millions of families to cut their spending. Soaring prices for food and gasoline are overwhelming modest wage gains for most workers, leaving households with even less money to spend. All of which deprives struggling businesses of sales, prompting them to shed more workers, sending the cycle down another turn. Starbucks announced on Tuesday that it would close stores and eliminate up to 12,000 jobs, about 7 percent of its work force. The fear of a downward spiral prompted the Bush administration to unleash $100 billion worth of tax rebates in the hopes that recipients would spend money and spur sales. The Treasury has already dispensed more than $78 billion, and the money appears to be finding its way into cash registers, with consumer spending climbing by 0.8 percent in May, according to the Commerce Department. Economists expect the rebates will continue to help retail sales through the summer, fueling modest economic growth that spares some jobs and prevents an outright contraction. But few expect these rebate-laced sales to expand the job market, because businesses understand that the one-time surge of money will wear off later this summer. Many experts expect the economy to then be pulled back into the weeds by the same forces that have led the downturn ? declining home prices, tighter credit and leaner paychecks. ?It?s going to be very hard to overcome those headwinds,? said Mr. Harris, the Lehman economist. From lnp3 at panix.com Wed Jul 2 08:53:06 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 10:53:06 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Obama Voters Protest His Switch on Telecom Immunity Message-ID: <486B9652.2050404@panix.com> NY Times, July 2, 2008 Obama Voters Protest His Switch on Telecom Immunity By JAMES RISEN WASHINGTON ? Senator Barack Obama?s decision to support legislation granting legal immunity to telecommunications companies that cooperated with the Bush administration?s program of wiretapping without warrants has led to an intense backlash among some of his most ardent supporters. Thousands of them are now using the same grass-roots organizing tools previously mastered by the Obama campaign to organize a protest against his decision. In recent days, more than 7,000 Obama supporters have organized on a social networking site on Mr. Obama?s own campaign Web site. They are calling on Mr. Obama to reverse his decision to endorse legislation supported by President Bush to expand the government?s domestic spying powers while also providing legal protection to the telecommunication companies that worked with the National Security Agency?s domestic wiretapping program after the Sept. 11 attacks. During the Democratic primary campaign, Mr. Obama vowed to fight such legislation to update the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA. But he has switched positions, and now supports a compromise hammered out between the White House and the Democratic Congressional leadership. The bill is expected to come to a vote on the Senate floor next Tuesday. That decision, one of a number made by Mr. Obama in recent weeks intended to position him toward the political center as the general election campaign heats up, has brought him into serious conflict for the first time with liberal bloggers and commentators and his young supporters. Many of them have seen the issue of granting immunity to the telecommunications companies as a test of principle in their opposition to Mr. Bush?s surveillance program. ?I don?t think there has been another instance where, in meaningful numbers, his supporters have opposed him like this,? said Glenn Greenwald, a Salon.com writer who opposes Mr. Obama?s new position. ?For him to suddenly turn around and endorse this proposal is really a betrayal of what so many of his supporters believed he believed in.? Jane Hamsher, a liberal blogger who also opposes immunity for the phone companies, said she had been flooded with messages from Obama supporters frustrated with his new stance. ?The opposition to Obama?s position among his supporters is very widespread,? said Ms. Hamsher, founder of the Web site firedoglake.com. ?His promise to filibuster earlier in the year, and the decision to switch on that is seen as a real character problem. I know people who are really very big Obama supporters are very disillusioned.? One supporter, Robert Arellano, expressed his anger on the Obama site. ?I have watched your campaign with genuine enthusiasm,? Mr. Arellano wrote, ?and I have given you money. For the first time in my life, I have sensed the presence of a presidential candidate who might actually bring some meaningful change to the corrupt cesspool of national politics. But your about-face on the FISA bill genuinely angers and alarms me.? For now, the campaign is trying to put a positive spin on the new FISA fight among its supporters. ?The fact that there is an open forum on BarackObama.com where supporters can say whether they agree or disagree speaks to a strength of our campaign,? said Bill Burton, a campaign spokesman. Several activists and bloggers predicted that Mr. Obama?s move toward the center on some issues could sharply reduce the intensity of support he has enjoyed from liberal activists. Such enthusiasm helped power his effort to secure the Democratic nomination, and it has been one of his campaign?s most important tools for fund-raising and organizing around the country. Markos Moulitsas, a liberal blogger and founder of the Daily Kos Web site, said he had decided to cut back on the amount of money he would contribute to the Obama campaign because of the FISA reversal. ?I will continue to support him,? Mr. Moulitsas said in an interview. ?But I was going to write him a check, and I decided I would rather put that money with Democrats who will uphold the Constitution.? Greg Craig, a Washington lawyer who advises the Obama campaign, said Tuesday in an interview that Mr. Obama had decided to support the compromise FISA legislation only after concluding it was the best deal possible. ?This was a deliberative process, and not something that was shooting from the hip,? Mr. Craig said. ?Obviously, there was an element of what?s possible here. But he concluded that with FISA expiring, that it was better to get a compromise than letting the law expire.? From walterlx at earthlink.net Wed Jul 2 09:22:00 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 11:22:00 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Marxism] =?utf-8?q?NYT=3A_China_Inspired_Interrogations_at_Guant?= =?utf-8?b?w6FuYW1v?= Message-ID: <25427819.1215012120564.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net> (It's a funny thing, isn't it, that they're trying to fob the blame off on China for what WASHINGTON and its torturers have been doing to its captives in Guantanamo? Torture is a terrible thing, and yet Washington maintains normal diplomatic and trading relations with the People's Republic of China, despite this. Well, China-bashing is all the rage in certain circles and presumably they think this will divert attention from WASHINGTON's responsibility for torture. It's like Malcolm X said about the role of the media: They try to turn the victim into the criminal and the criminal into the victim. Poor innocent Washington, seduced by those Communist Svangalis in Red China.) ==================================================================== THE NEW YORK TIMES July 2, 2008 China Inspired Interrogations at Guant?namo By SCOTT SHANE WASHINGTON ? The military trainers who came to Guant?namo Bay in December 2002 based an entire interrogation class on a chart showing the effects of ?coercive management techniques? for possible use on prisoners, including ?sleep deprivation,? ?prolonged constraint,? and ?exposure.? What the trainers did not say, and may not have known, was that their chart had been copied verbatim from a 1957 Air Force study of Chinese Communist techniques used during the Korean War to obtain confessions, many of them false, from American prisoners. The recycled chart is the latest and most vivid evidence of the way Communist interrogation methods that the United States long described as torture became the basis for interrogations both by the military at the base at Guant?namo Bay, Cuba, and by the Central Intelligence Agency. Some methods were used against a small number of prisoners at Guant?namo before 2005, when Congress banned the use of coercion by the military. The C.I.A. is still authorized by President Bush to use a number of secret ?alternative? interrogation methods. Several Guant?namo documents, including the chart outlining coercive methods, were made public at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing June 17 that examined how such tactics came to be employed. But committee investigators were not aware of the chart?s source in the half-century-old journal article, a connection pointed out to The New York Times by an independent expert on interrogation who spoke on condition of anonymity. The 1957 article from which the chart was copied was entitled ?Communist Attempts to Elicit False Confessions From Air Force Prisoners of War? and written by Alfred D. Biderman, a sociologist then working for the Air Force, who died in 2003. Mr. Biderman had interviewed American prisoners returning from North Korea, some of whom had been filmed by their Chinese interrogators confessing to germ warfare and other atrocities. Those orchestrated confessions led to allegations that the American prisoners had been ?brainwashed,? and provoked the military to revamp its training to give some military personnel a taste of the enemies? harsh methods to inoculate them against quick capitulation if captured. In 2002, the training program, known as SERE, for Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape, became a source of interrogation methods both for the C.I.A. and the military. In what critics describe as a remarkable case of historical amnesia, officials who drew on the SERE program appear to have been unaware that it had been created as a result of concern about false confessions by American prisoners. Senator Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan and chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said after reviewing the 1957 article that ?every American would be shocked? by the origin of the training document. ?What makes this document doubly stunning is that these were techniques to get false confessions,? Mr. Levin said. ?People say we need intelligence, and we do. But we don?t need false intelligence.? A Defense Department spokesman, Lt. Col Patrick Ryder, said he could not comment on the Guant?namo training chart. ?I can?t speculate on previous decisions that may have been made prior to current D.O.D. policy on interrogations,? Colonel Ryder said. ?I can tell you that current D.O.D. policy is clear ? we treat all detainees humanely.? Mr. Biderman?s 1957 article described ?one form of torture? used by the Chinese as forcing American prisoners to stand ?for exceedingly long periods,? sometimes in conditions of ?extreme cold.? Such passive methods, he wrote, were more common than outright physical violence. Prolonged standing and exposure to cold have both been used by American military and C.I.A. interrogators against terrorist suspects. The chart also listed other techniques used by the Chinese, including ?Semi-Starvation,? ?Exploitation of Wounds,? and ?Filthy, Infested Surroundings,? and with their effects: ?Makes Victim Dependent on Interrogator,? ?Weakens Mental and Physical Ability to Resist,? and ?Reduces Prisoner to ?Animal Level? Concerns.? The only change made in the chart presented at Guant?namo was to drop its original title: ?Communist Coercive Methods for Eliciting Individual Compliance.? The documents released last month include an e-mail message from two SERE trainers reporting on a trip to Guant?namo from Dec. 29, 2002, to Jan. 4, 2003. Their purpose, the message said, was to present to interrogators ?the theory and application of the physical pressures utilized during our training.? The sessions included ?an in-depth class on Biderman?s Principles,? the message said, referring to the chart from Mr. Biderman?s 1957 article. Versions of the same chart, often identified as ?Biderman?s Chart of Coercion,? have circulated on anti-cult sites on the Web, where the methods are used to describe how cults control their members. Dr. Robert Jay Lifton, a psychiatrist who also studied the returning prisoners of war and wrote an accompanying article in the same 1957 issue of The Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, said in an interview that he was disturbed to learn that the Chinese methods had been recycled and taught at Guant?namo. ?It saddens me,? said Dr. Lifton, who wrote a 1961 book on what the Chinese called ?thought reform? and became known in popular American parlance as brainwashing. He called the use of the Chinese techniques by American interrogators at Guant?namo a ?180-degree turn.? The harshest known interrogation at Guant?namo was that of Mohammed al-Qahtani, a member of Al Qaeda suspected of being the intended 20th hijacker in the Sept. 11 attacks. Mr. Qahtani?s interrogation involved sleep deprivation, stress positions, exposure to cold and other methods also used by the Chinese. Terror charges against Mr. Qahtani were dropped unexpectedly in May. Officials said the charges could be reinstated later and declined to say whether the decision was influenced by concern about Mr. Qahtani?s treatment. Mr. Bush has defended the use the interrogation methods, saying they helped provide critical intelligence and prevented new terrorist attacks. But the issue continues to complicate the long-delayed prosecutions now proceeding at Guant?namo. Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, a Qaeda member accused of playing a major role in the bombing of the American destroyer Cole in Yemen in 2000, was charged with murder and other crimes on Monday. In previous hearings, Mr. Nashiri, who was subjected to waterboarding, has said he confessed to participating in the bombing falsely only because he was tortured. ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From spalmer999 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 2 09:31:06 2008 From: spalmer999 at yahoo.com (Steve Palmer) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 08:31:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Marxism] Slow motion recession In-Reply-To: <486B8D74.90203@panix.com> Message-ID: <874044.88039.qm@web81906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Where, in these facts, is the supposed strength of US capitalism, so strongly yet vacuously trumpeted by various subscribers to this list? The floor is yours ... and some facts, not mere assertions or name-dropping, please ... Hic Rhodus, hic salta! --- Louis Proyect wrote: > NY Times, July 2, 2008 > Deepening Cycle of Job Loss Seen Lasting Into ?09 > By PETER S. GOODMAN > > As automakers dropped their latest batch of awful sales numbers on the > market on Tuesday, reinforcing the gloom spreading across the economy, > the troubles confronting American workers seemed to intensify. "I study a lot. That is one of the responsibilities of every revolutionary." Hugo Chavez. From lnp3 at panix.com Wed Jul 2 09:38:57 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 11:38:57 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Christopher Hitchens gets waterboarded Message-ID: <486BA111.7050000@panix.com> (They should have kept going with him.) http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/video/2008/hitchens_video200808 From pance at rogers.com Wed Jul 2 09:41:20 2008 From: pance at rogers.com (Pance Stojkovski) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 11:41:20 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Marxism] Slow motion recession In-Reply-To: <874044.88039.qm@web81906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <149695.20802.qm@web88003.mail.re2.yahoo.com> --- Steve Palmer wrote: > Where, in these facts, is the supposed strength of > US capitalism, Question - when people talk of "strength of US capitalism" - what part of US capitalism are they referring to? the beourgoise as a class? the economy as a whole? the military? cultural hegemony? or all these combined into one "U.S. IMPERIALISM"? Pance. From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Wed Jul 2 09:53:04 2008 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 16:53:04 +0100 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> Message-ID: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Louis Proyect" To: "James Daly" Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 1:44 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses :> http://www.raceandhistory.com/historicalviews/2008/1006.html Louis Proyect wrote: Odd that James Daly--a sharp critic of Sinn Fein--would get suckered by an article that begins with a quote by the Gerry Adams of South Africa. ***************** I was not "suckered" (ad hominem?) by the article. It was not about Mbeki's record in South Africa, nor about Mugabe's in Zimbabwe. It was about the true perception, I think, that the kind of regime overthrow in Zimbabwe, by force and by well rehearsed and ongoing destabilisation campaigns paid for by the US and its Foundations, which we have seen in Georgia, Yugoslavia and elsewhere would enormously strengthen the forces of imperialism throughout the world. It is the only kind of regime overthrow which is being planned there, and will involve the imperialist grabbing ("privatisation") of all the nation's resources. While it and the regime overthrow in Iran are being prepared, I cannot understand how a Marxism list is welcoming only to criticisms of the regimes, often paid for by the aforementioned funds. From spalmer999 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 2 09:58:13 2008 From: spalmer999 at yahoo.com (Steve Palmer) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 08:58:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Marxism] Hank Poulson's Chatham House Speech In-Reply-To: <149695.20802.qm@web88003.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <784878.89893.qm@web81904.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Chatham House is Britain's leading imperialist think tank, home of the "Royal Institute for International Affairs". This is not the sound of a strong confident imperialism - these guys are running scared. http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/hp1064.htm http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/files/11790_020708paulson.pdf July 2, 2008 HP-1064 Remarks by U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr. on the U.S., the World Economy and Markets before the Chatham House London - Thank you, Robin. I am pleased to be in London again. Today I will provide my perspective on current U.S. and global economic conditions and then look forward to your questions. When President Bush visited the United Kingdom last month, Prime Minister Brown remarked on the similarities between our countries -- that both are "founded upon liberty, our histories forged through democracy, our shared values expressed by a commitment to opportunity for all." And indeed our countries are loyal and true allies, our people are friends and we stand and work together on the world economic stage. U.S. Economy Today, the U.S. economy is going through a rough period. And while we have seen better growth in Europe over the last few quarters, there are signs of a slowdown in Europe in general and the UK specifically. However, emerging economies are expected to continue a period of strong growth, which will support global growth overall. Early this year, President Bush and the U.S. Congress enacted an economic stimulus package that is injecting $150 billion into the U.S. economy now when it's most needed. To date, almost 95 million payments totaling over $78 billion have been sent. Consumer spending data in May show these payments are helping families weather this period of slow growth and higher food and gas prices. Still, the U.S. economy is facing a trio of headwinds: high energy prices, capital markets turmoil and a continuing housing correction. U.S. Housing Market While we have implemented several public and private initiatives to prevent avoidable foreclosures, the housing correction continues to pose a significant downside risk to the U.S. economy. As the market works through past excesses, U.S. foreclosures will remain elevated and we should not be surprised at continued reports of falling home prices. Our policy continues to be to work to avoid preventable foreclosures while not impeding the necessary correction because the sooner housing prices stabilize and more buyers return to the market the sooner housing will begin to contribute to economic growth. U.S. and Global Capital Markets Today I will focus on our capital markets – where the United States and the United Kingdom face similar challenges and are pursuing similar approaches. I see our work in three tranches; first and foremost, our number one priority continues to be promoting market stability and limiting the impact on the broader economy as we work through today's institutional and markets stresses. Second, implementing the appropriate policy responses to recent events to address the deficiencies in our markets which the current problems have exposed. Third, improving our overall financial regulatory structure to better prevent and address future turmoil. Working through the current turmoil will take additional time, as markets and financial institutions continue to reassess risk, and re-price securities across a number of asset classes and sectors. I have encouraged financial institutions to de-lever, recognize and disclose losses and raise capital, so they can continue to play their vital role in supporting economic growth. Even in this difficult environment, financial institutions worldwide have raised over $338 billion. Institutions in the U.S. and the U.K. have raised capital equal to 95 and 96 percent of their recognized losses, respectively. In continental Europe, the gap is wider; there, institutions have raised only 56 percent of their recognized losses so far. I encourage financial institutions to continue to strengthen balance sheets by raising capital, de-leveraging or reviewing dividend policies. Today's markets are difficult and this is a tough earnings environment for our financial institutions as they work through the present market turmoil and adjust to the underlying challenges in our economy. For example, high oil prices will in all likelihood prolong our economic slowdown and housing continues to pose a significant downside risk. U.S. Response to Policy Issues Arising from Market Turmoil As the United States and international capital markets work through the immediate turmoil, policymakers around the world have been focused on addressing the policy implications. In the United States, the Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodities Futures Trading Commission worked together through the President's Working Group on Financial Markets, the PWG, to recommend and implement specific near-term policy actions. U.S. regulators, investors, financial institutions and credit ratings agencies have begun to implement these and other recommendations, which include stronger mortgage origination oversight, national licensing standards for mortgage brokers, and actions to improve market infrastructure, regulatory oversight, risk management practices, steps to address valuation issues, and policies and practices related to the credit ratings agencies and the mortgage securitization chain. International Policy Response to Market Turmoil From lnp3 at panix.com Wed Jul 2 10:17:33 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 12:17:33 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> Message-ID: <486BAA1D.8090204@panix.com> james daly wrote: > > I was not "suckered" (ad hominem?) by the article. It was not about Mbeki's > record in South Africa, nor about Mugabe's in Zimbabwe. But the website that the article appeared on is straight-out Mugabe puffery. It includes all sorts of material from Stephen Gowans, whose articles on Zimbabwe discredit him. I have noticed, btw, that apologists for Mugabe understandably have few good things to say about him other than his "land reform". So support boils down to attacking the MDC and its Western backers. As Patrick Bond has pointed out repeatedly, there is a radical movement in Zimbabwe that we should be in solidarity with not the scum in power. > While it and the regime overthrow in Iran are being prepared, I cannot > understand how a Marxism list is welcoming only to criticisms of the > regimes, often paid for by the aforementioned funds. And we find it just as difficult to understand why people such as yourself are so appalled by information such as this that has been circulated here. Do you think that these are imperialist lies, like "weapons of mass destruction in Iraq"? Do we support destroying poor peoples' shacks because Kofi Annan opposes it? If so, there is no need for any of us to have a brain. For somebody who has written extensively about Marxism and morality, you seem to need a refresher course yourself. NY Times, July 27, 2005 Zimbabwe Police Resume Drive to Raze Slums By MICHAEL WINES JOHANNESBURG, July 26 - The Zimbabwean police resumed a slum-demolition campaign on Tuesday, hours after the United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, accepted a government invitation to view firsthand the impact of the widely condemned program. The campaign has already rendered at least 700,000 people homeless. Mr. Annan's special envoy, a Tanzanian economist named Anna Kajumulo Tibaijuka, reported to him on Friday that the slum demolitions were a "disastrous venture" that had "unleashed chaos and untold human suffering." Mr. Annan agreed to go to Zimbabwe after its president, Robert G. Mugabe, had denounced the report as hostile and biased, even as Mr. Annan called it "profoundly distressing." Mr. Mugabe's aides called the program an urban cleanup effort, but human-rights critics and political opponents said it had been directed at peasants who make up the core of political opposition to Mr. Mugabe's 25-year rule. News reports said that the resumption of the demolitions had effectively wiped out a suburban Harare settlement called Porta Farm, where some 20,000 Zimbabwean peasants had lived for decades. The reports said the government riot police had burned homes and beaten citizens who had returned to the site, which had been cleared earlier this month, in an effort to re-establish their homesteads. Hundreds of thousands of impoverished Zimbabweans have fled to the countryside or have been herded into makeshift camps after being ousted from their homes by the two-month-long campaign, dubbed "Operation Drive Out Trash" by Mr. Mugabe's government. Mrs. Tibaijuka's unusually blunt report to Mr. Annan said that the forced evictions constituted "a humanitarian crisis of immense proportions," and demanded that "the culprits who have caused this man-made disaster be brought to book." Both Zimbabwe's neighbors and the African Union, the continentwide body charged with setting economic and human-rights standards, have either praised Mr. Mugabe's campaign or deemed it an internal matter outside their control. South Africa, the region's dominant economic and political force, has largely remained silent about the campaign and global criticism of Mr. Mugabe's rule. President Thabo Mbeki said several days ago that his government was considering helping Zimbabwe pay a debt of more than $300 million to the International Monetary Fund, which is to consider Zimbabwe's expulsion from the fund later this month. From ssschwartz8 at gmail.com Wed Jul 2 10:45:22 2008 From: ssschwartz8 at gmail.com (yossi schwartz) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 09:45:22 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Jerusalem only solution is working class revolution Message-ID: <685ad9b30807020945k5c7fd2d0kaffb7bc266362c80@mail.gmail.com> The Middle East-the only solution a working class revolution. Our first duty as Marxists in Israel is to oppose the oppression of the Palestinians and show the responsibility of the Israeli state for actions of despair like the one that took place today in Jerusalem. While we support mass actions against Israel we do no think that such actions as of today aimed at Israeli civilians advance the just struggle of the Palestinians. As a matter of fact it gives the Zionist state and the Zionist politicians the chance to take further oppressive measures against the Palestinians. Today the Zionist parliament ?the Knesset approved in a preliminary reading two bills that would enable the government to revoke the citizenship of Israeli Arabs involved in terror activities as well as that of their families even if they were not involved at all. In other words it is part of the transfer of the Arab Palestinians from 1967 occupied Jerusalem. . The bills were proposed by MKs Yuli Edelstein (Likud) and Nissan Slomiansky (National Union ? National Religious Party), and were approved by an overwhelming majority in the Knesset. We denounce these bills and those who stand behind it and those who voted for it. The blood of the Palestinians as well as of the Israeli civilians is on their hands. We do not know as yet all the details of this event. Not even the names or what were the immediate reasons for the action of the Palestinian youth. However it will not come as a big surprise for us that he and his families have been step on by the Israeli state, the city of Jerusalem the police and the settlers for a long period. Unlike the hypocrites who condemn the Palestinians for acts of despair, we who are struggling for a Palestinians workers state from the sea to the river blame the Zionist state that stole all the land of the Palestinians and have oppressed the Palestinians for such a long period and all of it supporters and in particular the European and the American imperialist for this needles death of the Israeli civilians and of the Palestinian youth. On the eve of presidential elections in the US we are fingering not only Bush and the Republicans but the democrats as well all of them supporters of the Zionist state for the tragedy of today. Those left leaning people who call to vote for Obma and see themselves friends of the Palestinians better use their heads support for Obma is support for the Zionist state and the further repression of the Palestinians and needless death of Israeli civilians. The imperialists whether dressed up as Republicans or Democrats are deadly enemies of the Palestinians and all other oppressed people. Only the American working workers can be the real friends of the oppressed people. For this reason what is necessary in the US is to struggle for a revolutionary working class party. Those who are saying that Obma is better as he will bring an imperialist peace and peace is better than war, ignore the bloody history of the region where imperialist peace plans are followed with hot war and many deaths including children. Yossi Schwartz ISL . From walterlx at earthlink.net Wed Jul 2 10:53:11 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 12:53:11 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Marxism] Fidel Castro: The McCain Tour and the Manifest Destiny of the U.S. Fourth Fleet Message-ID: <5075664.1215017591747.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Some people DO think Obama is the "main danger" and that's proven by the overwhelming preponderance of materials posted to Marxmail against Obama. About the only anti-McCain materials posted on this list are by people like Fidel Castro posted by people like myself. It's as if there's a special campaign being conducted to supposedly disabuse the readership of their "illusions" about Barack Obama. Every time he does something which all capitalist politicians do - move to the right and betray one or another promise or illusion by his supporters, a gleeful posting will be certain to find its way to Marxmail. Of course there IS something unique and distinctive about Obama, which some people discount and pretend to deny. Assuming that he's the Democratic nominee, he will be the first Black person to ever receive the nomination of a major capitalist party for the highest elective office in the United States. Given this country's history of racist abuse of Black people, that's an even of profound meaning, socially, politically and culturally. The critics, whether Black or non-Black, have a bland spot, as well as a blind spot, when it comes to the racist core of life in the United States of America. There will be no new progressive politics in the country until the people of the United States get past the idea that real change can come about by electing a better individual into the government. No need to repeat the arguments, as they've been said over and over and over again. Readers can save time by reading the last version: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/marxism/2008-March/026097.html ==================================================================== LOUIS PROYECT declared: Nobody thinks that Obama is the "main danger", whatever that means. McCain is clearly worse than Obama, just as George W. Bush was worse than John Kerry, and so on and so forth. There have been frequent reminders both during the primary and now after the primary that Obama is a typical DP candidate for president despite all the rhetoric about "change". Furthermore, this view is becoming fairly generalized not just among the unrepentant Marxists. ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From walterlx at earthlink.net Wed Jul 2 11:09:12 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 13:09:12 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Marxism] Don White, 71; social activist on human rights in Central America Message-ID: <16300113.1215018552048.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net> A collection of photos and comments by many of Don't activist friends over the years: http://www.walterlippmann.com/donwhite.html =========================================== http://www.latimes.com/news/obituaries/la-me-white2-2008jul02,0,2839980.story From acpollack2 at gmail.com Wed Jul 2 11:11:59 2008 From: acpollack2 at gmail.com (Andrew Pollack) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 13:11:59 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] an even worse quote from Obama on Vietnam Message-ID: <2fa1449b0807021011q37764238mfc2183968c5a7ce4@mail.gmail.com> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/01/AR2008070100961.html?hpid=sec-politics "He [Obama] said McCain 'deserves the utmost honor and respect for his service to our country.'" Honor and respect for dropping bombs on innocent civilians? McCain is a war criminal. An honest person would at the very least ask McCain to apologize to the unseen millions who were in the sights of his plane. But then you can't be an honest person and a candidate of the major parties. Andy P. From sartesian at earthlink.net Wed Jul 2 11:28:25 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 13:28:25 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Slow motion recession References: <874044.88039.qm@web81906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <004f01c8dc69$09320910$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Steve, I don't recall anyone making vacuous statements about this. Some disagreed with your view. I am one of those if by the weakness of US capitalism you mean that there are alternative, stronger capitalisms that will replace the US. But you want facts? How about statistics which are better than facts becauses as we know facts can be lies, but statistics are even beyond damnable lies. In the immortal words of George Clinton-- Feet Don't Fail Me Now Anyway some of my favorites, from the Statistical Abstract of the United States (I guess that risks immediate disqualification, but such is life). 1. Gross National Income: Number 1 country: 2000 US: $9674 billion; 2005 US: $12913; Number 2 country: 2000 Japan: $4492 billion; 2005 Japan:$4977. 2. GDP growth in 2000 constant dollars: Composite of all OECD countries 1995-2004; $22500 billion to $28665. US: $7973 billion to $10704 Second place: Japan: $3100 billion to $3432 3. Average annual rates of growth for labor productivity: All OECD not including US: 1995-2000, 1.8%; 2000-2006, 1.9% US: 2.3%, 2.3% EU ("old" 15) 1.8%, 1.1% EU (total 25) 2.1%, 1.5% 4. My personal favorite: rate of profits, manufacturing, after taxes, in relation to stockholders equity. US 2005 16.6%; 2006 18%. (Still checking OECD sources for comparable rates). These rates are of course influenced by the relative restriction on capital investment prior to 2005, stock buybacks, and reduction of equity (which however did not see increased rates of accumulation of corporate debt as a substitute for equity), offset by the recovery of share prices between 2003 and 2007. 5. Another personal favorite: Percent of final household income spent on food: US 7.5%, tied with Ireland for lowest ratio. Next closest "major"? UK, 9.1%. Japan 14.4%; Germany 11.9% The immortal words of George Clinton-- This is chance to dance our way out of our constrictions. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Palmer" To: Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 11:31 AM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Slow motion recession Where, in these facts, is the supposed strength of US capitalism, so strongly yet vacuously trumpeted by various subscribers to this list? From spalmer999 at yahoo.com Wed Jul 2 11:40:03 2008 From: spalmer999 at yahoo.com (Steve Palmer) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 10:40:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Marxism] Guantanamo - turns out it's all the fault of Commies again ... In-Reply-To: <2fa1449b0807021011q37764238mfc2183968c5a7ce4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <410296.32209.qm@web81902.mail.mud.yahoo.com> (Original article is here: http://tinyurl.com/55e6fl) NYT http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/us/02detain.html July 2, 2008 China Inspired Interrogations at Guantánamo By SCOTT SHANE WASHINGTON — The military trainers who came to Guantánamo Bay in December 2002 based an entire interrogation class on a chart showing the effects of “coercive management techniques” for possible use on prisoners, including “sleep deprivation,” “prolonged constraint,” and “exposure.” What the trainers did not say, and may not have known, was that their chart had been copied verbatim from a 1957 Air Force study of Chinese Communist techniques used during the Korean War to obtain confessions, many of them false, from American prisoners. The recycled chart is the latest and most vivid evidence of the way Communist interrogation methods that the United States long described as torture became the basis for interrogations both by the military at the base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and by the Central Intelligence Agency. Some methods were used against a small number of prisoners at Guantánamo before 2005, when Congress banned the use of coercion by the military. The C.I.A. is still authorized by President Bush to use a number of secret “alternative” interrogation methods. Several Guantánamo documents, including the chart outlining coercive methods, were made public at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing June 17 that examined how such tactics came to be employed. But committee investigators were not aware of the chart’s source in the half-century-old journal article, a connection pointed out to The New York Times by an independent expert on interrogation who spoke on condition of anonymity. The 1957 article from which the chart was copied was entitled “Communist Attempts to Elicit False Confessions From Air Force Prisoners of War” and written by Albert D. Biderman, a sociologist then working for the Air Force, who died in 2003. Mr. Biderman had interviewed American prisoners returning from North Korea, some of whom had been filmed by their Chinese interrogators confessing to germ warfare and other atrocities. Those orchestrated confessions led to allegations that the American prisoners had been “brainwashed,” and provoked the military to revamp its training to give some military personnel a taste of the enemies’ harsh methods to inoculate them against quick capitulation if captured. In 2002, the training program, known as SERE, for Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape, became a source of interrogation methods both for the C.I.A. and the military. In what critics describe as a remarkable case of historical amnesia, officials who drew on the SERE program appear to have been unaware that it had been created as a result of concern about false confessions by American prisoners. Senator Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan and chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said after reviewing the 1957 article that “every American would be shocked” by the origin of the training document. “What makes this document doubly stunning is that these were techniques to get false confessions,” Mr. Levin said. “People say we need intelligence, and we do. But we don’t need false intelligence.” A Defense Department spokesman, Lt. Col Patrick Ryder, said he could not comment on the Guantánamo training chart. “I can’t speculate on previous decisions that may have been made prior to current D.O.D. policy on interrogations,” Colonel Ryder said. “I can tell you that current D.O.D. policy is clear — we treat all detainees humanely.” Mr. Biderman’s 1957 article described “one form of torture” used by the Chinese as forcing American prisoners to stand “for exceedingly long periods,” sometimes in conditions of “extreme cold.” Such passive methods, he wrote, were more common than outright physical violence. Prolonged standing and exposure to cold have both been used by American military and C.I.A. interrogators against terrorist suspects. The chart also listed other techniques used by the Chinese, including “Semi-Starvation,” “Exploitation of Wounds,” and “Filthy, Infested Surroundings,” and with their effects: “Makes Victim Dependent on Interrogator,” “Weakens Mental and Physical Ability to Resist,” and “Reduces Prisoner to ‘Animal Level’ Concerns.” The only change made in the chart presented at Guantánamo was to drop its original title: “Communist Coercive Methods for Eliciting Individual Compliance.” The documents released last month include an e-mail message from two SERE trainers reporting on a trip to Guantánamo from Dec. 29, 2002, to Jan. 4, 2003. Their purpose, the message said, was to present to interrogators “the theory and application of the physical pressures utilized during our training.” The sessions included “an in-depth class on Biderman’s Principles,” the message said, referring to the chart from Mr. Biderman’s 1957 article. Versions of the same chart, often identified as “Biderman’s Chart of Coercion,” have circulated on anti-cult sites on the Web, where the methods are used to describe how cults control their members. Dr. Robert Jay Lifton, a psychiatrist who also studied the returning prisoners of war and wrote an accompanying article in the same 1957 issue of The Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, said in an interview that he was disturbed to learn that the Chinese methods had been recycled and taught at Guantánamo. “It saddens me,” said Dr. Lifton, who wrote a 1961 book on what the Chinese called “thought reform” and became known in popular American parlance as brainwashing. He called the use of the Chinese techniques by American interrogators at Guantánamo a “180-degree turn.” The harshest known interrogation at Guantánamo was that of Mohammed al-Qahtani, a member of Al Qaeda suspected of being the intended 20th hijacker in the Sept. 11 attacks. Mr. Qahtani’s interrogation involved sleep deprivation, stress positions, exposure to cold and other methods also used by the Chinese. Terror charges against Mr. Qahtani were dropped unexpectedly in May. Officials said the charges could be reinstated later and declined to say whether the decision was influenced by concern about Mr. Qahtani’s treatment. Mr. Bush has defended the use the interrogation methods, saying they helped provide critical intelligence and prevented new terrorist attacks. But the issue continues to complicate the long-delayed prosecutions now proceeding at Guantánamo. Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, a Qaeda member accused of playing a major role in the bombing of the American destroyer Cole in Yemen in 2000, was charged with murder and other crimes on Monday. In previous hearings, Mr. Nashiri, who was subjected to waterboarding, has said he confessed to participating in the bombing falsely only because he was tortured. "I study a lot. That is one of the responsibilities of every revolutionary." Hugo Chavez. From sartesian at earthlink.net Wed Jul 2 11:45:01 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 13:45:01 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y><486B7824.9000102@panix.com> Message-ID: <005d01c8dc6b$5ab08b70$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> James, The "list" such as it is, doesn't exclude things, a priori, based on subject heading or political position (except for the Stalin/Trotsky debate). So there have numerous postings not just defending Zimbabwe from UN intervention, but collapsing that defense with defense of Mugabe. That conflation has been challenged, by many. A position that supports UN sanctions has been expressed by only 1 or 2 individuals, and that too has not gone unchallenged. The late Mark Jones disagreed with about everything I said, and vice-versa. But, I wrote on one occassion, if Savimbi had won in Angola, and if 3 years after that he fell out with his imperialist sponsors, even if it was over his simple greed to claim more of the mineral wealth as his own, and if those sponsors then called for sanctions or fielded a force to overthrow Savimbi, we, as Marxists would oppose those sanctions and that field force without changing our analysis and opposition to Savimbi one bit. Mark wrote me to say that he found that our agreement on that position to be worth more than all the strenuous disagreements we had. Same thing with Nestor. He and I disagree almost always. One thing we absolutely agreed upon was the need to oppose any UN/US military venture in Myanmar under the mask of humanitarianism. Doesn't change our other disagreements; doesn't change the nature of the Myanmar regime. We have to avoid all illusions-- one that there is such a thing as "apolitical" humanitarianism that motivates capital and agents; and another that capitalist attacks mean that there is not, indeed, a real revolutionary struggle to be waged against those who have fallen out of favor. ----- Original Message ----- From: "james daly" To: Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 11:53 AM Subject: Re: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses From lnp3 at panix.com Wed Jul 2 11:49:21 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 13:49:21 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Fidel Castro: The McCain Tour and the Manifest Destiny of the U.S. Fourth Fleet In-Reply-To: <5075664.1215017591747.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <5075664.1215017591747.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <486BBFA1.3040100@panix.com> Walter Lippmann wrote: > Some people DO think Obama is the "main danger" and that's proven > by the overwhelming preponderance of materials posted to Marxmail > against Obama. About the only anti-McCain materials posted on this > list are by people like Fidel Castro posted by people like myself. Once again I have to state that nobody in their right mind thinks that Obama's positions are worse than McCain's. Maybe Walter is referring to some other "main danger", like Obama lulling the left so that he can bomb Iran or something. I do believe that Democrats often carry out policies associated with their Republican enemies--like Clinton abolishing welfare--but I would never have referred to Clinton as the "main danger". In fact, I think we all know where this kind of hysteria about the Republicans comes from, Walter's favorite group on the left: "The Communist Party in the 1996 elections was in harmony with the majority of working class voters. While we were sharply critical of Clinton and the Democratic Party, we understood that the most important challenge was to attack the main danger; the fascist threat coming from the far-right Republicans." full: http://www.pww.org/archives96/96-11-16-1.html > It's as if there's a special campaign being conducted to supposedly > disabuse the readership of their "illusions" about Barack Obama. > Every time he does something which all capitalist politicians do - > move to the right and betray one or another promise or illusion by > his supporters, a gleeful posting will be certain to find its way > to Marxmail. All capitalist politicians *do not* move to the right, as the McGovern campaign of 1972 demonstrated. Ever since 1972, the Democrats have run as Eisenhower Republicans. This is not because they are afraid of losing elections, but because of the exigencies of the capital accumulation process. We are now given the choice of voting for an Eisenhower Republican or a Reaganite Republican. I wouldn't have voted for McGovern myself, but at least I can tell the difference between him and an Obama: I have no secret plan for peace. I have a public plan. And as one whose heart has ached for the past ten years over the agony of Vietnam, I will halt a senseless bombing of Indochina on Inaugural Day. There will be no more Asian children running ablaze from bombed-out schools. There will be no more talk of bombing the dikes or the cities of the North. And within 90 days of my inauguration, every American soldier and every American prisoner will be out of the jungle and out of their cells and then home in America where they belong. And then let us resolve that never again will we send the precious young blood of this country to die trying to prop up a corrupt military dictatorship abroad. George McGovern, 1972 acceptance speech From sartesian at earthlink.net Wed Jul 2 11:55:40 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 13:55:40 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Fidel Castro: The McCain Tour and the Manifest Destiny of the U.S. Fourth Fleet References: <5075664.1215017591747.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <006801c8dc6c$d767c560$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Walter, Let's look at reality. What has been the history of the Democratic Party regarding every "progressive" movement in the past 60 years? To deflect it, to undercut it, to weaken it by recuperation. To prevent that movement from developing into a movement with a class based perspective by presenting a "liberal" alternative. And where does the Democratic Party look for votes to maintain and support that liberal illusion? Organized labor, unorganized labor, African-Americans-- kind of a base for the class-based movement that must break itself away from this bit and saddle. That's why more criticism is directed towards Obama, or Kerry, as their goals are quite simply to disable any movement that goes beyond the pledge of allegiance. If you post articles against McCain as the main enemy-- well you're using a single source, and that tends to give others the impression that you don't really do all that much thinking for yourself. One more thing, this "main danger" or "main enemy" crap is the same old, same old that the CP harpists plucked on for years. If that's what you intend, then why not just come right out and endorse Obama over the main enemy, the main danger? From lnp3 at panix.com Wed Jul 2 12:13:18 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 14:13:18 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Paper on the Labor Theory of Value Message-ID: <486BC53E.9070001@panix.com> This is an excerpt from an article by John Imani that can be read in its entirety at: http://www.marxmail.org/LTV.htm ON THE LABOR THEORY OF VALUE: The ?Markup? and The ?Workerless Society? ?He believes he has proved the untenability of economic Marxism, and confidently announces that ?the beginning of the end of the labor theory of value? has been inaugurated?Since his criticism deals with principles, since he does not attack isolated and arbitrarily selected points or conclusions, but questions and reflects as untenable the very foundation of the Marxist system, possibility is afforded for a fruitful discussion.? [1] If not labor, then what ?Though he did not put his conclusion in this way, Steedman was essentially saying that Marx cannot be right that labour is the only source of surplus?The inconsistencies Steedman established undermined Marx?s sequence of claims that labour is the only source of value, that value is the only source of profits, and that value determines price.? [2] I had heard of Ian Steedman?s assertion[3] that it is not necessary to make reference to value in order to determine prices. I have not read his book. However, without reading it, if such a notion as his leads to a conclusion that new value does not spring forth from labor and labor alone, as Steve Keen asserts above, then such a notion can be challenged. The below does not set out to sketch a ?positive? proof of the assertion that labor, and labor alone, is the source of all value. Instead, it is essentially a ?negative? undertaking in that it seeks only to demonstrate that without labor there is no new value created. In a paper kindly hosted by Marxmail[4] I previously examined a somewhat similar proposition and found that the elimination of the labor force in one sector produced, as it ought, less purchasing power, and given an output that remained the same, supplemented as it was by the products of a workerless factory, systemic deflation and a fallen general rate of profit (P?). Carried out to its expansio ad absurdum ?logical? conclusion i.e. the elimination of the workforces of the remaining sectors, it is here argued that the only ?purchasing power? that could possibly be produced would therefore be the portion of the commodity-value designated, by the capitalist, as profit (italics). ?Profit? is italicized so as to indicate that, as the exploitation relationship in Marx? theory of surplus-value, the requirement for the very existence of profit, is (with the workers) gone, we must call it something else or indicate in some way (italics perhaps) that, though we might continue to call this portion of commodity value ?profit?, it is a horse of a different color for it would merely be a mark-up over the costs-of production that each of the ?capitalists? (italicized for the same reason as ?profit? above), the only ones left with ?purchasing power?, would mutually charge each other and thereby benefiting none. This story has been best told in the account of the alleged encounter wherein Walter Reuther of the United Auto Workers responding to a proud and haughty Henry Ford as Ford, while showing off his latest labor-reducing machinery, exclaimed ?Well?Walter, how are you going to get them to go on strike?? Reuther is said to have responded with this rejoinder, ?Well?Henry, how are you going to get them to buy Fords?? Nevertheless, using Marx? investigations of exchange between departments[5] in the ?reproduction schemes? he crafted in Vol 2, the proposition that new value can be created and realized, without the existence of the productive power of living labor, is below examined. [1] Rudolf Hilferding. Preface to ?B?hm-Bawerk's Criticism of Marx.? http://www.marxists.org/archive/hilferding/1904/criticism/preface.htm [2] Steve Keen. ?Debunking Economics.? Pluto Press. Australia. 2001. P286. [3] ?If one is attempting to explain prices and the profit rate then ?labour theories? are simply redundant.? ?Marx After Sraffa and the Open Economy (Some Notes)? http://www.open.ac.uk/socialsciences/hetecon/2002/abstracts2002/steedman_i_full.pdf [4] http://www.marxmail.org/workerless-factory.html [5] ?The total product, and therefore the total production, of society may be divided into two major departments: I. Means of Production, commodities having a form in which they must, or at least may, pass into productive consumption II. .Articles of Consumption, commodities having a form in which they pass into the individual consumption of the capitalist and the working-class.? Marx. ?Capital. Vol. 2.? Chapter XX. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1885-c2/ch20_01.htm From shmage at pipeline.com Wed Jul 2 13:30:05 2008 From: shmage at pipeline.com (Shane Mage) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 15:30:05 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Fidel Castro: The McCain Tour and the Manifest Destiny of the U.S. Fourth Fleet In-Reply-To: <5075664.1215017591747.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <5075664.1215017591747.JavaMail.root@elwamui-milano.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <0D5651E2-D70E-4778-B425-27223CDF131D@pipeline.com> On Jul 2, 2008, at 12:53 PM, Walter Lippmann wrote: > Some people DO think Obama is the "main danger" and that's proven > by the overwhelming preponderance of materials posted to Marxmail > against Obama... The illogic here is striking. Many, some shamefacedly, are calling for support to the Obama campaign. But absolutely nobody has, even parodistically, called for support or even sympathy to McCain (although, on the important issue of bioethanol Fidel agrees with McCain and opposes Obama). But--for anyone hoping for as large an antiwar, pro-civil-liberties, pro-single-payer, antiZionist, vote against the two corporate parties as possible--Obama, the annointed of Wall Street, is indeed not the "main danger" but the *only* danger. And those here expressing sympathy and worse for his campaign (a campaign to persuade blacks, young people, and the poor that he would be a progressive change from the twenty-year Bush/Clinton regime) only worsen (infinitesimally, given their lack of any public political standing) that danger. Shane Mage "Thunderbolt steers all things...it consents and does not consent to be called Zeus." Herakleitos of Ephesos From lnp3 at panix.com Wed Jul 2 13:49:00 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 15:49:00 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Christopher Hitchens gets waterboarded In-Reply-To: <486BA111.7050000@panix.com> References: <486BA111.7050000@panix.com> Message-ID: <486BDBAC.8080402@panix.com> Louis Proyect wrote: > (They should have kept going with him.) > > http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/video/2008/hitchens_video200808 > A priceless comment posted to this item on Huffingtonpost.com: Now, if only it had been a vat of gin all you would have had to do is forget that board and throw in the olive. -gala1 From nmgoro at gmail.com Wed Jul 2 15:05:28 2008 From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 18:05:28 -0300 Subject: [Marxism] Guantanamo - turns out it's all the fault of Commies again ... In-Reply-To: <410296.32209.qm@web81902.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <2fa1449b0807021011q37764238mfc2183968c5a7ce4@mail.gmail.com> <410296.32209.qm@web81902.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2fa158550807021405r2b82e6cjcf52cc798027aba0@mail.gmail.com> C'est pas juste!!!!!!!!! Waterboarding was taught by French experts (Algeria, Viet Nam) to Arg military as far back as the late 50s, early 60s. Les Chinois? Pas du tout, la douce France, elle est le professeur!!! BTW: AFAIK, scalping was also a French invention that the American original peoples boomeranged on their murderers. 2008/7/2, Steve Palmer : > (Original article is here: http://tinyurl.com/55e6fl) > > NYT http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/us/02detain.html > July 2, 2008 > China Inspired Interrogations at Guant?namo > By SCOTT SHANE > > WASHINGTON ? The military trainers who came to Guant?namo Bay in > December 2002 based an entire interrogation class on a chart showing the > effects of "coercive management techniques" for possible use on > prisoners, including "sleep deprivation," "prolonged > constraint," and "exposure." > > What the trainers did not say, and may not have known, was that their chart had > been copied verbatim from a 1957 Air Force study of Chinese Communist > techniques used during the Korean War to obtain confessions, many of them > false, from American prisoners. > -- N?stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a From nmgoro at gmail.com Wed Jul 2 15:11:44 2008 From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 18:11:44 -0300 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <005d01c8dc6b$5ab08b70$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <005d01c8dc6b$5ab08b70$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Message-ID: <2fa158550807021411n26a2fdcem52cbb0145a3dce6b@mail.gmail.com> 2008/7/2, S. Artesian : [...] > > The late Mark Jones disagreed with about everything I said, and vice-versa. > But, I wrote on one occassion, if Savimbi had won in Angola, and if 3 years > after that he fell out with his imperialist sponsors, even if it was over > his simple greed to claim more of the mineral wealth as his own, and if > those sponsors then called for sanctions or fielded a force to overthrow > Savimbi, we, as Marxists would oppose those sanctions and that field force > without changing our analysis and opposition to Savimbi one bit. Mark > wrote me to say that he found that our agreement on that position to be > worth more than all the strenuous disagreements we had. > > Same thing with Nestor. He and I disagree almost always. One thing we > absolutely agreed upon was the need to oppose any UN/US military venture in > Myanmar under the mask of humanitarianism. Doesn't change our other > disagreements; doesn't change the nature of the Myanmar regime. Not to copy Mark J., but I also find that our agreement on that position is worth more than all the strenuous disagreements we had (and will have once and again). And there is another point of agreement which, as time passes by, will also become substantial (re: energy), which is our common standing (and even love) for railroad transport. But this, I guess, we share with many members of this list, perhaps most. One of the few advertisements I have ever considered truthful was that by Amtrak, a long decade ago: railroads are the civilized way to travel. -- N?stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a From elishastephens at hotmail.com Wed Jul 2 16:18:47 2008 From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 15:18:47 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Fidel Castro: The McCain Tour and the Manifest Destiny of the U.S. Fourth Fleet Message-ID: There have been a number of posters responding to the question of Obama as the "main danger," but I want to respond to something else Walter wrote: "Every time he does something which all capitalist politicians do - move to the right and betray one or another promise or illusion by his supporters, a gleeful posting will be certain to find its way to Marxmail." Speaking only for myself, which is all I'm empowered to do, and also speaking as someone responsible for many of the posts Walter refers to, I assure him and everyone else that I take no "glee" in posting such things. I would be ABSOLUTELY DELIGHTED if Obama were, say, Kucinich, and was demanding immediate withdrawal from Iraq and NAFTA, voting against funding the war and the FISA sellout, and the only thing I could say bad about him was something generic like "he represents one of the twin parties of imperialism and capitalism" or some such. I am ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTED (but not surprised!) at what Obama is saying and doing and sharing that disgust with others on this list and on my blog is not a "gleeful" experience in the slightest. As far as why I post such things to Marxmail and on my blog, it's because I'm a firm believer that facts matter, and if I'm going to educate people about Obama, just making generic statements like "he's sure to move to the right like all capitalist politicians" is a complete waste of time. Making SPECIFIC statements about what he IS saying and doing, on the other hand, is most definitely not. _________________________________________________________________ Do more with your photos with Windows Live Photo Gallery. http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Wave2_photos_022008 From lueko.willms at t-online.de Wed Jul 2 16:26:45 2008 From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (=?iso-8859-15?Q?L=FCko_Willms?=) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 00:26:45 +0200 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> Message-ID: <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> Guten Tag Louis Proyect, am Mittwoch, 2. Juli 2008 um 14:44 schrieben Sie: >> By Sehlare Makgetlaneng* >> June 10, 2008 >> >> "The fight against Zimbabwe is a fight against us all. Today it is >> Zimbabwe, tomorrow it will be South Africa, it will be Mozambique, it will >> be Angola, it will be any other African country. Any government that is >> perceived to be strong, and to be resistant to imperialists, would be made a >> target and be undermined. So let us not allow any point of weakness in the >> solidarity of the SADC, because that weakness will also be transferred to >> the rest of Africa." >> -Thabo Mbekii(1) Morgan Tsvangirai has called for foreign, especially imperialist powers to have a decisive say about which government the people of Zimbabwe might chose. He has made himself into a stooge of the the campaign spearheaded by Bernard Kouchner for the abolishment of the sovereignty of the former colonies. The editorial of my local daily newspaper proclaimed that the African governments and heads of state have now a wonderful opportunity to declare themselves against one of them -- and to be the Oncle Toms of their former colonial masters, I added in clarification. I consider Mr. Tsvangirai as an enemy. Remind you: I have learned my staunch opposition against colonialism from the Angolans, even before I knew anything of Vietnam. -- Mit freundlichen Gr??en L?ko Willms mailto:lueko.willms at t-online.de From lnp3 at panix.com Wed Jul 2 16:31:01 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 18:31:01 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> Message-ID: <20080702223057.DF0FA16543@mailbackend.panix.com> > I consider Mr. Tsvangirai as an enemy. Remind you: I have learned my > staunch opposition against colonialism from the Angolans, even before > I knew anything of Vietnam. > >-- >Mit freundlichen Gr??en >L?ko Willms >mailto:lueko.willms at t-online.de Another fan of cops tearing down shacks in Harare... From nmgoro at gmail.com Wed Jul 2 16:37:56 2008 From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 19:37:56 -0300 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> Message-ID: <2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com> 2008/7/2, L?ko Willms : > > > I consider Mr. Tsvangirai as an enemy. Remind you: I have learned my > staunch opposition against colonialism from the Angolans, even before > I knew anything of Vietnam. > I don't suggest that those who think differently be given a Time Machine tour to Argentina, jan-march 1976 (that is during the last 90 days of the Isabel Per?n regime). But it would be a sobering experience, indeed. This regime was overwhelmingly inept and brutally violent. It was overthrown under imperialist auspices on March 24, 1976. Perhaps some forget these issues -and their consequences. I don't. Our local Tsvangirais, Ra?l Alfons?n as the cheerleader, supported the military overthrow of Isabel Per?n (Communist Party included, and as late as 1978 they were still supporting, yes, supporting the military regime in power). They held the not unsustainable hope that once the dirty job had been done by the military they would be called to rule over the ruins (in fact, this was what General Viola attempted by 1980). History proved keener than them, and intersected the Battles for Malvinas in their road. But this is another issue. What our own experience shows to revolutionaries the world over is: No imperialist-sponsored or imperialist-backed intervention anywhere, at any time, has been ever proven to be of the most minute help to the interests of the local population, not to speak of worldwide socialist revolution. No matter how monstrous the regime targetted by imperialists may be, what follows is still worse. This still keeps true. I share L?ko's enemy. And I guess I am not the single one. -- N?stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a From mjs at smithbowen.net Wed Jul 2 16:45:41 2008 From: mjs at smithbowen.net (Michael Smith) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 18:45:41 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Fidel Castro: The McCain Tour and the Manifest Destiny of the U.S. Fourth Fleet In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20080702184541.2cd287a2@mjs-laptop> On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 15:18:47 -0700 Eli Stephens wrote: > Walter wrote: > >> "Every time [Obama] does something which all capitalist >> politicians do - move to the right and betray one or >> another promise or illusion by his supporters, a gleeful >> posting will be certain to find its way to Marxmail." > > Speaking only for myself...I assure him and everyone else that I take > no "glee" in posting such things. I'm sorry to hear this. One ought to be able, at least, to take some innocent pleasure in it. Speaking for myself, I do: "glee", in fact, is not too strong a word. I've been saying this guy was a fraud ever since 2004. Come on, you'd have to be more than human not to enjoy saying "I told you so." From lnp3 at panix.com Wed Jul 2 16:51:28 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 18:51:28 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.co m> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> <2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> Nestor wrote: >What our own experience shows to revolutionaries the world over is: >No imperialist-sponsored or imperialist-backed intervention >anywhere, at any time, has been ever proven to be of the most minute >help to the interests of the local population, not to speak of >worldwide socialist revolution. No matter how monstrous the regime >targetted by imperialists may be, what follows is still worse. This >still keeps true. I share L??ko's enemy. And I guess I am not the >single one. -- N??stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo >puede no ser de mi autor??a This line of argument is really getting tedious. Nobody on Marxmail has been promoting either the MDC or Western intervention, either military or economic. The real conflict that interests us is between ZANU-PF and the working class. We take the side of the working class and the political parties and grass roots organizations that fight on their behalf. There have been repeated references to the ISO, a group in Zimbabwe that is fighting courageously even if they may never be capable for reasons I have gone into elsewhere of organizing the workers and small farmers under their banner. Here is the sort of thing they have been writing. Anybody who chooses ZANU-PF over these comrades should be ashamed of themselves: While the MDC had been propelled nearly into power by the working class, the character of the party by the 2000 elections was patently rabid antiworking class neo-liberal. How had this happened? The relative ease with which a movement with so much potential was turned into a neo-liberal popular front lay in the historical and continuing weakness of the working-class movement, and the lack of a significant socialist movement. While the 1997-98 mass actions had rocked Mugabe and generated the first significant challenge to his rule in twenty years, they had not developed into an independent rank-and- file movement that could challenge the stranglehold of a reformist labour bureaucracy. Under pressure from below, the bureaucracy had participated in and endorsed the mass actions, gaining significant moral authority in the process. However, it remained prone to vacillation and fundamentally untransformed, as shown by its cancellation of the second day of the December 1997 strike. Threatened by the workers' growing radicalisation and vulnerable to state repression, including the 1998 ban on strikes, and attempts to ban the ZCTU, the bureaucracy sought to rein in the workers. From March 1998, they shifted from strike-based demonstrations to "peaceful stayaways" in which workers were told to stay at home. This reduced the militancy and impact of the action, individualised workers and made them vulnerable to intimidation; it also prevented the mass gatherings that had been the basis for pressure on the union bureaucracy, reducing its accountability. In late 1998 and early 1999, the ZCTU chiefs unilaterally cancelled two major stayaway actions. Their sudden support for the formation of the MDC should be understood in this context. In late 1998, they argued that militant stayaways were no longer useful, if not counter-productive, enabling Mugabe to declare a state of emergency. Instead, what was needed was a political party to fight the 2000 elections. These ideas appealed to many workers, and this partly accounts for the growth of reformist parliamentary illusions and the subsequent decline of militant struggles in the period 1999-2000. The second key factor in the right-wing takeover of a rising working-class movement in Zimbabwe, as elsewhere, lay in the role of the middle-class intelligentsia. The neo-liberal agenda had been imposed in Zimbabwe, as throughout most of the periphery societies, through authoritarian regimes such as Africa's one party state regimes, Latin America's military juntas and Eastern Europe's Stalinist dictatorships. In such societies, the distinction between economics and politics becomes razor thin. Thus the revolts that emerged against the worsening conditions of the masses as a result of the deepening economic crisis of neo-liberal capitalism inevitably assumed a political form?democratic struggles against the authoritarian superstructure that had imposed the neo-liberal framework in the first place. At that stage the forces of global neoliberalism, cognisant of the revolutionary potential of the emerging struggles, were forced to abandon the old authoritarian forms of domination of the periphery, and instead assume a more democratic face with which they would be able to intervene and neutralise the rising movement. The groups to whom their cynical appeals to bourgeois democratic values like rule of law, human rights, and good governance appealed most were the middle-class intelligentsia who were being radicalised under the impact of the crisis. But in the absence of a rival ideological alternative, given the ignominious demise of "communism" and the accompanying bourgeois triumphalism of this period, many of these groups got into bed with global neo-liberalist forces without interrogating the true nature of their partner. In any case the massive dowry, thinly disguised bribes, that global neo-liberalism poured into their civic groups, academia, "independent media" and churches were too much for most to resist. And thus from Poland to Serbia to Zambia to Zimbabwe, these middle classes became the midwives who delivered the militant and rising but trusting and ideologically immature working-class movement into the arms of the neo-liberal forces. In Zimbabwe the critical middle-lass body which negotiated the neo-liberal take over of the rising workers movement was the NCA. The NCA had been formed in 1997 as a vehicle for mobilising the middle classes around the demand for a new constitution, and was financed and mentored by German and Scandinavian social democratic foundations and unions. Tsvangirai's nominal leadership of the NCA placed its middle-class leaders in a uniquely powerful position to take control of the political party that emerged under his leadership. Their role in the MDC gave the new party respectability in the eyes of international financial organisations, which could now write off Mugabe, who had previously done their bidding but who no longer had the authority to impose their reforms. Just ahead of the 2000 elections, the IMF, World Bank and Western bank loans were suspended, accelerating the economic crisis. full: http://static.links.org.au/dossiers/2008-06-26-Zimbabwe-Dossier.pdf From nmgoro at gmail.com Wed Jul 2 17:09:12 2008 From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 20:09:12 -0300 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> <2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com> <20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> Message-ID: <2fa158550807021609r3cb0bfa3x3d8f5c25b13606e5@mail.gmail.com> The _line of argument_ may become tedious. Not _me_, because it is quite long since I last commented on Zimbabwe. But more tedious is the _line of action by imperialism and its allies_. And, mind all of you, wasn't it a Lenin who explained that politics was a long exercise in patience? I understand that many get bored. I do, myself. But such is life, sorry... The problem still stands that when an imperialist intervention is on the agenda, some people, tediously, honestly claim -as I claim myself- that the "conflict [...] between [ZANU-PF, substitute adequate acronym in different environments, for example Isabel Per?n] and the working class" will be solved _during and through_ the battle against imperialist intervention and that thus if we really want to "take the side of the working class and the political parties and grass roots organizations that fight on their behalf" -mind you: not just those that SAY TO FIGHT ON THEIR BEHALF!- then we must not, under any argument, promote the so-called "class" (should I write, er, "classist", or even "classy"?) "interests of the working class" above the _main_ interest of the working class, which is not to allow imperialists to get any footing into the country. Particularly vicious is the "humanitarian" or "democratic" footing. One does not need to OPENLY PROMOTE this option in order to support it, not even WANT IT TO HAPPEN... That is, anti-imperialist struggle promotes an interest that may include _unsavory alliances_. Failing to understand this may bring about the worst consequences. I am sorry not to seem, to share this view on this particular issue with Louis Pr, nor with other members of this list. We have had strong such disagreements on other, more complex issues, before, which did not imply our getting to each other's throat. And I hope to keep that way. But it is not me that is boring. It is the almost clockwork predictability of imperialist interventions today. In Spanish we say "el que se quem? con leche ve una vaca y llora", that is "people who have got burnt with milk weep whenever they see a cow". My tears may be boring, but they are not less real and realistic for that. -- N?stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a From lnp3 at panix.com Wed Jul 2 17:21:36 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:21:36 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <2fa158550807021609r3cb0bfa3x3d8f5c25b13606e5@mail.gmail.co m> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> <2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com> <20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> <2fa158550807021609r3cb0bfa3x3d8f5c25b13606e5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080702232133.3709010C1E@mailbackend.panix.com> Nestor wrote: >The _line of argument_ may become tedious. Not _me_, because it is >quite long since I last commented on Zimbabwe. But more tedious is >the _line of action by imperialism and its allies_. And, mind all of >you, wasn't it a Lenin who explained that politics was a long >exercise in patience? I understand that many get bored. I do, >myself. But such is life, sorry... The problem still stands that >when an imperialist intervention is on the agenda, some people, >tediously, honestly claim -as I claim myself- that the "conflict >[...] between [ZANU-PF, substitute adequate acronym in different >environments, for example Isabel Per??n] and the working class" will >be solved _during and through_ the battle against imperialist >intervention and that thus if we really want to "take the side of >the working class and the political parties and grass roots >organizations that fight on their behalf" -mind you: not just those >that SAY TO FIGHT ON THEIR BEHALF!- then we must not, under any >argument, promote the so-called "class" (should I write, er, >"classist", or even "classy"?) "interests of the working class" >above the _main_ interest of the working class, which is not to >allow imperialists to get any footing into the country. Particularly >vicious is the "humanitarian" or "democratic" footing. One does not >need to OPENLY PROMOTE this option in order to support it, not even >WANT IT TO HAPPEN... That is, anti-imperialist struggle promotes an >interest that may include _unsavory alliances_. Another defender of cops tearing down shacks underneath all the high-flung rhetoric. From elishastephens at hotmail.com Wed Jul 2 17:25:29 2008 From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 16:25:29 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] The liberal assault on Iran Message-ID: Links and formatting in the original: http://lefti.blogspot.com/2008_07_01_archive.html#1729891909171315207 Joseph Cirincione, the former head of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (I should probably put a "sic" after that) and now the head of the equally peaceful sounding "Plowshares Fund," has been consistent on Iran. Twice in 2006 (here and here), I wrote about his taking the "not if, but when" attitude toward Iran developing nuclear weapons. You might think the National Intelligence Estimate in late 2007 might have given him pause, but no, there he was on Democracy Now this morning, pushing the same line still, with statements like "The major nation in the world we?re concerned about at all is Iran with its civilian nuclear program that could be used for military purposes." and "If we don?t stop Iran...then it?s almost inevitable that these stockpiles will spread." Those were bad enough, albeit typical. But then he resorted to outright lying. Here's his explanation for why nations want nuclear weapons: Historically, the three major reasons are security, number one?that?s why we got them; we thought Hitler was developing a nuclear weapon, we wanted to offset that potential threat?the second is prestige?...But never underestimate the third: the role of domestic politics. You see that happening in Iran now, where President Ahmadinejad is using the nuclear issue to consolidate his otherwise shaky presidency. His assertion that the U.S. developed nuclear weapons because we thought that Germany was developing them is dubious at best, but it's the last part that concerns me. The unwary listener wouldn't have a clue that, far from advocating nuclear weapons, Ahmadinejad has been outspoken in his opposition to nuclear weapons, so implying he is trying to gain domestic political advantage from their development is just preposterous. To her utter discredit, none of these statements were challenged by host Amy Goodman. Perhaps the most preposterous thing Cirincione said, also unchallenged, was in this exchange: JOSEPH CIRINCIONE: Israel is the only country that refuses to acknowledge its nuclear status, nor does it deny it. Everyone else has sort of seen these weapons as a source of national pride and prestige. AMY GOODMAN: Why doesn?t Israel admit it? JOSEPH CIRINCIONE: It actually works out fairly well for US policy. They don?t want to acknowledge that they have nuclear weapons, because they don?t want other countries in the region to be under pressure to imitate or to match their nuclear stockpile. AMY GOODMAN: Like India and Pakistan? JOSEPH CIRINCIONE: Well, no, like Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt. Excuse me? Other countries aren't under any pressure to "imitate or match" Israel's nuclear weapons because Israel "officially denies it," even though the entire world knows that they not only have nuclear weapons but, more or less, how many? You must be kidding. Why did I put the word "assault" in the title of this post? After all, neither Cirincione nor Goodman were advocating attacking Iran, or even imposing sanctions on them (though it wouldn't surprise me to learn that Cirincione, or even Goodman, supports them). But this is precisely the role that liberals like Cirincione serve. Even while opposing the methods used to attack regimes the U.S. opposes, be it Iraq, Iran, Cuba, etc., they lay the groundwork in the public mind by providing the justification for such attacks. After all, once you agree that "we" have to "stop them," you're only arguing about the most effective means of doing so. _________________________________________________________________ Watch ?Cause Effect,? a show about real people making a real difference. Learn more. http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/MTV/?source=text_watchcause From sartesian at earthlink.net Wed Jul 2 17:37:09 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 19:37:09 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y><486B7824.9000102@panix.com><14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de><2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com> <20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> Message-ID: <001201c8dc9c$8c049aa0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> I am in agreement with Louis. 1. The argument gets tedious because 2. Nobody is arguing what some think is being argued. Opposition to Mugabe is not an endorsement of imperialism; support for the poor, the dispossessed, the workers in Zimbabwe is not support for the MDC; Mugabe is hardly anti-imperialist. He is deploying rhetoric as a smoke screen. Been done before and a lot and always, always, leads to nothing but greater imperialist penetration. If we can't make, and practice, the critical distinction between opposition to "local capitalism" and the support of advanced capital , then there is very little chance of defeating either the "local agent" of capitalism, or the international network of capitalism. We will forever oscillate between a pseudo-social nationalism that paves the way for greater repression and poverty. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Louis Proyect" To: Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 6:51 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses Nestor wrote: >What our own experience shows to revolutionaries the world over is: >No imperialist-sponsored or imperialist-backed intervention >anywhere, at any time, has been ever proven to be of the most minute >help to the interests of the local population, not to speak of >worldwide socialist revolution. No matter how monstrous the regime >targetted by imperialists may be, what follows is still worse. This >still keeps true. I share L??ko's enemy. And I guess I am not the >single one. -- N??stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo >puede no ser de mi autor??a This line of argument is really getting tedious. Nobody on Marxmail has been promoting either the MDC or Western intervention, either military or economic. The real conflict that interests us is between ZANU-PF and the working class. We take the side of the working class and the political parties and grass roots organizations that fight on their behalf. There have been repeated references to the ISO, a group in Zimbabwe that is fighting courageously even if they may never be capable for reasons I have gone into elsewhere of organizing the workers and small farmers under their banner. Here is the sort of thing they have been writing. Anybody who chooses ZANU-PF over these comrades should be ashamed of themselves: While the MDC had been propelled nearly into power by the working class, the character of the party by the 2000 elections was patently rabid antiworking class neo-liberal. How had this happened? The relative ease with which a movement with so much potential was turned into a neo-liberal popular front lay in the historical and continuing weakness of the working-class movement, and the lack of a significant socialist movement. While the 1997-98 mass actions had rocked Mugabe and generated the first significant challenge to his rule in twenty years, they had not developed into an independent rank-and- file movement that could challenge the stranglehold of a reformist labour bureaucracy. Under pressure from below, the bureaucracy had participated in and endorsed the mass actions, gaining significant moral authority in the process. However, it remained prone to vacillation and fundamentally untransformed, as shown by its cancellation of the second day of the December 1997 strike. Threatened by the workers' growing radicalisation and vulnerable to state repression, including the 1998 ban on strikes, and attempts to ban the ZCTU, the bureaucracy sought to rein in the workers. From March 1998, they shifted from strike-based demonstrations to "peaceful stayaways" in which workers were told to stay at home. This reduced the militancy and impact of the action, individualised workers and made them vulnerable to intimidation; it also prevented the mass gatherings that had been the basis for pressure on the union bureaucracy, reducing its accountability. In late 1998 and early 1999, the ZCTU chiefs unilaterally cancelled two major stayaway actions. Their sudden support for the formation of the MDC should be understood in this context. In late 1998, they argued that militant stayaways were no longer useful, if not counter-productive, enabling Mugabe to declare a state of emergency. Instead, what was needed was a political party to fight the 2000 elections. These ideas appealed to many workers, and this partly accounts for the growth of reformist parliamentary illusions and the subsequent decline of militant struggles in the period 1999-2000. The second key factor in the right-wing takeover of a rising working-class movement in Zimbabwe, as elsewhere, lay in the role of the middle-class intelligentsia. The neo-liberal agenda had been imposed in Zimbabwe, as throughout most of the periphery societies, through authoritarian regimes such as Africa's one party state regimes, Latin America's military juntas and Eastern Europe's Stalinist dictatorships. In such societies, the distinction between economics and politics becomes razor thin. Thus the revolts that emerged against the worsening conditions of the masses as a result of the deepening economic crisis of neo-liberal capitalism inevitably assumed a political form?democratic struggles against the authoritarian superstructure that had imposed the neo-liberal framework in the first place. At that stage the forces of global neoliberalism, cognisant of the revolutionary potential of the emerging struggles, were forced to abandon the old authoritarian forms of domination of the periphery, and instead assume a more democratic face with which they would be able to intervene and neutralise the rising movement. The groups to whom their cynical appeals to bourgeois democratic values like rule of law, human rights, and good governance appealed most were the middle-class intelligentsia who were being radicalised under the impact of the crisis. But in the absence of a rival ideological alternative, given the ignominious demise of "communism" and the accompanying bourgeois triumphalism of this period, many of these groups got into bed with global neo-liberalist forces without interrogating the true nature of their partner. In any case the massive dowry, thinly disguised bribes, that global neo-liberalism poured into their civic groups, academia, "independent media" and churches were too much for most to resist. And thus from Poland to Serbia to Zambia to Zimbabwe, these middle classes became the midwives who delivered the militant and rising but trusting and ideologically immature working-class movement into the arms of the neo-liberal forces. In Zimbabwe the critical middle-lass body which negotiated the neo-liberal take over of the rising workers movement was the NCA. The NCA had been formed in 1997 as a vehicle for mobilising the middle classes around the demand for a new constitution, and was financed and mentored by German and Scandinavian social democratic foundations and unions. Tsvangirai's nominal leadership of the NCA placed its middle-class leaders in a uniquely powerful position to take control of the political party that emerged under his leadership. Their role in the MDC gave the new party respectability in the eyes of international financial organisations, which could now write off Mugabe, who had previously done their bidding but who no longer had the authority to impose their reforms. Just ahead of the 2000 elections, the IMF, World Bank and Western bank loans were suspended, accelerating the economic crisis. full: http://static.links.org.au/dossiers/2008-06-26-Zimbabwe-Dossier.pdf ________________________________________________ YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/sartesian%40earthlink.net From Dbachmozart at aol.com Wed Jul 2 17:52:03 2008 From: Dbachmozart at aol.com (Dbachmozart at aol.com) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 19:52:03 EDT Subject: [Marxism] Aggression Rights and Wrongs: Vietnam in Cambodia, US in Iraq Message-ID: [ Z Magazine, July-August 2008?forthcoming] Aggression Rights and Wrongs: Vietnam in Cambodia; The United States in Iraq Edward S. Herman Vietnam Lacked Aggression Rights A recent book by Michael Vickery (Cambodia: A Political Survey [Editions Funan: 2007]) dramatizes once again the fantastic double-standard that operates in cases of cross-border attacks by the weak, and especially U.S. targets, and the strong, especially the United States. Vietnam invaded Cambodia in December 1978, quickly defeating the Khmer Rouge and pushing its remnant forces into Thailand. Vietnam did this under considerable provocation, as the Pol Pot regime was extremely hostile to Vietnam, carried out a major ethnic cleansing of Vietnamese within Cambodia, and mounted a series of cross-border attacks that cost many Vietnamese lives. Vietnam?s invasion was therefore based on, and a response to, serious Cambodian provocations. By contrast, the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 was not based on actions by Saddam Hussein injurious to the United States?the Bush administration was obliged to construct a series of lies to justify the attack and occupation of a distant country, lies that had been crudely (and obviously) fabricated before the attack but which were decisively confirmed as lies in its aftermath. Of course, both before and after the invasion of Iraq it had been alleged that as Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator ousting him was desirable and therefore in itself justified the invasion. But of course the same argument would justify the Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia, as Pol Pot had been furiously assailed as a mass killer and ?another Hitler,? and in a politically neutral world his ouster by the Vietnamese would have been treated at least equally as a liberation and part of that ?responsibility to protect? that has become a favorite of contemporary interventionists?in fact more so as in the late 1970s Pol Pot ranked higher than Saddam as a killer. And as noted Vietnam was acting at least in part in genuine self-defense. But following the failed U.S. attempt to dominate Vietnam by military attack, that country was hated by U.S. officials, who had actually cozied up to Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge in the last years of Pol Pot?s rule, even while the U.S. and Western establishments continued to denounce that rule as beyond the pale. A useful indication of the shift was former U.S. official and Vietnam expert Douglas Pike?s November 1979 reference to Pol Pot as a ?charismatic leader? of a ?bloody but successful peasant revolution.? Thus, although there had been Western calls for forcible action against the Pol Pot regime, when Vietnam proceeded to oust that regime the United States--hence its allies, clients. and the ?international community?-- treated this as intolerable aggression. The view was that the government soon installed in Phnom Penh was a Vietnamese and illegitimate ?puppet??although it was composed of Cambodians who had been a political faction in Cambodia under attack by Pol Pot?and that it was urgent that Vietnam remove itself from Cambodia and allow an ? independent? Cambodian government to be formed and rule. What followed then was international condemnation of Vietnam, sanctions, a Chinese punitive invasion of Vietnam in February 1979, and a widespread refusal to recognize the new government of Cambodia, with Cambodia?s seat at the UN kept for Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge on the grounds of ?continuity? with the old Cambodia (as the State Department informed congress in 1982). Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, along with several other exiled Cambodian factions, having fled to Thailand, were welcomed there and their cadres were protected and funded by China, the United States, and other countries, with the Khmer Rouge free to make sporadic attacks on (and steal timber from) their former homeland. (Imagine the U.S. and UN response if Iran provided a homeland for an ousted Saddam Hussein faction that made periodic incursions into Iraq!) The design in supporting Pol Pot was to ?bleed? Vietnam, as explicitly stated by Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping, and the United States cooperated fully in this bleeding enterprise, even though it involved the huge hypocrisy of supporting ?another Hitler? and imposing further injury on the long-suffering Cambodian people, about whom many crocodile tears had been shed while Pol Pot had ruled Cambodia. Another part of the U.S. and allied design was to force Vietnam to withdraw from Cambodia and to replace the government it had brought into power with one either closely aligned with the West or impotent. The United States succeeded in getting the UN and its allies to put enough pressure on the Cambodian government and Vietnam to force them to accept an election process that would replace the existing government. One problem with this solution was that the Cambodian government that was to be replaced was doing a credible job, despite the horrendous conditions that it inherited, and the refusal of the ? international community? to give any substantial aid to the badly damaged and slowly recovering country. According to a UN report of 1990: ?considering the devastation inherited from war and internal strife, the centrally directed system of economic management?has attained unquestionable successes, especially marked in restoring productive capacity to a level of normalcy and accelerating the pace of economic growth to a respectable per capita magnitude from the ruinously low level of the late 1970s.? Vickery claims that this new government also ?made creditable progress in developing social services, health care, education, agriculture, and vaccination programs for children and animals.? It also performed relatively well on women?s rights and civil liberties, given the immediate background and in comparison with its Cambodian predecessors and nearby neighbors (like Thailand). A second problem for Western interventionism was that Vietnam gradually withdrew its military forces from Cambodia and had them all out by 1989, in keeping with Vietnam?s promises and contrary to Western assurances that Vietnam intended a permanent stay. This suggested that the Cambodian government no longer needed the Vietnamese military presence to govern, and in another political context it might have raised questions about the need for foreign intervention to assure ?independence.? But all of this was irrelevant to the United States, which simply refused to accept a government friendly toward and influenced by the Vietnamese. That government had to be ousted, no matter what the consequences, and the experiences of post-ouster Guatemala (1954 onward) and post-ouster Nicaragua (1990 onward) indicated that the consequences could be painful and even disastrous to the indigenous population. A third problem for the West was that Pol Pot?s Khmer Rouge (KR) was the most powerful faction across the border in Thailand and anxious to return to power. Not only did this not interfere with the effort at regime change, the United States and its allies actually insisted that the KR be one of the constituent parties that would take part in an election for the new government. The U.S. and its allies organized a Paris conference in 1991 to firm up a massive international intervention in Cambodia, with the supposedly regime-changing election to be held in 1993. This regime change process terminated the progress made by the post-KR government, by introducing neoliberal rules that cut back needed social programs, and via the new deliberately splintering political arrangements that made the government more corrupt and less workable. Amusingly, the electoral rules imposed to help weaken the power of the Vietnam-sponsored government, including proportional voting, succeeded in allowing that earlier government to retain preeminent power, although its effectiveness was reduced as it struggled in a more hostile environment. But the power of the KR, which had rested heavily on Western subsidy and diplomatic support, dwindled quickly, although its indigenous partners, now uneasily linked to the new government, maintained the KR?s venomous hostility toward Vietnam and Vietnamese. In short, what has been called the ?Nicaragua strategy,? with an international boycott and sanctions, a subsidized contra force attacking the target state and forcing it to spend resources on defense, and an election designed to finalize regime change, was used in the case of Cambodia, and was partially successful: it succeeded in imposing a great deal of pain on the target population, and terminated economic and social progress under a government opposed by the United States; but it did not succeed, as in Guatemala and Nicaragua, in fully effecting a regime change. The heavy costs to the Cambodian people resulting from Western (U.S.) hostility to the Cambodian government continues up to today. But of course Vietnam did not have aggression rights, so its occupation and the government that it installed had to be removed in the interests of international law and justice! And with the help of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge! The United States Has Aggression Rights In the case of the U.S. invasion-occupation of Iraq, all the principles that affected Vietnam and Cambodia are stood on their head. (1) Although in contrast with the Vietnam-Cambodia case the United States invasion was based on no provocation by the distant victim state, no sanctions were imposed by the UN or international community, and although the ? humanitarian interventionists? had proclaimed a newly accepted ?responsibility to protect,? no protection was offered the Iraqis from March 2003 up to the present ?and David Rieff, George Packer, Samantha Power, Michael Ignatieff, Thomas G. Weiss , Kofi Annan, Ban Ki-Moon and company have never called upon the world to intervene to protect the Iraqis despite a million or more Iraqi deaths, over 4 million refugees, and a steady stream of Falluja type assaults and massacres?and although, according to Thomas Weiss, of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, the responsibility to use force to protect ?kicks in?if a state is manifestly unable or unwilling to protect its citizens,? as is manifestly the case with Iraq under U.S. attack and occupation. (2) No demand has been made that the invader get out, and the Security Council even voted shortly after the invasion to give the invader occupation rights (under Security Council Resolution 1546, June 8, 2003, which might be called the U.S. ?pacification rights? resolution); and this has not been altered even though the invader has made it plain that he intends to stay indefinitely with a gigantic Embassy, a number of very large ?enduring bases,? and steady efforts to negotiate a long-term presence with the Iraqi government. (3) No protest has been made that the government of Iraq, militarily and financially dependent on the occupation, is not truly ?independent,? and that independence would require the withdrawal of the occupation army and other conditions that might make an election free and meaningful (points forcibly made as regards the Vietnam occupation of Cambodia, or as regards Syria in Lebanon). (4) In the decisions on ?surges? and debates on how long the United States will stay in Iraq, neither the conditions of true independence, nor the demands of international law, nor the desires of the Iraqi people, enter the discussion (and polls there have regularly shown that the Iraqis, as well the U.S. public want us out). These are decisions for the U.S. ruling elite, grounded in U.S. aggression rights and the cowardice and lack of moral force of the international community. **************Get the scoop on last night's hottest shows and the live music scene in your area - Check out TourTracker.com! (www.tourtracker.com ?NCID=aolmus00050000000112) From sartesian at earthlink.net Wed Jul 2 17:58:59 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 19:58:59 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Colombia References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y><486B7824.9000102@panix.com><14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de><2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com><20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> <001201c8dc9c$8c049aa0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Message-ID: <002a01c8dc9f$98e9d070$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> According to Council on Hemispheric Affairs, the Colombian military succeeded in extracting Ingrid Betancourt and 14 others from FARC control today. From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net Wed Jul 2 18:38:06 2008 From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 20:38:06 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Steve Bloom: Assessing the Cleveland Conference Message-ID: <01e701c8dca5$10070830$6401a8c0@office1pc> First, for those who were not present, a few factual notes: There were 350 participants, more or less, though only around 200-250 were actually in the room and voting at any one time. Solidarity had (if my count is accurate) 9 comrades present. I could have missed one or two. David can report on how our literature table did. The main other revolutionary political current there as a constructive participant in the conference was Socialist Action, which clearly mobilized its forces. The FSP, which has been part of the conference planning committee, was also present, but their numbers are limited. Various sects came to disrupt and expose (Spartacists, LRP, etc.) but did not constitute a serious problem. The ISO was not present, except for their book table. There was a substantial and visible presence of SDS. Among other participants (that is, not presently or formerly affiliated revolutionaries) the attendance was fairly broad. A bus full of young people arrived from Connecticut. Individuals wore T-shirts from Code Pink, Progressive Democrats of America, and Iraq Vets Against the War. There were perhaps 3-5% Black faces, a scattering of women in head-scarves, a number of Latinos (including some prominent leaders of the immigrant rights struggles)--though the predominant participation was our usual anti-war movement white. A workshop I attended on "the war at home," for example, had three Black panelists speaking to an all-white audience. The most interesting discussions (and most revealing votes) took place around two issues: 1) whether to propose dates in December for common actions that can try to unite the various wings of the movement, and 2) Palestine. The factors at work were similar in both cases. On the question of December dates the proposal from the conference coordinating committee was to call for actions on December 9-14. This includes Mumia Abu-Jamal's birthday (December 9), International Human Rights Day (December 10) and a Saturday on December 14. UFPJ, ANSWER, TONC, and USLAW were consulted about these dates, and positive replies came from all but UFPJ which took a wait-and-see approach. (Leslie Cagan of UFPJ was present at the conference as a speaker on Saturday night and as an observer. Brian Becker from ANSWER was also there, and likewise spoke on the Saturday evening panel. TONC was present as a participant in the conference planning committee and played an active role in the conference itself.) The conference call clearly stated that unifying the movement was one of the prime objective of the assembly. Still, in the floor debate on this question, it was clear that many (and not just the sectarian leftists present) were not persuaded that this should be the overriding objective. Many said that the conference should just do the right thing, go ahead with actions that were independent of the Democratic Party regardless of whether they would be able to generate unity. October 11, a date proposed by coalition forces in New England, was prominently mentioned in this regard, as were proposed demonstrations around Inauguration Day. Some said to just skip any attempt at unified actions in the Fall of 2008 and focus on the proposal (also in the main resolution) to unify the movement around bi-coastal protests in the Spring of 2009. And everyone, including those who supported them as the only dates around which unity might be generated in the Fall, acknowledged that December 9-14 were far from ideal. In the end, the motion to include these dates in the overall conference resolution, as a proposal to the braoder movement, was adopted, but by a relatively slim margin. (I would say 55% to 45%, or something like that). This may limit the degree to which this proposal actually puts pressure on UFPJ to sign on. At the same time, the fact that most of the opposition was proposing to simply go it alone, not actually caring whether UFPJ signs on, also puts pressure on UFPJ, though in a different way. The Palestine discussion revealed similar divisions in the conference. A motion came in from the Middle East Criisis Committee of Connecticut (spearheaded by Stan Heller) to make the quesiton of Palestine an integral part of the agenda of the broader antiwar movement, and to include support to the call for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel. A more moderate proposal was presented by the conference presiding committee, noting the links between Palestine and Iraq and calling for quesitons related to Palestine to become a central discussion in the movement. The presiding committee proposal explicitly omitted the call for BDS. These two approaches were counterposed to each other in a discussion on Sunday morning, and in the end the Middle East Crisis Committee's language was adopted (by a similar narrow margin as the December dates). What can we make of this? First an assumption that goes into the following analysis: Probably about half of those in the room and voting at any one time were conscious leftists/revolutionaries of one kind or another, affiliated or unaffiliated. On the Palestine vote that layer was probably split pretty much 50-50. The members of Socialist Action, along with others who appreciate the need to think strategically (in terms of making links with more conservative forces, particularly in the labor movement) voted for the presiding committee language. Others, who were either interested in consciously pushing a left agenda, or else just voting their individual consciences, supported the MECC language. If this is true (that the conscious leftists were split) then the decisive vote came from others, who did not arrive in Cleveland with a consciously "revolutionary" agenda. That layer as represented at this conference, then, would seem to have a substantial majority which is prepared to put Palestine in its rightful place politically, as a cause which anti-war activists ought to place front and center in their political program. . The arguments for the more moderate position on Palestine just weren't going to fly. All of the arguments in favor of it hinged around the need to adapt to more conservative forces, such as the union movement. Too many people were not prepared to subordinate a correct, anti-imperialist (in the positive sense of that term) political agenda to "unity" if they have to choose between the two. These are instincts which I think most in Solidarity would disagree with. But we also need to understand them, understand why a layer of activists is so frustrated with the two wings of the movement so far (UFPJ for its reformist approach and ANSWER/TONC for their sectarianism) that they are prepared to go-it-alone if necessary, simply say and do the right thing and not care what the consequences might be. While this is not a sentiment we should endorse, it's also not simply an ultraleft response in my judgment. It reflects something positive in terms of levels of consicousness and combativity (even if also a certain immaturity) on the part of a layer of activists. BTW, Jeff M of SA seemed to have a similar assessment after the assembly, based on a brief conversation I had with him. The final act of the gathering was to elect a new administrative commitee of 13. In addition, there will be a "continuations body" consisting, as the previous Coordinating Committee was, of individuals nominated by endorsing organizations. The outgoing AC of three people had proposed a new AC of nine, and presented nine nominees. In the end 13 were chosen from among 19 nominees, which is a positive thing IMO. One final political conclusion. From the outset there was a tension in the planning process for this conference, different goals that were, in some ways, in conflict with one another: a) promote unity in the movement as a whole b) cultivate a base in the labor movement as a key constituency for the antiwar movement generally and the National Assembly in particular c) bring together a wing of the movement that would consistently struggle for "US Out Now!" to stay in the streets, remain indpendent of the Democrats, generally stand for the right to self-determination. In the end, (c) turned out to be stronger than (b) (thus the Palestine position), and (a) barely squeeked by (thus the close vote on December actions). It seems to me that we simply have to move ahead now as best we can, understanding that all three goals remain worthwhile, but that there are going to be continuing difficulties as we try to articulate them with one another given the political realities of the antiwar movement today. This conference was far from perfect. It would have been good had there been more people there, and a smaller proportion who (as Charlie quipped at one point) would be able to identify the transitional program. Some of the procedures developed by the planning committee were cumbersome and made it more difficult to generate clarity on the issues. On the whole, however, I would rate the assembly at a 7 or 8 on a scale of 10. There was a genuine debate, and considerable clarity generated, on some of the key political questions: Do we need dates in December that will try to unify the movement? What is the relationship between those dates and others that folks are organizing around, such as October 11? What position should a group like the NA take on Palestine, Afghanistan, and Iran? (I did not take time to elaborate the latter two discussions here, as a concensus developed in the end. Comrades can read the language in the final resolution when it comes out.) The main thing we need to do now is help move things forward. From gary.maclennan at gmail.com Wed Jul 2 18:41:01 2008 From: gary.maclennan at gmail.com (gary.maclennan at gmail.com) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 17:41:01 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Christopher Hitchens gets waterboarded In-Reply-To: <486BDBAC.8080402@panix.com> References: <486BA111.7050000@panix.com> <486BDBAC.8080402@panix.com> Message-ID: This is in some ways an extraordinary event. At one level it is clearly a manifestation of the relentless self-publicising that is such an essential part of being a public intellectual, esp in the USA. At another level it is about American imperialism and Hitchens' role in its defence and promotion. Hitchens knows what imperialism is and he knows that all imperialism rest on a firm ground of dirty work. The torturer at his filthy dark tasks is as essential to imperialism as are the contemporary press conference or congressional resolution or public pronouncements and publications by the likes of Hitchens. So Hitchens, who has of course gone from being a star of the Left to being a hack for the imperialists and war mongerers, by staging this stunt can in some ways be claiming that he did not really know what went on in the CIA's prisons. What is annoying about this episode is that we are expected to be impressed by his "Independence and fearlessness". No wonder Lou commented as he did. On yet another level it is a neat illustration of the problems of apprehending reality. The term "water-boarding" is now well known. But it is generally grasped in what Cardinal Newman called the "notional" way. That is we can name, classify, distinguish it and even compare it as a technique with other favoured methods such as sleep deprivation. However we do not really apprehend it as a reality. That takes sensation, imagination and memory. So much of the workings of capitalism are understood only in a notional way and that is one of the reason why the obscenities of capitalism endure. My own favourite illustration here is of the 200 day hunger strike of the IRA sisters Dolours and Marian Price in 1974. The sisters were demanding that they be sent to a prison in Northern Ireland. It was announced that the sisters were being "force fed". I even read an article which describe what happened when the sisters resisted force feeding and how traumatic an experience it was for those doing the feeding. By a coincidence at the same time the BBC put to air a TV Mini series entitled *Shoulder to Shoulder* (1974) on the suffragettes. It dealt with their hunger strikes and the terrible sufferings they under went when being force fed. Suddenly what was happening to the Price Sisters could be apprehended as a reality. Sensation, imagination and memory came into play and these in turn gave rise to Sympathy and the Price sisters won their strike and were repatriated to Northern Ireland. I doubt very much if Hitchens' experience on the board will ever give rise to anything sympathy for the victims of American experience. For that to happen I suspect he would have needed to have been kept on that board for a lot longer; though perhaps not as long as most comrades on this list would wish. regards Gary From sabocat59 at mac.com Wed Jul 2 19:15:47 2008 From: sabocat59 at mac.com (Greg McDonald) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:15:47 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Guantanamo-turns out it's all the fault of commies again Message-ID: <7EE8DD0C-D50C-44F4-8692-7164072D0862@mac.com> Nestor Gorojovsky wrote: In "Blood Meridian", C. McCarthy portrays scalping of native americans by marauding white mercenaries as an economic utility. Scalps were turned in to the governor for payment, as per their agreement. Greg McDonald From markalause at gmail.com Wed Jul 2 20:52:22 2008 From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 21:52:22 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] Christopher Hitchens gets waterboarded In-Reply-To: References: <486BA111.7050000@panix.com> <486BDBAC.8080402@panix.com> Message-ID: Didn't somebody from Fox News get themselves waterboarded when it came out that they were using this technique? I remember seeing a clip from Jon Stewart's show. Not strange I suppose for CH to follow the lead of Fox. ML From fred.fuentes at gmail.com Wed Jul 2 21:26:11 2008 From: fred.fuentes at gmail.com (Fred Fuentes) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 13:26:11 +1000 Subject: [Marxism] "Hugo Chavez faces political crisis as allies desert him" In-Reply-To: <000d01c8da5d$faeed930$6401a8c0@office1pc> References: <000d01c8da5d$faeed930$6401a8c0@office1pc> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:04 PM, Fred Feldman wrote: > Loss of allies is given as national democratic revolutions proceed and as > class aspects of it come more to the fore, as the must at some point. So my > submitting this article is not an expression of opinion, but a request for a > rounded picture of where things are headed. > Michael Lebowitz: The spectre of socialism for the 21st century ..........Three years ago, I gave a talk in Venezuela called ``Socialism doesn't drop from the sky'', which has been very widely circulated in Venezuela (largely because Chavez has talked about it a number of times on television); it is also a chapter in my book, Build it Now: Socialism for the 21st Century. One aspect of the title of that essay refers to the obvious point that socialism obviously is necessarily rooted in particular societies -- which is to say that it must be developed in societies with particular histories. To understand the possibilities for success in Venezuela, you have to know something about the nature of that society. Now, I can't give you a complete, balanced account of Venezuela in the time left. So, I'll just stress just some of the characteristics which suggest significant obstacles to building socialism for the 21st century in Venezuela. When you talk about Venezuela, you have to begin with oil. Not only the effect of oil exports upon the hollowing-out of the economy such that local manufacturing and agriculture effectively disappeared as the result of an exchange rate which made it much cheaper to import everything rather than to produce it domestically. It's an extreme example of what is called the ``Dutch disease'': despite rich agricultural land, Venezuela was importing 70% of its food. So, massive migration from the countryside to live in the cities, e.g., in the hills surrounding Caracas -- 80% of the population is urban, maybe 10% engaged in agriculture. And as for industry, it was largely import processing -- processing food, assembling cars and assorted other import-related sectors. Oil production itself doesn't generate many jobs, so we have to think about unemployment, an informal sector (about 50% of the working class) and poverty -- extreme social debt and inequality. Add to that economic effect, the effect upon state and society. Unlike the classic picture of a state resting upon civil society, upon the social classes, in Venezuela, civil society rests upon the state. Contrary to Engels' sneers at Tkachev, in Venezuela the state indeed has been suspended in mid-air -- or, more precisely, suspended upon an oil geyser. Thus, the state has been the supreme object of desire -- or, more precisely, access to the state for the purpose of gaining access to oil rents has been a national preoccupation. And, in this orgy of rent seeking within a poverty-stricken society -- a culture of corruption and clientalism, parasitic capitalists who don't invest, a labour aristocracy with trade union leaders who sell jobs, a party system which functions as an alternating transmission belt for elections and access to state jobs, a state which mostly does not work because it is filled with incompetent sinecurists but, when it does, is completely top-down. These are just a few characteristics worth mentioning. All of this was present in Venezuela when Chavez was elected in 1998. And, you would have to be truly na?ve to think that it disappeared when Ch?vez came to office. On the contrary, it pervades Chavism -- the corruption, the clientalism, the nature of the state, the nature of the party (including the new party ? PSUV -- currently being built), the gap between the organised working class and the poor in the informal sector -- it's all there! And, you will recognise that it is entirely contrary to everything in the concept of socialism for the 21st century. Socialism doesn't drop from the sky. It is necessarily rooted in particular societies. And, these two souls which currently beat in the breast of Venezuela are clearly at war. Chavez often cites [Italian Marxist Antonio] Gramsci about how the old is dying and the new cannot yet be born (although he leaves out the part about how a great many morbid symptoms appear at that time). Precisely because of these two opposed tendencies, when I write about Venezuela, I always stress the internal struggle within Chavism as the main obstacle to the success of the Bolivarian Revolution. Obviously, it is not the only obstacle -- there is the existing oligarchy, the latifundists (who are the most reactionary and violent part of the opposition), the existing capitalists in their enclaves of import processing, finance and the media (which has been their main weapon) and, of course, US imperialism. Not only was the US complicit in the 2002 coup which briefly removed Chavez and in the oil lockout and sabotage later that year, but it also funds and trains the opposition, orchestrates the international media blitz against Venezuela (currently with the assistance of magical laptop computers produced by its Colombian clients), and it is in the process of bringing the US navy back to patrol the waters off Venezuela. Imperialism is no paper tiger. And, clearly, solidarity with the Bolivarian process is essential by those outside the country who value the concepts and developments I have described. However, I stress the internal obstacles to socialism within Chavism -- the emerging new capitalists (the ``bolibourgeoisie''), the high officials (both from military and vanguardist traditions -- it is difficult to see the distinction) who are opposed to power from below in workplaces and communities (and, thus opposed, in this respect, to human development and revolutionary practice), the party functionaries and nomenklatura. Why do I stress this? Because I consider this the ultimate contradiction of the revolution; and, I think the struggle between this ``endogenous right'' (the right from within) and the masses who have been mobilised is the ultimate conflict which will determine the fate of the Bolivarian Revolution.......... read the rest at http://links.org.au/node/503 From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net Wed Jul 2 21:30:08 2008 From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 23:30:08 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] (no subject) Message-ID: <000001c8dcbd$18857bf0$6401a8c0@office1pc> Artesian wrote: The late Mark Jones disagreed with about everything I said, and vice-versa. But, I wrote on one occasion, if Savimbi had won in Angola, and if 3 years after that he fell out with his imperialist sponsors, even if it was over his simple greed to claim more of the mineral wealth as his own, and if those sponsors then called for sanctions or fielded a force to overthrow Savimbi, we, as Marxists would oppose those sanctions and that field force without changing our analysis and opposition to Savimbi one bit. Mark wrote me to say that he found that our agreement on that position to be worth more than all the strenuous disagreements we had. Fred Feldman comments: Well, this is the closest thing to a statement I 100 percent agree with in the discussion. Of course Mugabe is not a Savimbi. More to the point, he is not a Lumumba, a Mandela, or a Thomas Sankara either. The US and British imperialists are after him, not because of how determinedly he has stood up to them (although he is not simply a puppet -- his gang interests come way ahead of his neoliberal commitments, which the imperialists do not like) but because imperialism is ON THE OFFENSIVE IN AFRICA. And because it furthers the propaganda that all the problems in Africa are due to the incapacity of the Africans to rule themselves. Give the land back to the white farmers so they can make the desert bloom! (By the way, Louis was wrong to reduce what happened to in Russia a suppression of the Kulaks which destroyed agriculture. What happened was the crushing of the entire peasantry in the name of eliminating the Kulaks. The return of the land to the white farmers would be a completely reactionary outcome in Zimbabwe, even though the patronage-driven land reform is not the solution that is needed.) Luko considers Tsvangirai an enemy. So do I. Of course, I think and I assume that Luko thinks that Mugabe is an enemy to. Right now, all that exists in Zimbabwe is a choice between enemies of the people. That is why I think the best stop-gap solution might actually be a MDC-ZANU coalition to head off what I fear will be a Congo-type civil war, complete with interventions from Botswana, Congo, and other neighboring countries out to grab spoils. I will give no support to such a coalition, but I fear that a civil war will be a dead end under present conditions. (And I am not someone who imagines that war is always worse than "peace." Of course, this is something that the left ZANU-phobes (and there is a lot to be phobic about, but phobia is never a good guide) think is the PURE imperialist solution. (Just like they imagine that imperialism is really 100 percent in support of China in Tibet and so forth, and basically in support of Mugabe, and so on. The pose enables them can feel independent of imperialism when they take hard-line pro-MDC or pro Tibet independence positions, with the actual public imperialist positions being proclaimed nonexistent by declaring them "hypocritical." Finally, I want to take up the character of the debate that took place, in which the position which the position that focused on opposition to imperialist intervention was crudely, and without any factual proof, amalgamated with support to Mugabe's cops and troops against the people. Lueko Willms wrote: "Morgan Tsvangirai has called for foreign, especially imperialist powers to have a decisive say about which government the people of Zimbabwe might chose.... "I consider Mr. Tsvangirai as an enemy. Remind you: I have learned my staunch opposition against colonialism from the Angolans, even before I knew anything of Vietnam." Note that Lueko did not say a word in favor of Mugabe. Not one. Louis answered: "Another fan of cops tearing down shacks in Harare..." Nestor wrote: "I don't suggest that those who think differently be given a Time Machine tour to Argentina, jan-march 1976 (that is during the last 90 days of the Isabel Per?n regime). But it would be a sobering experience, indeed. This regime was overwhelmingly inept and brutally violent. It was overthrown under imperialist auspices on March 24, 1976.... "Our local Tsvangirais, Ra?l Alfons?n as the cheerleader, supported the military overthrow of Isabel Per?n (Communist Party included, and as late as 1978 they were still supporting, yes, supporting the military regime in power).'" And then he wrote: The problem still stands that when an imperialist intervention is on the agenda, some people, tediously, honestly claim -as I claim myself- that the "conflict [...] between [ZANU-PF, substitute adequate acronym in different environments, for example Isabel Per?n] and the working class" will be solved _during and through_ the battle against imperialist intervention and that thus if we really want to "take the side of the working class and the political parties and grass roots organizations that fight on their behalf" -mind you: not just those that SAY TO FIGHT ON THEIR BEHALF!- then we must not, under any argument, promote the so-called "class" (should I write, er, "classist", or even "classy"?) "interests of the working class" above the _main_ interest of the working class, which is not to allow imperialists to get any footing into the country. Particularly vicious is the "humanitarian" or "democratic" footing. One does not need to OPENLY PROMOTE this option in order to support it, not even WANT IT TO HAPPEN..." Note that Nestor said not one word in defense of Mugabe or any of his actions. Who can, of course! But that is part of imperialism's big advantage here, as with Saddam Hussein. Louis replied: "Another defender of cops tearing down shacks underneath all the high-flung rhetoric." So how can anyone be sure -- really sure -- that Louis is against the imperialist campaign against the Mugabe regime (whatever its goals) when his response to those who viscerally react against it is such unadulterated cop-baiting. This has no place on the list, and I am sure the moderator will put a firm stop to it. Fred Feldman From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net Wed Jul 2 21:32:49 2008 From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman) Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 23:32:49 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Previous post should have been titled "Re: MDC weaknesses". Apologies. Message-ID: <000001c8dcbd$78424dc0$6401a8c0@office1pc> From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Wed Jul 2 21:45:25 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 23:45:25 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] (no subject) In-Reply-To: <000001c8dcbd$18857bf0$6401a8c0@office1pc> References: <000001c8dcbd$18857bf0$6401a8c0@office1pc> Message-ID: <908b689f0807022045t5f00dd9y9c9cb8907bee5c31@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 11:30 PM, Fred Feldman wrote: > Artesian wrote: > The late Mark Jones disagreed with about everything I said, and vice-versa. > But, I wrote on one occasion, if Savimbi had won in Angola, and if 3 years > after that he fell out with his imperialist sponsors, even if it was over > his simple greed to claim more of the mineral wealth as his own, and if > those sponsors then called for sanctions or fielded a force to overthrow > Savimbi, we, as Marxists would oppose those sanctions and that field force > without changing our analysis and opposition to Savimbi one bit. Mark > wrote me to say that he found that our agreement on that position to be > worth more than all the strenuous disagreements we had. > > Fred Feldman comments: > > Well, this is the closest thing to a statement I 100 percent agree with in > the discussion. Fred, Out of curiosity, what was your stand with regard to the demand for western sanctions against apartheid South Africa? Were you pro-sanctions/anti-sanctions, or were you abstentionist/agnostic on the issue? Thanks, R. Critic From fred.fuentes at gmail.com Wed Jul 2 21:50:09 2008 From: fred.fuentes at gmail.com (Fred Fuentes) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 13:50:09 +1000 Subject: [Marxism] President Cristina's speech at Mercosur In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 3:35 AM, Joaqu?n Bustelo wrote: > Unfortunately I lost access to the signal before hearing the others at > the summit, including Lula, Evo, Chavez and Bachelet. .... > Perhaps Nestor knows where to find the speech in print, so at least > those that can read Spanish can find it. > Two reports in spanish on speech by Evo and Chavez SAN MIGUEL DE TUCUM?N, 2(PSI).- EVO MORALES INST? A PENSAR PRIMERO EN EL PUEBLO Y NO EN EL DINERO. El presidente boliviano hizo hincapi? en la necesidad de resolver los problemas de alimentaci?n y critic? a los productores y empresarios. Durante su discurso cuestion? la directiva europea que expulsa a los inmigrantes ilegales y pidi? a sus pares a rechazarla. Morales prioriz? "el inter?s de los pueblos" antes que "el de los negocios especulativos". El presidente de Bolivia, Evo Morales, asegur? durante la cumbre de Jefes de Estado del Mercosur que se desarroll? en Tucum?n que los productores agr?colas deben entender que por estar en juego la alimentaci?n de las personas, "hay que priorizar el inter?s de los pueblos antes que el de los negocios especulativos". "Hay que entender que el tema de la alimentaci?n, como primer derecho humano, nos obliga a los presidentes de gobierno y a los productores, sean peque?os, medianos o grandes, a que atiendan esta demanda que tienen nuestros pueblos. Pero, lamentablemente, hay grupos que especulan con el tema", asever? Morales al hablar durante la cumbre de Jefes de Estado del Mercosur. Cuando le toc? hablar durante la reuni?n de mandatarios de los pa?ses miembros y asociados del Mercosur, como el caso de Bolivia, Morales inst? a combatir los comportamientos especulativos y a propiciar, como lo sugiri? el presidente de Uruguay, Tabar? V?zquez, la complementariedad puertas adentro de las naciones y entre ellas en la regi?n. "Si no existe esto, seguramente, habr? problemas en los distintos pa?ses porque el precio de los alimentos seguir? subiendo. Los productores y empresarios deben pensar primero en el pueblo, no en el dinero, para que, en el marco de la complementariedad y de manera solidaria, podamos resolver los problemas de alimentaci?n", subray? Morales. Morales dedic? buena parte de su discurso a cuestionar la denominada directiva de retorno, aprobada recientemente por el Parlamento de la Uni?n Europea, por medio de la cual se penaliza la inmigraci?n indocumentada en el Viejo Continente. "Am?rica Latina ha recibido mucha gente europea y de todos los continentes por problemas de guerra, de hambruna, de pobreza. Vinieron aqu?, con sus familias, y acapararon miles de hect?reas, saquearon nuestros recursos naturales, explotaron a nuestros hermanos y ahora nos aprueban esta directiva retorno contra nuestras familias, inclusive familiares m?os", expres? Morales. El presidente boliviano record? que, en cambio, los latinoamericanos que viven en Europa "no han acaparado miles de hect?reas, no son due?os de minas, no est?n saqueando recursos ni est?n explotando a los europeos", ya que algunos se dedican, por ejemplo, a "cuidar ancianas y perciben 1.200 euros al mes, lo que puede ser considerado mucho si antes s?lo tenia un sueldo de U$S 300 o U$S 400". Exhort? a sus pares en "rechazar esta directiva, pero revisando nuestra historia. Antes nos dec?an que los indios no ten?an alma, pero me pregunto: ?D?nde est? el alma de los europeos con esta medida que significa expulsi?n?" y luego inst? a rechazarla mediante pronunciamientos del Mercosur, de la Uni?n de Naciones de Sudam?rica (Unasur) y de la Comisi?n Andina. Morales elogi? a la Argentina, porque, a diferencia de la UE, "el Estado es el que regulariza la situaci?n de los inmigrantes por medio del programa denominado `Patria grande`, por el que muchos compatriotas pudieron regularizar su situaci?n, con lo que se cumpli?, finalmente, el sue?o de la familia grande". Finalmente, tambi?n apoy? la idea de crear un Consejo de Seguridad de Am?rica Latina, para dejar atr?s la ?poca en que las "Fuerzas Armadas iban a capacitarse a Estados Unidos, en la denominada Escuelas de las Am?rica, donde les ense?aban a combatir contra los enemigos internos de cada pa?s que, en el caso de Bolivia, son los movimientos sociales, especialmente los ind?genas".- XXX SAN MIGUEL DE TUCUM?N, 2(PSI).- CH?VEZ PROPUSO ESTRATEGIA PETROALIMENTARIA. El presidente de Venezuela, Hugo Ch?vez, propuso ayer la implementaci?n de una estrategia petroalimentaria, de manera de convertir el petr?leo en alimentos. "Que nos sirva de una especie de escudo", afirm? el mandatario venezolano, aludiendo a que "ya es hora de sembrar el petr?leo, como lo dec?a Arturo Uslar Pietri, ya que el precio del crudo se ha estabilizado en 140 d?lares y el nuestro, que es un poco m?s barato, en 124 d?lares, en promedio". Detall? que Venezuela exporta casi tres millones de barriles diarios de petr?leo, "de los cuales 333.500 barriles diarios est?n comprometidos y no se pueden tocar". Est?n comprometidos a diversos destinos como Cuba, el Caribe y la Argentina. Ch?vez sostuvo que "siempre y cuando este precio est? por encima de los 100 d?lares el barril, Venezuela est? dispuesta a colocar en un fondo, un d?lar, lo que da unos 920 millones de d?lares al a?o, cifra modesta para la magnitud de la tarea que tenemos, pero estamos dispuestos a hacer eso ahora mismo siempre y cuando un grupo de pa?ses nos unamos en un plan para producir alimentos en emergencia". "Mientras seguimos avanzando en el nuevo Mercosur, del cual Venezuela ya se siente miembro pleno, proponemos un fondo y un plan para ayudar a enfrentar la crisis alimentaria y energ?tica, pero en este caso la alimentaria", sostuvo. Por otra parte Ch?vez afirm? que "Venezuela ya se siente de hecho y de derecho, parte del Mercosur. Venezuela ya es Mercosur", y recalc? que el bloque "no es una opci?n, es el camino". "Estamos -dijo Ch?vez- en el camino de la uni?n de Sudam?rica, sobre todo ahora con un Mercosur politizado porque es una poderosa herramienta, m?s a?n cuando hemos logrado colocar de nuevo los caballos delante de la carreta". Por otro lado, envi? un mensaje a Estados Unidos, naci?n a la que solicit? poner fin a la "injerencia grosera y violenta" en Bolivia. "A los bolivianos los atacan por dentro, quieren partir ese pa?s en pedazos para tratar de disolver el Estado", acus?. Incluso, Ch?vez cuestion? la cobertura que da la cadena noticiosa estadounidense "CNN" a la situaci?n que atraviesa su par Evo Morales, por considerar que sobredimensiona el conflicto. El carism?tico presidente advirti? tambi?n sobre la cuarta flota estadounidense que recorrer? los r?os de Am?rica Latina, seg?n dijo. "No tengo dudas que se trata de una amenaza. Quieren realizar un vasto control por el Orinoco, por el Amazonas y por el Paran?. Debemos estar preparados para ver qu? quieren hacer aqu?". Finalmente, el venezolano cit? al ex presidente Juan Domingo Per?n, de cuya muerte se cumpl?an ayer 34 a?os, al afirmar: "el siglo XXI nos conseguir? unidos o dominados".- XXX From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Wed Jul 2 21:53:18 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 23:53:18 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Obama Voters Protest His Switch on Telecom Immunity In-Reply-To: <486B9652.2050404@panix.com> References: <486B9652.2050404@panix.com> Message-ID: <908b689f0807022053i704bf5d2o17b50c2b0260f541@mail.gmail.com> Actually, one positive sign that is happening is that some of the disillusioned ("upset") former Obama supporters seem to be building their own grass-roots efforts (see below). This is quite an encouraging development and possibly could be the basis of a lasting, broader movement. The left needs to make efforts to engage with this rapidly-becoming-disillusioned group. NY Times, July 2, 2008 Obama Voters Protest His Switch on Telecom Immunity By JAMES RISEN WASHINGTON ? Senator Barack Obama's decision to support legislation granting legal immunity to telecommunications companies that cooperated with the Bush administration's program of wiretapping without warrants has led to an intense backlash among some of his most ardent supporters. Thousands of them are now using the same grass-roots organizing tools previously mastered by the Obama campaign to organize a protest against his decision. In recent days, more than 7,000 Obama supporters have organized on a social networking site on Mr. Obama's own campaign Web site. They are calling on Mr. Obama to reverse his decision to endorse legislation supported by President Bush to expand the government's domestic spying powers while also providing legal protection to the telecommunication companies that worked with the National Security Agency's domestic wiretapping program after the Sept. 11 attacks. From fred.fuentes at gmail.com Wed Jul 2 23:50:14 2008 From: fred.fuentes at gmail.com (Fred Fuentes) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 15:50:14 +1000 Subject: [Marxism] =?windows-1252?q?The_Revolution_on_Hold_=96_Departmenta?= =?windows-1252?q?l_Autonomy_and_the_Crisis_of_the_Left_in_Bolivia?= Message-ID: The Revolution on Hold ? Departmental Autonomy and the Crisis of the Left in Bolivia Andrew Lyubarsky, July, 01 2008 When Evo Morales was elected the first indigenous president of Bolivia in 2005, he swept to power with a huge and unprecedented popular mandate, crushing his nearest opponent by a 25-point margin. The country's traditional political classes were discredited and divided after the failures of twenty years of neoliberalism to produce much except misery for the majority of Bolivians. The Movimiento Nacionalista Revolucionario (MNR), a formerly revolutionary party responsible for the nationalization of Bolvia's mines and a 1950s era land reform that destroyed the hacienda system in the Andean sections of Bolivia but later became the main technocratic engineers of neoliberal reform, had been bathed in blood and polled less than ten percent. Just two years earlier, the party had produced almost 90 deaths in repression of demonstrations under the presidency of Gonzalo S?nchez de Lozada, who subsequently had to flee to exile in the United States. The main right-wing opposition party, Poder Democratico y Social (PODEMOS) consisted of the remnants of the political movement of general Hugo Banzer, a 1970s era dictator whose brief democratic return to power was marked by repression of coca growers and social movements fighting against water privatization. In addition to pursuing unpopular policies, they had to cope with the legacy of military rule that had usurped the popular will of Bolivian democracy. The ideological hegemony of neoliberalism had been broken, although its actual structures and regulating structures remained operational. No longer was there a broad consensus in Bolivian society that the "tough medicine" of privatization, trade liberalization, flexibilization of the labor market, and gutting of the social welfare state was the necessary price to pay in the changing global economy. Morales' Movimiento a Socialismo (MAS) strode boldly into this vacuum, promising a new kind of politics that would recuperate the resources that were systematically sold to foreign investors in the last twenty years and place the focus on the indigenous and economically disadvantaged majority of the country. The movement, with strong roots in the popular movements that had flourished in the resistance to the preceding right-wing governments, would seek to revalorize Bolivian culture in the context of a political project opposed to what Morales called a "savage capitalism" imposed by the United States. As part of his new popular politics, Evo cut his own salary by 57% and demanded a similar austerity from MAS politicians. . In January 2006, he undertook an expansive world tour, meeting with leaders of major European, Asian, and African powers and working to drum up alternative investment sources to lessen the country's historical dependency on the United States. He began to flex his political muscle, declaring on May Day that all foreign national gas companies would have to renegotiate their contracts, granting vastly increased proceeds and control to the Bolivian state. In August of that year, he convoked the Constituent Assembly, charged with the lofty task of rewriting the Constitution. While the opposition fought his every step, the MAS government had achieved clear popular support for their policies. What seemed impossible only a couple years before seemed to be coming into reality - Bolivia was on the brink of a radical social change that would began to address the historic inequalities of the country's social structure. Two years later, Evo Morales cannot travel to five of the country's nine departments for fear for his personal security. The constitutional project that was the centerpiece of his administration has fallen into question, with the right-wing line that it does not represent a genuine social contract achieving wide credence among middle-class sectors that had previously been receptive to the Morales message. "Evo murderer" and "Evo dictator" graffiti dot the streets of middle-class neighborhoods throughout the country, even outside the main center of opposition to his government in Santa Cruz. Although the faithful allegiance of popular sectors allow for the stability of the government itself and make an electoral defeat extremely unlikely, the mandate that MAS had to transform Bolivian society has effectively evaporated. Popular discourse is no longer about social change and alternative economic models - it is about an elite-driven departmental autonomy movement that has successfully cast the government as authoritarian, arbitrary and centralist in order to stop its proposals for social change that would challenge their political power and economic status. There is no doubt that hope remains that the Morales government will be able to prevail in the current crisis, regain the popular support it once had, and continue with the historical mission it was elected to fulfill. However, despite the declarations of officials and MAS loyalists, the process is unmistakably stalled and losing momentum to a right-wing regionalist populist resurgence. The manner in which this happened offers a lot of lessons for leftist social movements globally - moving from protesta to propuesta, from an oppositional stance towards a proactive governing body, can be tremendously problematic.....read the rest at http://boliviarising.blogspot.com/2008/07/revolution-on-hold-departmental.html From glparramatta at greenleft.org.au Wed Jul 2 18:01:57 2008 From: glparramatta at greenleft.org.au (glparramatta) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:01:57 +1000 Subject: [Marxism] Michael Lebowitz: The spectre of socialism for the 21st century | Links Message-ID: <486C16F5.1010203@greenleft.org.au> A spectre is haunting capitalism. It is the spectre of socialism for the 21st century. Increasingly, the characteristics of this spectre are becoming clear, and we are able to see enough to understand what it is not. The only thing that is not clear at this point is whether the spectre is real ? i.e., whether it is actually an earthly presence. Consider what this spectre is not. It is not the belief that by struggling within capitalism for reforms that it is possible to change the nature of capitalism -- i.e., that a better capitalism, a third way, can suspend the logic of capital (except momentarily). Nor is it a focus upon electing friendly governments to preside over exploitation, oppression and exclusion -- i.e., to support barbarism with a human face. Indeed, this spectre does not accept the premise that you can challenge the logic of capital without understanding it. Very simply, the spectre of socialism for the 21st century is not yesterday?s liberal package -- social democracy. Full atrticle at http://links.org.au/node/503 Subscribe free to /Links - International Journal of Socialist Renewal/ - at http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373 From killakai at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 01:58:06 2008 From: killakai at gmail.com (Kai) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 03:58:06 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] =?windows-1252?q?The_Revolution_on_Hold_=96_Departmenta?= =?windows-1252?q?l_Autonomy_and_the_Crisis_of_the_Left_in_Bolivia?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4be0c4210807030058h1ac63a91m253f11ce3e6c1bd9@mail.gmail.com> The Evo Morales situation highlights the classic reform vs. revolution 'dilemna' that liberals are trapped in. There is a limit to how much you can reform capitalist society, and I think Evo is getting very close to that limit. All of his reforms can be undone by the next president. From ppz at optusnet.com.au Thu Jul 3 02:39:33 2008 From: ppz at optusnet.com.au (PPZ) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:39:33 +1000 Subject: [Marxism] Socialist Alliance calls for defiance of anti-democratic pope visit laws Message-ID: <1215074373.5417.48.camel@ppz-desktop> ?The Iemma government has lost it?, Dick Nichols, the Socialist Alliance National Coordinator said. ?Faced with a peaceful July 19 protest against Pope Benedict?s mediaeval positions on issues like condom use, the ministerial clique in Macquarie Street has introduced laws that would be laughable if they weren?t such a violation of civil liberties." More: http://www.socialist-alliance.org/page.php?page=769 From lueko.willms at t-online.de Thu Jul 3 03:35:37 2008 From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?L=FCko_Willms?=) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 11:35:37 +0200 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> <2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com> <20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> Message-ID: <537005349.20080703113537@t-online.de> Guten Tag Louis Proyect, am Donnerstag, 3. Juli 2008 um 00:51 schrieben Sie: > The real conflict that interests us is between ZANU-PF and the > working class. The real conflict here is between the people of Zimbabwe -- the whole nation, all classes -- and Imperialism which tries to put the African nations again under its heel. > We take the side of the working class and the > political parties and grass roots organizations that fight on their > behalf. This, especially that with the "grass roots organisations that fight on their behalf" is the wide open path which people like Joschka Fischer and Bernard Kouchner have walked to become the foreign ministers of their respective imperialist bourgeoisies, promoting the recolonisation of the former colonies and fighting wars for "humanitarian imperialism". Especially the war(s) against Jugoslavia had been fought "on behalf" of the "poor oppressed people" of Bosnia or Kosovo. The wide open path of "internationalist solidarity" with those seen as being oppressed within the nations oppressed and exploited by colonialism and neo-colonialism turned out to be the slippery slope into the bed of serving the main oppressor. It was only logical, that Bernard Kouchner of "Doctors without borders" fame, who had been the vice-roy of the imperialist coalition in Kosovo, then sent "aid" to Myanmar with a war ship full of fighting troops, as if humanity hadn't known the famous Danaen present, the Trojan Horse. Morgan Tsvangirai has vacillated between taking part in the election, and opposing them, calling for imperialism to have a decisive say over Zimbabwe. In the end, he made himself the stooge of imperialist intervention, rejecting even the call of the African Union of a government of national unity. And imperialist propaganda has continued on the line which the former US-war minister Rumsfeld proclaimed for his opposition to the shift to the left in Latin America: elections are shit, because the outcome is not always in the interests of the imperialist masters. We should not forget that Tsvangirais party has won a majority of the seats in the Zimbabwean parliament, and that Mugabe has recognised that by announcing talks about a unity government based on that "cohabitation" as the French call that (who often hat in their Fifth Republic a president and a parliamentary majority of opposing camps). One should also note that the participation in the run-off presidential elections last Friday was very low, less than 50%. The main thing is to prevent wide scale infighting as happened in Kenia, and an imperialist intervention. Let's work together for that. Comradely yours, L?ko Willms mailto:lueko.willms at t-online.de From glparramatta at greenleft.org.au Thu Jul 3 05:06:37 2008 From: glparramatta at greenleft.org.au (glparramatta) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 21:06:37 +1000 Subject: [Marxism] Eric Toussaint -- Characteristics of the experiences underway in Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia | Links Message-ID: <486CB2BD.6090107@greenleft.org.au> By *Eric Toussaint* June 27, 2008 -- In Latin America, if we exclude Cuba, we can point to three general categories of governments. First, the governments of the right, the allies of Washington, that play an active role in the region and occupy a strategic position: these are the governments of ?lvaro Uribe in Colombia, Alan Garc?a in Peru and Felipe Calder?n in M?xico. Second, we find supposed ?left? governments that implement a neoliberal policy and support the national or regional bourgeoisies in their projects: Brazil, Uruguay, Chile, Nicaragua and the government of Cristina Fernandez Kirchner, from Argentina?s Peronists. They are governments that implement a neoliberal policy that favour grand capital, covered up with some social assistance measures. In effect, they make it a bit easier to swallow the neoliberal pill by applying social programs. For example, in Brazil poor families receive a bit of help from the government, which assures them popular support in the poorest region of the country. In the third category of countries we find Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador, which are confronted by the active opposition of important sectors of the local capitalist class and Washington. Cuba is, by itself, a fourth category. Full article http://links.org.au/node/504 Subscribe free to /Links - International Journal of Socialist Renewal/ - at http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373 From ppz at optusnet.com.au Thu Jul 3 05:51:54 2008 From: ppz at optusnet.com.au (PPZ) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 21:51:54 +1000 Subject: [Marxism] Malaysian opposition leader alleges high-level murder cover-up Message-ID: <1215085914.5417.78.camel@ppz-desktop> July 3, 2008: In the wake of new "sodomy" allegations against him, Malaysian Peoples Front (Pakatan Rakyat) leader Anwar Ibrahim today (July 3) claimed there was a conspiracy to cover up "shocking evidence" showing alleged ties between deputy prime minister Najib Razak and a Mongolian woman who was brutally murdered two years ago. More: http://www.asia-pacific-action.org/node/84 From nmgoro at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 06:10:31 2008 From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 09:10:31 -0300 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <20080702232133.3709010C1E@mailbackend.panix.com> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> <2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com> <20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> <2fa158550807021609r3cb0bfa3x3d8f5c25b13606e5@mail.gmail.com> <20080702232133.3709010C1E@mailbackend.panix.com> Message-ID: <2fa158550807030510k2230d2aft7e291a749b0d9fb7@mail.gmail.com> 2008/7/2, Louis Proyect : > Nestor wrote: > >The _line of argument_ may become tedious. Not _me_, because it is > >quite long since I last commented on Zimbabwe. But more tedious is... Louis Pr., visibly bored, replied > > Another defender of cops tearing down shacks underneath all the > high-flung rhetoric. > Not just that, dear Louis. Within the Isabel Per?n regime that I and my comrades supported against the 1976 coup there were also murderers and torturers. Moreover, some of our own comrades and allies had been killed by such elements. But in the name of those of our dead we supported the principle of elementary popular sovereignty which was the single way to fight for a new situation where their lives would be reivnidicated and their killers punished. So that, if you want to make your statement stronger you can write down "Another defender of murderers of his own comrades underneath, etc., etc." You would not be the first one to do it. Many of the "Leftist" enemies of the Isabel regime who paved the way for the Videla regime did it before. Both are wrong. Particularly when one realizes that what is at stake in Zimbabwe today, as L?ko exposes on his most recent mail, is the principle of legal continuity of the structures of government. Won't meddle into this debate again. As Fidel says, "History will absolve me". -- N?stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a From nmgoro at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 06:12:55 2008 From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 09:12:55 -0300 Subject: [Marxism] President Cristina's speech at Mercosur In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2fa158550807030512x27605b68n5713d5c3fec32105@mail.gmail.com> Will try to obtain it. Probably the official website of the Arg government holds the full version. El 3/07/08, Fred Fuentes escribi?: > On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 3:35 AM, Joaqu?n Bustelo wrote: > > > Unfortunately I lost access to the signal before hearing the others at > > the summit, including Lula, Evo, Chavez and Bachelet. .... > > Perhaps Nestor knows where to find the speech in print, so at least > > those that can read Spanish can find it. > > > > Two reports in spanish on speech by Evo and Chavez > > SAN MIGUEL DE TUCUM?N, 2(PSI).- EVO MORALES INST? A PENSAR PRIMERO EN > EL PUEBLO Y NO EN EL DINERO. El presidente boliviano hizo hincapi? en > la necesidad de resolver los problemas de alimentaci?n y critic? a los > productores y empresarios. Durante su discurso cuestion? la directiva > europea que expulsa a los inmigrantes ilegales y pidi? a sus pares a > rechazarla. Morales prioriz? "el inter?s de los pueblos" antes que > "el de los negocios especulativos". > El presidente de Bolivia, Evo Morales, asegur? durante la > cumbre de Jefes de Estado del Mercosur que se desarroll? en Tucum?n > que los productores agr?colas deben entender que por estar en juego la > alimentaci?n de las personas, "hay que priorizar el inter?s de los > pueblos antes que el de los negocios especulativos". > "Hay que entender que el tema de la alimentaci?n, como primer > derecho humano, nos obliga a los presidentes de gobierno y a los > productores, sean peque?os, medianos o grandes, a que atiendan esta > demanda que tienen nuestros pueblos. Pero, lamentablemente, hay grupos > que especulan con el tema", asever? Morales al hablar durante la > cumbre de Jefes de Estado del Mercosur. > Cuando le toc? hablar durante la reuni?n de mandatarios de > los pa?ses miembros y asociados del Mercosur, como el caso de Bolivia, > Morales inst? a combatir los comportamientos especulativos y a > propiciar, como lo sugiri? el presidente de Uruguay, Tabar? V?zquez, > la complementariedad puertas adentro de las naciones y entre ellas en > la regi?n. "Si no existe esto, seguramente, habr? problemas en los > distintos pa?ses porque el precio de los alimentos seguir? subiendo. > Los productores y empresarios deben pensar primero en el pueblo, no en > el dinero, para que, en el marco de la complementariedad y de manera > solidaria, podamos resolver los problemas de alimentaci?n", subray? > Morales. > Morales dedic? buena parte de su discurso a cuestionar la > denominada directiva de retorno, aprobada recientemente por el > Parlamento de la Uni?n Europea, por medio de la cual se penaliza la > inmigraci?n indocumentada en el Viejo Continente. "Am?rica Latina ha > recibido mucha gente europea y de todos los continentes por problemas > de guerra, de hambruna, de pobreza. Vinieron aqu?, con sus familias, y > acapararon miles de hect?reas, saquearon nuestros recursos naturales, > explotaron a nuestros hermanos y ahora nos aprueban esta directiva > retorno contra nuestras familias, inclusive familiares m?os", expres? > Morales. > El presidente boliviano record? que, en cambio, los > latinoamericanos que viven en Europa "no han acaparado miles de > hect?reas, no son due?os de minas, no est?n saqueando recursos ni > est?n explotando a los europeos", ya que algunos se dedican, por > ejemplo, a "cuidar ancianas y perciben 1.200 euros al mes, lo que > puede ser considerado mucho si antes s?lo tenia un sueldo de U$S 300 o > U$S 400". > Exhort? a sus pares en "rechazar esta directiva, pero > revisando nuestra historia. Antes nos dec?an que los indios no ten?an > alma, pero me pregunto: ?D?nde est? el alma de los europeos con esta > medida que significa expulsi?n?" y luego inst? a rechazarla mediante > pronunciamientos del Mercosur, de la Uni?n de Naciones de Sudam?rica > (Unasur) y de la Comisi?n Andina. > Morales elogi? a la Argentina, porque, a diferencia de la > UE, "el Estado es el que regulariza la situaci?n de los inmigrantes > por medio del programa denominado `Patria grande`, por el que muchos > compatriotas pudieron regularizar su situaci?n, con lo que se cumpli?, > finalmente, el sue?o de la familia grande". > Finalmente, tambi?n apoy? la idea de crear un Consejo de > Seguridad de Am?rica Latina, para dejar atr?s la ?poca en que las > "Fuerzas Armadas iban a capacitarse a Estados Unidos, en la denominada > Escuelas de las Am?rica, donde les ense?aban a combatir contra los > enemigos internos de cada pa?s que, en el caso de Bolivia, son los > movimientos sociales, especialmente los ind?genas".- XXX > > SAN MIGUEL DE TUCUM?N, 2(PSI).- CH?VEZ PROPUSO ESTRATEGIA > PETROALIMENTARIA. El presidente de Venezuela, Hugo Ch?vez, propuso > ayer la implementaci?n de una estrategia petroalimentaria, de manera > de convertir el petr?leo en alimentos. > "Que nos sirva de una especie de escudo", afirm? el > mandatario venezolano, aludiendo a que "ya es hora de sembrar el > petr?leo, como lo dec?a Arturo Uslar Pietri, ya que el precio del > crudo se ha estabilizado en 140 d?lares y el nuestro, que es un poco > m?s barato, en 124 d?lares, en promedio". > Detall? que Venezuela exporta casi tres millones de barriles > diarios de petr?leo, "de los cuales 333.500 barriles diarios est?n > comprometidos y no se pueden tocar". Est?n comprometidos a diversos > destinos como Cuba, el Caribe y la Argentina. > Ch?vez sostuvo que "siempre y cuando este precio est? por > encima de los 100 d?lares el barril, Venezuela est? dispuesta a > colocar en un fondo, un d?lar, lo que da unos 920 millones de d?lares > al a?o, cifra modesta para la magnitud de la tarea que tenemos, pero > estamos dispuestos a hacer eso ahora mismo siempre y cuando un grupo > de pa?ses nos unamos en un plan para producir alimentos en > emergencia". > "Mientras seguimos avanzando en el nuevo Mercosur, del cual > Venezuela ya se siente miembro pleno, proponemos un fondo y un plan > para ayudar a enfrentar la crisis alimentaria y energ?tica, pero en > este caso la alimentaria", sostuvo. > Por otra parte Ch?vez afirm? que "Venezuela ya se siente de > hecho y de derecho, parte del Mercosur. Venezuela ya es Mercosur", y > recalc? que el bloque "no es una opci?n, es el camino". > "Estamos -dijo Ch?vez- en el camino de la uni?n de > Sudam?rica, sobre todo ahora con un Mercosur politizado porque es una > poderosa herramienta, m?s a?n cuando hemos logrado colocar de nuevo > los caballos delante de la carreta". > Por otro lado, envi? un mensaje a Estados Unidos, naci?n a > la que solicit? poner fin a la "injerencia grosera y violenta" en > Bolivia. "A los bolivianos los atacan por dentro, quieren partir ese > pa?s en pedazos para tratar de disolver el Estado", acus?. Incluso, > Ch?vez cuestion? la cobertura que da la cadena noticiosa > estadounidense "CNN" a la situaci?n que atraviesa su par Evo Morales, > por considerar que sobredimensiona el conflicto. > El carism?tico presidente advirti? tambi?n sobre la cuarta > flota estadounidense que recorrer? los r?os de Am?rica Latina, seg?n > dijo. "No tengo dudas que se trata de una amenaza. Quieren realizar un > vasto control por el Orinoco, por el Amazonas y por el Paran?. Debemos > estar preparados para ver qu? quieren hacer aqu?". > Finalmente, el venezolano cit? al ex presidente Juan Domingo > Per?n, de cuya muerte se cumpl?an ayer 34 a?os, al afirmar: "el siglo > XXI nos conseguir? unidos o dominados".- XXX > > ________________________________________________ > YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > Send list submissions to: Marxism en lists.econ.utah.edu > Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/nmgoro%40gmail.com > -- N?stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a From nmgoro at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 06:14:06 2008 From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 09:14:06 -0300 Subject: [Marxism] Sorry private mail sipped into list Message-ID: <2fa158550807030514y44a12307ka6053ff988c97cb4@mail.gmail.com> Sorry just sent to list mail intended to Fred Fuentes. El 3/07/08, N?stor Gorojovsky escribi?: > Will try to obtain it. Probably the official website of the Arg > government holds the full version. > > > El 3/07/08, Fred Fuentes escribi?: > > > On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 3:35 AM, Joaqu?n Bustelo wrote: > > > > > Unfortunately I lost access to the signal before hearing the others at > > > the summit, including Lula, Evo, Chavez and Bachelet. .... > > > Perhaps Nestor knows where to find the speech in print, so at least > > > those that can read Spanish can find it. > > [...] -- N?stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a From pt_costello at yahoo.com Thu Jul 3 06:21:26 2008 From: pt_costello at yahoo.com (Pat Costello) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 05:21:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Marxism] Dying to Live Message-ID: <455006.9670.qm@web63112.mail.re1.yahoo.com> http://machetera.wordpress.com/2008/06/28/dying-to-live/ Dear Friends and Family, I am writing to share a little about what is happening in my life lately. As most of you know, I have been in Jerusalem since March 18 with Ramzi who at the time had barely turned 5 months. We left Habib and made the sacrifice to be apart for the coming 4 months for the sake of preserving my Jerusalem ID, to keep my residency status. I know this might sound strange, but as a Palestinian who has lived her whole life in Jerusalem, and despite the fact that my family has lived in Jerusalem and Palestine for centuries, according to the Israeli law, Palestinians living in Jerusalem are only residents but not necessarily permanent residents, and therefore are at risk all the time of losing their residency rights. For the past 3 years, I have been married to Habib, a Palestinian by blood but an American by citizenship, because Habib?s Jerusalem residency was revoked in 2004- although Habib was born in Jerusalem, and has lived there until his adult life. Anyways, now it was my turn to renew my entry visa to ?Israel? (yes, I needed a visa in my own country)- I met with a lawyer who asked for a substantial amount to help me renew my entry visa, which would preserve my residency until the next time I have to renew (a maximum of 3 years), but this time the Israelis refused to renew it and instead told me that since I made the decision to marry an ?American?, who can?t reside in Jerusalem, I have made a decision to seek residency in a foreign country and am therefore ?choosing? to abandon my residency rights in Jerusalem. (Palestinians are not allowed to have dual residency or citizenship, a law that is not applicable to Israelis who are able to hold dual or multiple citizenships.) To make a long story short, I lost my residency rights in my own country!!!! I can only go back to visit as a tourist, and have to acquire a tourist visa from the Israeli embassy!! The ironic thing is that all my family still live there!! But I can never join them, I don?t have a choice in the matter. We, the people of the land are being thrown out(!!!) Don?t be surprised, if you look into your dictionary for the synonym of Zionism that would, in one way and another, be what it is! On my way back from the lawyer?s office, I was stopped by Israeli soldiers who asked to see my papers - they spoke Russian - I thought to myself, these immigrants know nothing of this land they are serving and protecting - they don?t even know the language - they come from Russia, Europe, Africa, the US, and other places and choose to reside in my country - and they can!!!! Not only that but they can limit my movement in my country, and even kick me out of it! When I complained to my lawyer about this injustice he simply answered, ?Mona, this is occupation!!!? Not at all the legal answer I was looking for - there is no human law that can protect me, or preserve my rights. Needless to say, I have lost my right to return, to my country?..to the only country I ever belonged to, the only place I ever called home. As an adult who has been living under occupation for the past 33 years, I was upset but I can?t say that I was surprised by what happened to me. However, what surprised me was what is happening with my 7 month old, Ramzi. Ramzi was born in the US and therefore got an American passport. Although he is the son of two full blooded Palestinians who call Jerusalem and Palestine home, he was denied residency rights in Jerusalem and was given a tourist visa. I asked the lady at the airport when we first arrived if she could give Ramzi (then 5 months old) a 4 month Visa, rather than the traditional 3 month visa, I showed her my residency card (at the time I still was considered a resident), and showed her our return plane tickets. She said no, and said that I should apply for an extension for Ramzi at the ministry of interior. To avoid conflict and to make my life easier I asked the lawyer to apply for an extension for Ramzi?.. to my surprise Ramzi was denied. The Israeli government refused to grant a 7 month old baby an extension on his visa, not even with the help of our lawyer and all his connections!!! So, now I have to face the choice of leaving with Ramzi early and change our vacation plans, or stay with Ramzi here as planned until July 25th, and have my 7 month old be illegally overstaying his welcome in the land of his ancestors. The ironic thing is that this poor little baby can?t even say mama or baba, yet he is posing such a security threat to Israel that they denied him a one month extension on his visa!! So now, my little family of three are added to the millions of Palestinians who lost their right to reside in their country and have been kicked out of their homes. We now are residents of Las Vegas, but I will always refer to Palestine as my home. Since the 1948 diaspora of our people, the Palestinians in the world have been waiting for a just solution, that would give them the right to return to their homeland, and now 60 years later the list gets longer everyday with people just like the 3 of us who were driven out of our country. I will never give up the hope that one day I would have the choice to live in Palestine, and I will make sure that Ramzi also knows that he has a right to return! Mona From lnp3 at panix.com Thu Jul 3 06:50:01 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 08:50:01 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <537005349.20080703113537@t-online.de> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> <2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com> <20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> <537005349.20080703113537@t-online.de> Message-ID: <486CCAF9.9030000@panix.com> L?ko Willms wrote: > The real conflict here is between the people of Zimbabwe -- the > whole nation, all classes -- and Imperialism which tries to put the > African nations again under its heel. Such an approach would have led to blind support for the Spanish Popular Front government against the "splitters and wreckers" of the POUM and the even more truculent Trotskyist movement. Odd that Luko and Nestor, two comrades who had some connections with Leon Trotsky's ideas at some point in their lives, seen intent on excavating the corpse of the Stalintern at this point in history and applying rouge to its rotting face. From lnp3 at panix.com Thu Jul 3 07:06:51 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 09:06:51 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] More on Mugabe In-Reply-To: <000001c8dcbd$18857bf0$6401a8c0@office1pc> References: <000001c8dcbd$18857bf0$6401a8c0@office1pc> Message-ID: <486CCEEB.1030503@panix.com> > Fred Feldman comments: > > And because it furthers the propaganda that all the problems in Africa are > due to the incapacity of the Africans to rule themselves. Give the land back > to the white farmers so they can make the desert bloom! (By the way, Louis > was wrong to reduce what happened to in Russia a suppression of the Kulaks > which destroyed agriculture. What happened was the crushing of the entire > peasantry in the name of eliminating the Kulaks. The return of the land to > the white farmers would be a completely reactionary outcome in Zimbabwe, > even though the patronage-driven land reform is not the solution that is > needed.) This seems like a rather pedantic distinction. The point is that "revolutionary" leaders like Stalin or Mugabe have a responsibility to the people to make such "reforms" effective. If the reforms are ineffective, then history must judge them harshly. Both of the expropriations were characterized by bureaucratic excess driven by social contradictions unleashed by Stalinism in one case and bourgeois nationalist paternalism in the other. Comrades really need to study the question of land reform in more depth since not every such reform invites revolutionaries to pray at its altar. --- The White Revolution (Persian: ?????? ????, Enghelab-e-Sephid) was a far-reaching series of reforms launched in 1963 by the last Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. The Shah had intended it to be a non-violent regeneration of Iranian society through economic and social reforms, with the ultimate long-term aim of transforming Iran into a global economic and industrial power. The Shah introduced novel economic concepts such as profit-sharing for industrial workers and initiated massive government-financed heavy industry projects, as well as the nationalization of forests and pastureland. Most important, however, were the land reform programs which saw the traditional landed elites of Iran lose much of their influence and power. Nearly 90% of Iranian share-croppers became land owners as a result. Socially, the platform granted women more rights and poured money into education, especially in the rural areas. The Literacy Corps was also established, which allowed young men to fulfill their compulsory military service by working as village literacy teachers. The White Revolution consisted of 19 elements that were introduced over a period of 15 years, with the first 6 introduced in 1963 and put to a national referendum on January 26th, 1963. 1. Land Reforms Program and Abolishing "Feudalism": The government bought the land from the feudal land lords at a fair price and sold it to the peasants at 30% below the market value, with the loan being payable over 25 years at very low interest rates. This made it possible for 1.5 million peasant families, who had once been nothing more than slaves, to own the lands that they had been cultivating all their lives. Given that average size of a peasant family was 5, land reforms program brought freedom to 9 million people, or 40% of Iran's population. 2. Nationalization of Forests and Pasturelands: Introduced many measures, not only to protect the national resources and stop the destruction of forests and pasturelands, but also to further develop and cultivate them. More than 9 million trees were planted in 26 regions, creating 70,000 acres (280 km?) of "green belts" around cities and on the borders of the major highways. full: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Revolution > > Luko considers Tsvangirai an enemy. So do I. Of course, I think and I assume > that Luko thinks that Mugabe is an enemy to. Right now, all that exists in > Zimbabwe is a choice between enemies of the people. Sort of like Obama and McCain? > That is why I think the best stop-gap solution might actually be a MDC-ZANU > coalition to head off what I fear will be a Congo-type civil war, complete > with interventions from Botswana, Congo, and other neighboring countries out > to grab spoils. There are absolutely no signs of a civil war. The ineffable Stephen Gowans has written that the MDC deserved to be crushed because Tsvangirai made a speech 10 years or so ago calling for Mugabe to be removed by force. A day later he apologized for his remarks. > Of course, this is something that the left ZANU-phobes (and there is a lot > to be phobic about, but phobia is never a good guide) think is the PURE > imperialist solution. (Just like they imagine that imperialism is really 100 > percent in support of China in Tibet and so forth, and basically in support > of Mugabe, and so on. No, you have it the other way around. Imperialism does not support Mugabe at all. We understand that it would prefer his removal by the MDC. The political position we support is that of the radical movement in Zimbabwe, whose main voice right now is the ISO. It does not matter to me how small it is. I have no problem choosing between such formations and their bourgeois rivals in either the MDC or ZANU-PF, just as I have no trouble rejecting Obama and McCain in favor of Nader or McKinney. > Note that Lueko did not say a word in favor of Mugabe. Not one. But that's the whole point. There is implicit support for Mugabe, not explicit support. Perhaps if Mugabe were just a teeny bit less disgusting, then the comrades would be emboldened to join Stephen Gowans's shrine around him. From lnp3 at panix.com Thu Jul 3 07:16:33 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 09:16:33 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Debating Zimbabwe Message-ID: <486CD131.4090705@panix.com> JUAN GONZALES: Gerald Horne, I?d like to ask you. Obviously Mugabe has been an icon and a hero, a giant in terms of the liberation movements in Africa for decades. But your sense now, do you believe that he still represents any forces for progress in Africa or has he gradually transformed himself into a dictator? GERALD HORNE: Well, I think that president Mugabe is a force to be reckoned with in Zimbabwe. And I agree with those leaders in the region who feel that he and his party must be contented with if there is to be a settlement of this controversy in Zimbabwe. I should also say that with regard to professor Campbell, I?m here not to carry a brief on OPS, but they have argued they did not move on land reform before 1994, i.e. the date of the South African elections, so as not to unsettle the situation in neighboring South Africa, which of course has outstanding land claims of its own. We all know there are more white farmers killed in South Africa than have been killed in Zimbabwe. And likewise, there are outstanding land claims in neighboring Namibia as well. I think it?s understandable why there has been a focus on on Zanu PF, but standing in the wings of the opposition of the MDC and sadly, unfortunately, there has not been considerable focus on them such as their leaders, Roy Bennet, a top leader, a former major land owner in Zimbabwe who of course throttled an African leader on the floor of the Zimbabweans parliament?I would of thought that kind of behavior would have ended in independence in 1980. You have other leading Rhodesians in the leadership of MDC. One thing that worries many of us is that if MDC does come to power, there will be a split and quite frankly, they will pave the way for the rise of certain retrograde elements like Roy Bennet come back into power. In some ways, MDC, a trade union-led movement, is akin to solidarity in Poland which of course paved the way for the present right wing in Poland to come to power in Warsaw. So we have to be careful when we try to butt in to the internal affairs of a sovereign state. I think our energies would be best served by putting pressure on this government here in Washington and its comical sidekick in London. AMY GOODMAN: Professor Horace Campbell? HORACE CAMPBELL: The intellectual subservience of the MDC and the leadership ofthe MDC is clear to most workers in Southern Africa. But this point in the history of Zimbabwe, the MDC doesn?t have political power. The social forces that are organized in Zimbabwe against the government have thrown their weight behind the MDC at the present moment. The Women of Zimbabwe rise, these are independent organizations, Padari, the workers, agricultural and plantation workers. I do not think?we do not have the right to say to the Zimbabwean workers that your under oppression and therefore, we should decide for you because of the history of Mugabe?s relationship to the liberation movement, 28 years ago, then we should be saying to you what your choices should be. In Southern Africa, the Congress of South African Trade Union movement has called for a blockade of the Zimbabwean government and is the Zimbabwe leadership and the Congress of South African Trade Union which is the largest trade union movement in Southern Africa is a movement which is calling for the isolation of Mugabe government. What we agree with Gerald is on as the failing?the land question in Southern Africa is an urgent question in the media, in south Africa, and in Zimbabwe. But having said that, we must learn lessons from Zimbabwe. To say that when land his been reclaimed it should not be reclaimed for rich, black farmers to replace white farmers. Land when it is being reclaimed in South Africa or in Nambia should be reclaimed in a condition where there is health and safety conditions for the working people?s. So yes, we should take lessons from Zimbabwe and we should introduce new politics in Southern Africa that is coming out of the politics of reconciliation. That no concept of victory should be victory which gives power to one group over another there should be ways in which the transition towards a new political dispersion?in south Africa it is one that strengthens the producing classes, the small workers, farmers, students. And these are the forces that have been repressed, brutalized, the trade union leaders that are in jail right now in Zimbabwe should be released. Opposition leaders should be released. Women should be released. Human rights workers should be released. So that yes, we can criticize the leadership of the MDC and I have done so in my writing, in my book, ?Reclaiming Zimbabwe? but the government of Zimbabwe must now arise in a situation where we provide leadership in a condition where 80% of the people are unemployed, where women have been persecuted as prostitutes when a walk on the streets. Where homosexuals have been called pigs and dogs and where men go around trying to have sexual relations with young virgins saying this would prevent HIV/AIDS. We need a new political leadership to go against this kind of backwardness that came out of the kind of patriotic leadership that we had for the past 28 years. full: http://www.democracynow.org/2008/6/26/zimbabwe_and_the_question_of_imperialism From jeffare2 at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 07:22:11 2008 From: jeffare2 at gmail.com (Jeff Richards) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 22:52:11 +0930 Subject: [Marxism] International Financial Catastrophe: Is this the 'BIG ONE'? Message-ID: <001b01c8dd0f$cffa3b70$6feeb250$@com> There are many times when I think the Latin American preoccupations of radical left groups like the DSP and the RSP (thankfully, less so in the case of the DSP/SA) make you neglect what could be a truly historical moment in the history of late capitalism (it certainly beats the daily chronicles of the retreating horizons of the great struggles led by Chavez and Morales and Cuba's slow drift to Beijing style 'socialism with Chinese characteristics'). While I have nothing but respect for those in groups like the DSP -people who put vast amounts time and effort to building a radical alternative- I have to say that the amount of effort put into international economic reporting is paltry compared to Latin American politics. Where are the new generation of radical political economists? They are sadly missed. Looking through all the messages over the last few days there was not one soul who dropped a reference to the annual report of the Bank of International Settlements, one of the most important financial institutions in the world. The BIS is warning that we might not just be facing a recession; we could be hurtling towards a depression!(In case anyone forgets, the last time we had a depression we had some rather earth shattering events e.g. world war 2). In my view, there is a pressing need to refocus on this global historical event. Below is a report from one of Australia's best financial journalists, Stephen Long from the ABC. Here is the website for the Bank of International Settlements: http://www.bis.org/ Here is the link to the BIS annual report: http://www.bis.org/publ/arpdf/ar2008e.htm 'Financial catastrophe looms': analyst By economics correspondent Stephen Long Posted Tue Jul 1, 2008 8:05am AEST Updated Tue Jul 1, 2008 2:13pm AEST The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) says global markets may still be set for severe economic downturn. Last year, when inflation was low and the world economy was still strong and stable, BIS gave a a prescient warning about the growing risks that could bring it all undone. In its latest annual report, released last night in Basel Switzerland, BIS gives a grim and candid assessment. "The facts suggest that the magnitude of problems to be faced could be much greater than many now perceive... while difficult to predict, their interaction does appear to point to a deeper and more protracted global downturn than the consensus view seems to expect," the report says in part. Despite this, it cautions against using rate cuts to bail out the world economy, arguing that loose monetary policy helped create the mess in the first place. Satyajit Das is a risk analyst who tipped the global credit crisis. "It's an extraordinary statement of just how close the world economy is to a total financial meltdown," he said. Associate Professor Dick Bryan, an economist from the University of Sydney, uses the same adjective. "It's a quite extraordinary message," he said. "It's a big statement that the world economy could potentially be facing one of the biggest crises for the last 150 years." Most central banks and the International Monetary Fund are tipping only a mild hit to world economic growth. The Bank for International Settlements, whose chief economist Harry White is retiring, says they are wrong. "The Bank for International Settlements goes to great lengths to juxtapose their own view to what they call the consensus and that consensus is saying that inflation will be a blip that it'll only be around for a year and we'll get recovery and they're saying no," Associate Professor Bryan said. "The central banks have used loose monetary policy and low interest rates to bail themselves out of every crisis since 1987 and what they are saying is at some point in time the piper must be paid," Satyajit Das said. "The fears about higher inflation and what central banks can and can't do is really quite frank. I think it would be best to sum up this report by saying the super-hero central banker is dead." The Bank for International Settlements notes parallels between the current financial turmoil and the great economic woes of modern history. "The 1930s, the 1870s, they're referring to parallels with the Asian financial crisis and they're giving a big serve to the way in which the world financial system has been run," Associate Professor Bryan said. "The statements in here are talking about comparisons to the 1920s depression and is actually pointing fingers at central banks and their policies and their misunderstanding of how the financial system works and their love of the new-fangled things that have brought the world to the precipice of what could be one of the most major financial catastrophes in the history of economics," Satyajit Das said. He adds that he has never seen a report as dire as this from a global economic agency. "It's telling central banks that they got it wrong, that they shouldn't have let us get into this precarious position, that they should have been constraining credit earlier and that they've put us in a position now where there just aren't clear policy options," Associate Professor Bryan said. Jeff Richards South Australia http://jeffrichards.blogspot.com/ From lnp3 at panix.com Thu Jul 3 07:27:47 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 09:27:47 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Fissures in ruling circles over Iran Message-ID: <486CD3D3.4040207@panix.com> http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-usiran3-2008jul03,0,2674505.story Risk to U.S. troops seen if Israel strikes Iran Joint Chiefs Chairman Michael Mullen says a new conflict could entangle and strain soldiers already in the region. By Peter Spiegel Los Angeles Times Staff Writer July 3, 2008 WASHINGTON ? The U.S. military's top officer warned Wednesday that an Israeli airstrike against Iran would make the Middle East more unstable and could add to the stress on overworked American forces in the region. The comments by Navy Adm. Michael G. Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, came days after he visited Israel and amid growing international concern that Jerusalem is actively considering such an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. Mullen spoke at a Pentagon news briefing shortly after President Bush addressed the subject. Bush was asked at a Rose Garden news conference whether he would strongly discourage Israel from an attack, but he sidestepped the question, saying only that he believed the best way to deal with the Iranian nuclear program was through multilateral negotiations. "I have made it very clear to all parties that the first option ought to be to solve this problem diplomatically," Bush said. The comments appeared to reflect a strain within the administration as it grapples for a way to address Iran's nuclear program, which Tehran says is peaceful but Washington and its allies suspect is intended for developing atomic weapons. Bush long has pointedly left open the option of military action by the U.S. or Israel, and administration officials have said they will not interfere with Israel's right to respond to what it sees as a looming threat. But American military officials are concerned that U.S. forces, stationed nearby in Iraq and Afghanistan, could become entangled in any conflict that would result. The Bush administration is eager to keep the prospects of an Israeli strike on the table to maintain pressure on Iran to freeze its uranium enrichment program, said Jon B. Alterman, head of the Middle East program at the nonpartisan Center for Strategic and International Studies. "There's a belief in the White House that we shouldn't give comfort to the Iranians," Alterman said. "We're not actively planning an attack, as far as I know, but we're not going to let the Iranians sleep well knowing there's no possibility of an attack." Fears of an Israeli attack have been fueled in recent weeks by large-scale war games by Israel's air force over the Mediterranean and a warning by a senior official of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's government that an attack could become unavoidable. Although Bush did not directly answer the question about possible Israeli action, Mullen was more direct. "Opening up a third front right now would be extremely stressful for us," he said, referring to the prospect of a direct clash with Iran while fighting continues in Iraq and Afghanistan. "This is a very unstable part of the world, and I don't need it to be more unstable." In his trip to Israel, Mullen met with Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, chief of the Israeli defense staff. Mullen declined to say whether an airstrike was broached in his meetings but acknowledged that the Iranian threat was discussed and said he agreed that Tehran was a destabilizing force in the region. Mullen has expressed his concerns for several months about the risks posed to U.S. troops in Iraq by a strike on Iran, Defense Department officials said, but those warnings have been made mostly in private. Mullen declined to say whether he had delivered his assessment to the White House in recent days. American military analysts familiar with Israel's thinking said the government there remained uncertain whether an attack on Iran made strategic sense and whether such a strike would prove a decisive blow against Tehran's nuclear program. The subject is controversial in Israel, and many Israelis strongly oppose a strike. Despite Mullen's remarks, rhetoric surrounding a possible airstrike continued to escalate. The head of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard had warned last week that his government would impose controls on shipping through the Strait of Hormuz if the country was attacked. But U.S. Navy Vice Adm. Kevin J. Cosgriff said at a conference of regional naval leaders Wednesday in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, that the U.S. would not allow Iran to block the key waterway. "We will not allow them to close the Strait of Hormuz. I can't say it any more clearly than that," Cosgriff said, according to Reuters. Despite Iran's official public positions, the country's leadership fears both a possible military attack and heightened sanctions and isolation, many analysts say. In recent days, Iran has rolled out a diplomatic initiative meant to ease U.S. pressure by currying favor with other world powers. Iran is considering a package of economic and political incentives being offered by Western diplomats to pave the way for wide-ranging talks if it halts its uranium enrichment program. Diplomats have also suggested a less formal "freeze-for-freeze" package, a six-week period of preliminary talks during which Iran would stop adding new uranium-enrichment capability while the West stops pushing for sanctions. Many Iranian political heavyweights have sought to change the popular Western view that the country is run by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, whose remarks calling for the destruction of Israel have been cited as evidence of Iran's ultimate intentions. In an unusual article published Wednesday in the French daily Liberation, a powerful Iranian foreign policy official emphasized the role of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, not Ahmadinejad, as the ultimate authority in Iran. "In key strategic issues, it's the supreme leader that the Constitution, approved by universal suffrage, [says] has the final decision," wrote Ali Akbar Velayati, a highly placed advisor to Khamenei and a former foreign minister who appears on Iran's political scene during peak crisis moments. He urged readers to look at Khamenei's track record to "predict the future course" of Iran's diplomacy. "A compromise could be made using concerns common to Iran and other states," Velayati said. Backers of the White House's course contend that the increasingly divergent voices coming out of Tehran are thanks, in part, to continued U.S. pressure and the prospect of an Israeli attack. But some key international players have argued against military action. Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the United Nations' nuclear watchdog agency, said over the weekend that an Israeli attack on Iran would turn the Middle East into "a ball of fire." peter.spiegel at latimes.com Times staff writer Borzou Daragahi in Beirut contributed to this report. From lnp3 at panix.com Thu Jul 3 07:38:12 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 09:38:12 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] An eleven second withdrawal Message-ID: <486CD644.1090907@panix.com> Hitchens Gets Waterboarded, Withdraws from Iraq in 11 Seconds By John Dolan, AlterNet Posted on July 2, 2008, Printed on July 3, 2008 http://www.alternet.org/story/90292/ Stop the presses! Christopher Hitchens just noticed that waterboarding is torture! Hitchens announced the news like he'd brought it down from Mount Sinai, in a Vanity Fair article. "Believe me," he told a waiting nation, "it's torture." Well, yeah. It usually is, when it happens to you. When it happens to somebody else, it's "extreme interrogation." I thought everybody over the age of 5 knew that, but as usual, I misoverestimated the media. Hitchens' tame little torture session is the biggest S&M video on the web since "9? Weeks." Hitchens' video is totally fake -- there's even soft-rock background music playing on the video, better music than you usually get at the dentist's office, and his "interrogators" treat him more like a client getting a mud pack at a spa than a real suspect in Iraq. That makes it even more disgusting that Hitch caved in after only 11 seconds of having water poured over a towel on his face. Eleven seconds! Think about the timeline here: For five long years he supported this stuff when it was happening to other people. Once it happened to him, he needed exactly 11 seconds to see the light. Of course if Hitchens had been a real Iraqi suspect, they'd never have had to waterboard him at all. They do that to tough suspects, not wimps like him. In a real torture cell, everything would be a lot tougher from the start. For example, Chris wouldn't be in the nice dress shirt and slacks he's wearing on the video. He'd be naked -- a gross image, what a lifetime of booze and lying does to the body, but we have to be hard-nosed here -- because keeping the prisoner naked is basic interrogation strategy, especially with a culture as horrified of gettin' nekkid as Arabs are. You'll recall that in those Abu Ghraib pictures, the prisoners were naked. So that's fake already, and the video gets faker as it goes. The guys "interrogating" him are fat, middle-aged, mild-mannered dudes. They don't even yell at him. A real suspect in Iraq would be snatched off the street, smacked around until he passes out, stripped and dumped into a cell with a hood over his head. He wouldn't be able to sleep off his misery, either, because sleep deprivation is one of the oldest, most effective tortures. The interrogators would maintain this schedule for hours, days, weeks, depending on how well and how soon the victim breaks down. When they think he's ready -- like, they notice with satisfaction that he screams like a steam whistle every time he hears footsteps in the corridor -- they drag him out of his cell and strap him onto that waterboarding table. Well, Chris is a busy man and didn't have time for all that background research, so what you see in this video is a guy who hasn't been so much as slapped or yelled at. Who probably just finished a 10-martini lunch at some upscale restaurant. That's ridiculous enough, but the interrogators make it even more ridiculous with their little introduction to the torture session. One guy says, "All right, listen up, I'm going to give you some instructions ..." Then he tells the fat man on the table, "We're going to place metal objects in each of your hands," and if he feels "unbearable stress" at any time, all he has to do is drop the objects and they'll stop. I've had dentists who did root canals on me without being that nice; they stuck to "this is going to hurt." More to the point here, putting the victim in "unbearable stress" is, uh, the whole point of torture, or "extreme interrogation," or whatever you want to call it. The last thing you'd ever do is give the victim a sense of power, like he can stop the process by dropping a "metal object" on the floor. That kind of etiquette is what you get from those expensive dominatrixes English dudes like to get whipped by, or those nerf BDSM sites that talk about "consensual power exchanges." What reminded me most of those BDSM sites is the "code word" they tell Hitchens he can use to stop the waterboarding: "That word is red, R-E-D." They ask him if he understands and he says, "Yes, sir." That "sir" only added to the ridiculous porn feel here, like Hitchens was paying a hundred pounds an hour to have Baron Whipsong or Lady Cruella, whichever way he likes it, wear out their riding crop on his eager little bum. The real thing isn't nearly so nice. After you've been beaten on bruises (which hurt more each time) for a few days, they slam the cell door open, screaming abuse at you, kick you to your feet and take you down the corridor, slamming your head into the walls as often as they feel like it, and strap you down. And all the time they're screaming: "OK, you worthless (Arabic obscenity here) -- We're through with you! We don't even want you any more! Ever drown before, (obscenity)? Ever go swimming head-first, (obscenity)?" If you remember "The Big Lebowski," you can get a better idea of what waterboarding is like by remembering the scene where the Dude walks into his bungalow, where Jackie Treehorn's yuppie thugs are waiting for him. The blond one grabs the Dude's hair and runs him headfirst into the toilet, screaming, "Where's the money, Lebowski? Where's the money, shithead?" See, the point is to show overwhelming, terrifying power over the suspect, not give him little safety words. But all that niceness doesn't matter once the torturer's helper takes a plastic milk container full of water and pours it, bit by bit, over a towel covering Hitch's face. The "metal object," whatever it is, drops after 11 seconds. And of course these fake interrogators are all over Hitch, making sure he's OK. That's also totally fake, but why bother listing any more fake features of this nonsense? The truth is that anybody who's been through as much dentistry as I have knows that nobody holds out under torture. It's not just the pain, it's the fear of the pain. I used to try to be a hero like the ones in my war books every time I went to have a root canal from the mean old Armenian who did our dental work. He scrimped on the Novocain, so I had plenty of scope to practice. And I learned the same thing any sane person knows by the time they grow up: Nobody can resist torture. Just like anybody knows what having water poured over a towel on your face is like: It's like drowning. Duh. Anybody who wanted to know that already knew it. So why does Hitchens make such a big show of just realizing it now, after five years of supporting it? To me, the answer's easy: He's withdrawing from Iraq, making a big Jesus-on-the-cross demonstration, like a public punishment, for supporting the war all this time. By getting himself tortured in this half-assed way, he gives himself a reason to see the light, desert from the Neocon forces before it's too late. Karl Rove won't be happy, though, because the last thing the GOP wants is for people to start realizing what we're actually doing in Iraq. Reminds me of the debate about abolishing flogging with the cat-o'-nine-tails in the British Navy. The first time the bill was introduced, everybody laughed at how ridiculous a notion that was. Then somebody thought of having a real cat-o'-nine-tails introduced to the House of Commons, a bloody old Exhibit A. Nobody said a thing; they just voted unanimously to forbid it. That's all it takes to change anybody's mind about torture, getting one little 11-second whiff of it, even if it's nowhere close to the real thing. The interesting thing is not that Hitchens changed his mind; it's the strategic thinking that made him decide to do it now. The timing of this little martyr is the key here, and what it tells you is that Hitchens is declaring martyrdom and getting out. He just unilaterally withdrew from Iraq, and in only 11 seconds. John Dolan is an editor of the Moscow-based English-language alternative paper The eXile. He is the author of, most recently, Pleasant Hell (Capricorn, 2005). From rfidler_8 at sympatico.ca Thu Jul 3 07:39:37 2008 From: rfidler_8 at sympatico.ca (Richard Fidler) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 09:39:37 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] President Cristina's speech at Mercosur In-Reply-To: <2fa158550807030512x27605b68n5713d5c3fec32105@mail.gmail.com> References: <2fa158550807030512x27605b68n5713d5c3fec32105@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Text in Spanish: http://www.casarosada.gov.ar/index.php?option=com_content&task=vie w&id=3538 or http://tinyurl.com/42pqkl -----Original Message----- From: marxism-bounces+rfidler_8=sympatico.ca at lists.econ.utah.edu [mailto:marxism-bounces+rfidler_8=sympatico.ca at lists.econ.utah.edu ] On Behalf Of N?stor Gorojovsky Sent: July 3, 2008 8:13 AM To: rfidler_8 at sympatico.ca Subject: Re: [Marxism] President Cristina's speech at Mercosur Will try to obtain it. Probably the official website of the Arg government holds the full version. From nmgoro at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 07:47:36 2008 From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 10:47:36 -0300 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <486CCAF9.9030000@panix.com> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> <2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com> <20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> <537005349.20080703113537@t-online.de> <486CCAF9.9030000@panix.com> Message-ID: <2fa158550807030647g11b48d21h748d0ef7cd7d82d2@mail.gmail.com> 2008/7/3, Louis Proyect : > > Odd that Luko and Nestor, two comrades who had some connections with > Leon Trotsky's ideas at some point in their lives, seen intent on > excavating the corpse of the Stalintern at this point in history and > applying rouge to its rotting face. Well, this last paragraph would mean war had it been uttered by someone else!!! I believe I am STILL in close relation with Leon Trotsky's ideas, particularly with his ideas on what was to be done in a semicolony when confronting imperialism. The Spanish Revolution and Civil War has little if anything to do with this Zimbabwe issue, at least this is what I believe. I am puzzled why can't Louis Pr. see this obvious fact. Imperialism did not have the same influence in Spain, 1936, as it does in Zimbabwe, 2008. Spain was (and still is) a member of the imperialist bloc. Ask the Moroccan revolutionaries -if there is anyone alive after the long history of joint Spanish-French-USA colonialism there- what was it that the Spanish Republic did with them, and ask them too for the name of one of the greatest killers in Spanish colonial history there. Spain was NOT a semicolony. It was advisable not to establish any "national front" policy which would most probably be self-defeating, as it actually was when considered on a Long History level. But even under such condition, it should be kept in mind that although LDT's positions on the "win the war/make revolution" false opposition -which was, in a sense, the way in which the "national front" quandary took shape- were clearly that unless you revolutionized the war it would be almost impossible to win it, what was actually unacceptable for his followers and for himself was the murderous, self-defeating and (to put it bluntly) monstruous role Stalinism played behind Republican lines in the name of that debate. Much has been said from the Stalinist side in the sense that "Permanent Revolution" implied a full array of mistaken policies on the international level, resembling a permanent, bloody and mad massive series of attacks against the core fortifications of a Maginot line by weaponless, bare chested troops. But this was not true, of course. There were less differences, AT THAT LEVEL, than Stalinists (and later Trotskyists) would imply. In Zimbabwe we face such a situation. In Zimbabwe there is an ACTUAL possibility that a fully pro-imperialist, imperialist-backed, and imperialist-funded, etc., movement, grabs power. The most recent events there leave little place -if any- for doubt. Under such conditions, Trotsky's writings on Brazil apply quite better than those on Spain. Trotsky considered the Brazilian regime of Vargas a _fascist_ regime. I won't enter now in the debate on whether he was right or not. Suffice it to say that many formal traits of that regime, particularly under the Estado Novo, lent support to such an interpretation. However, Trotsky informed his followers and the world that if such a regime entered in war against Britain, he would side with Fascist Brazil against Democratic Britain. So, who's nearer to Stalin here? Trotsky on Spain or Trotsky on Brazil? Please. couldn't we try to debate without slinging mud at each other's face? I believe this list deserves it. -- N?stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Thu Jul 3 07:55:58 2008 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 14:55:58 +0100 Subject: [Marxism] The ineffable Stephen Gowans discredits himself again! Message-ID: The ineffable Stephen Gowans discredits himself again! Wednesday, June 25, 2008 Violence in Zimbabwe and the MDC and its Social Imperialist Supporters By Stephen Gowans Full at: -- http://gowans.blogspot.com/2008/06/violence-in-zimbabwe-and-mdc-and-its.html It was MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai who said to Mugabe, "If you don?t want to go peacefully, we will remove you violently." [1] -- -- [ Louis Proyect "discredits" this on the grounds that it was said 10 years ago and Tsvangirai apologised the next day. If Obama said it to George W. Bush a belated apology would hardly suffice, and the incident would be remembered for more than 10 years. -- J. D.] -- -- -- It was MDC faction leader Arthur Mutambara who said he was "going to remove Robert Mugabe, I promise you, with every tool at my disposal" and that "We?re not going to rule out or in anything - the sky?s the limit." [2] It was secretary general of Tsvangirai?s MDC faction, Tendai Biti, who warned of Kenya-style post electoral violence if Mugabe won. [3] It was opposition principal Pius Ncube, then Archbishop of Bulawayo, who said he was "ready to lead the people, guns blazing," to oust the Mugabe government. [4] It was the Zimbabwe Resistance Movement that promised to take up arms against the Zanu-PF government if "the poodles who run the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission," failed to declare Tsvangirai the victor of the presidential run-off election. [5] In light of this, is it any surprise that Zanu-PF supporters are "outraged that the Security Council that never saw the need to convene and discuss Kenya when more than 2,000 people were hacked to death over two months, at times in front of Western cameras, saw it fit to meet and discuss Zimbabwe on the back of" claims by the opposition that it was being repressed by a campaign of violence? [6] The Social Imperialist Project With Western media coverage on Zimbabwe monopolized by the views of the neo-liberal MDC, the US and British governments, and "independent" election monitors and human rights groups funded by the US Congress and State Department, the British government?s Westminster Foundation for Democracy, George Soros? Open Society Institute, and the CIA- and Council on Foreign Relations-linked Freedom House, one might think it would be possible to find a measure of relief from the blanket uniformity of ruling class dominated opinion on a socialist web site. Just a tiny break. Snip ISO?s Latest Silliness Here?s what wrong with the MDC, according to the Zimbabwe section of the International Socialist Organization: "The increasing domination of the party leadership by capitalist and Western elites and the marginalization of workers and radicals?will lead to its likely pursuing a neoliberal capitalist agenda if it assumes power to the detriment of the working people." [10] Funny that it has taken this long for the ISO to figure this out. Here?s then MDC spokesman Eddie Cross, formerly vice-chairman of the Confederation of Zimbabwe Industries, in advance of 2000 elections - eight years ago! "We are going to fast track privatization. All 50 government parastatals will be privatized within a two-year time-frame, but we are going to go beyond that. We are going to privatize many of the functions of government. We are going to privatize the central statistical office. We are going to privatize virtually the entire school delivery system. And you know, we have looked at the numbers and we think we can get government employment down from about 300,000 at the present time to about 75,000 in five years." [11] Moreover, the principal role in the formation of the party played by the Zimbabwe Democracy Trust, whose patrons are former British foreign secretaries Douglas Hurd, Geoffrey Howe, Malcolm Rifkind and whose chair is Lord Renwick of Clifton, should have provided more than an inkling of what was ahead. So now that the ISO has belatedly figured out that the MDC is dominated by "capitalist and Western elites" and will likely pursue "a neoliberal capitalist agenda," what does it recommend radicals and working people in Zimbabwe do? Unconditionally support Tsvangirai. Yes, that?s right. "The ISO?has now modified its position to call for unconditional but fraternally critical support to Tsvangirai." [12] From ssschwartz8 at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 08:02:45 2008 From: ssschwartz8 at gmail.com (yossi schwartz) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 07:02:45 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Jerusalem- the road to workers revolution Message-ID: <685ad9b30807030702h5113fb83u91a010b2d320cf4@mail.gmail.com> *Statement of the ISL (Israel) on the Terrorist Event In Jerusalem* The ruling class of the Zionist state has been facing a difficult situation for a while now. It has been defeated in Lebanon, it has failed to break the will power of the Palestinian people, and it has suffered from the growing world economic crisis. The American imperialists refuse to make a commitment to support Israel in case it decides to attack Iran. The French President, whose show of support for Israel was meant to give French imperialism a new foothold in the Middle East, is deeply unpopular in his own country, and obviously France cannot substitute for the military strength of the US. They are so down on their luck that they are even afraid of losing the support of Israeli workers, evidenced by their quick capitulation in the face of strike threats by the Histadrut, even though they know very well that Histadrut Chairman Ofer Eini is "their man" in the union. Things were to become worse. A deal has been finalized with Hizb Allah for an exchange of prisoners. Hamas seems to have finally made its long sought-after settlement with the imperialists. This is deadly for the Zionists. Israel, a country whose only function in the world imperialist system is the military suppression of the masses in the Middle East, lives on strife. If the fundamentalists and the nationalist bourgeoisie can subdue 'their' masses, then support of the Zionist state becomes unnecessary PR trouble for imperialism. This explains the regrowth of Zionist hysteria regarding Iran. The terrorist attack in Jerusalem must be viewed in this context. Who was Khussam Dwayat? According to YNet, the website of Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot, was a 31 year old father of two from the Sur Baher neighbourhood in East Jerusalem. He was not a member of any political organization and does not seem to have had strong political views. His attack seems to have been quite spontaneous, not pre-planned like other terrorist attacks in the past. The Zionist racists can easily explain this: it is the evil "Arab nature," the uncivilized and brutal nature of Islam, maybe "extremism," etc. The arguments change as one goes from left to right across the political spectrum. But all the arguments have the same purpose: to avoid an explanation of terrorism, something that the Zionists fear like the devil. As Marxists we must explain scientifically what would drive a relatively young man to give up his life in order to kill innocent people. But we already know the context of the attack. After Hamas' victory in the election and the Israeli disengagement from Gaza, many people had false hopes that perhaps, if Palestine could not be taken back in its entirety, than Hamas could at least ensure the Palestinians a better life in the parts of the land in which they live now. But Hamas' and Hizb Allah's new deals with imperialism have crushed these dreams, as the ISL has warned all along. Superexploited and seeing before them not workers and capitalists, but only a racist society of colonialists, the Palestinian masses can feel no sympathy for the Israeli workers. The ISL truly symapthizes with the suffering of the Israeli masses, unlike the Zionists who despise them and use them as cannon fodder. For this reason, we are honest with them. We say to them: so long as you continue to identify yourself with the state; so long as you continue to support its murderous oppression of the Palestinians; so long as you continue so sacrifice yourself and your children for its wars in service of imperialism, the Palestinian people will not and cannot sympathize with you, or tell the difference between you and your oppressors. The only way for Jews to live in peace in this land is to support the proletarian revolution in the Middle East. Obviously, we sympathize with the expropriated and oppressed Palestinians as well. And for the same reason, we are honest with them too. Terrorism cannot advance the struggle for national liberation, much less for socialism. Even if the attacks would target only military targets or officials, they could not shake the foundations of the colonialist state. The only way for the Palestinians to ever be free is to overthrow imperialism and its client regimes - the only way to do this is by building revolutionary workers' parties, which will be led by the most class conscious elements of the working class of this region. The terrorist attacks will be used once more by the Zionists in order to justify their racist policies. Already there is talk of reversing an order disallowing the destruction of homes of the families of terrorists. The hypocrisy here is astounding. Has Baruch Goldstein's home been wrecked? What about the home of Eden Nathan-Zada, the fascist who murdered 4 Palestinians in a bus in the city of Shfaram? Knowing the Zionists, they define as terrorists all those who dare rise up against Israeli oppression (former Minister of Finance, Benyamin Nethanyahu, even called striking workers terrorists once). The ISL stands firmly against this current. In the face of the silence and embarrassment of the 'radical', i.e. centrist and reformist left, we clearly spell out our positions. We do not hide our slogans, which remain unchanged: *For a Palestinian Workers' State, from the Jordan to the Sea!* *Against Zionist pogromism!* *For the setting up of vanguard parties in every country of the Middle East! * *Rebuild the Fourth International!* Jerusalem syndrome From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net Thu Jul 3 08:04:18 2008 From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:04:18 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses Message-ID: <000001c8dd15$b00c58b0$6401a8c0@office1pc> Luko wrote: Morgan Tsvangirai has vacillated between taking part in the election, and opposing them, calling for imperialism to have a decisive say over Zimbabwe. In the end, he made himself the stooge of imperialist intervention, rejecting even the call of the African Union of a government of national unity. And imperialist propaganda has continued on the line which the former US-war minister Rumsfeld proclaimed for his opposition to the shift to the left in Latin America: elections are shit, because the outcome is not always in the interests of the imperialist masters. This version of Tsvangirai does not take account of some of the facts, which I think we should always be open to, leaving aside demagogy. The implication is clear that Tsvangirai withdrew from the elections at the insistence of his imperialist masters, who opposed the vote because Mugabe was going to win it fair and square. And the comparison with Latin America is a downright insult to Paraguay, Argentina, Bolivia, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Ecuador (and one could even stretch a bit and include Brazil) that have elected governments which aim to defend and assert national sovereignty or make urgently needed social changes. Here is a clipping with one fact about the Zimbabwe elections: Morgan Tsvangirai Arrested Yet Again SW Radio Africa (London) NEWS 14 June 2008 Posted to the web 14 June 2008 MDC Leader Morgan Tsvangirai and 11 other members of his election campaign team were again detained by police and members of the Central Intelligence Organisation just after 10:00 am on Saturday at a road block outside Shurungwi, in the Midlands province. They were then taken to Shurugwi police station. In a statement released on Saturday the MDC said It was clearly impossible to talk about free and fair election in Zimbabwe and to suggest otherwise is to be clearly blind to the grave harassment, intimidation and violence that the people of Zimbabwe have had to endure over the past few years. The statement went on to commend the resolve of the Zimbabwean people and called on SADC leaders to act on the current crisis in the country. "The determination and resolve of the people of Zimbabwe to build a new and prosperous Zimbabwe surely has to be complemented by decisive leadership from SADC. The people of Zimbabwe have done, and are still doing all they can to finish off the era of dictatorship, and define a new destiny of the country, a destiny of peace, jobs, health care and general prosperity. This harassment of the leadership and the people of Zimbabwe must stop," the statement said. The arrest on Saturday is the third time the MDC leader has been detained since Thursday and many believe it is the intention of the police and security forces in Zimbabwe to intimidate and pressure the MDC into a Government of National Unity with Robert Mugabe as its head. (end clip) Then there are such facts as violent attacks on MDC headquarters and rallies. Secondly, it is not accurate to suggest that Tsvangirai has rejected the proposals for a joint government with ZANU. In fact he has proposed Mugabe as president for life. The difference between the first election and this one seems to be that Mugabe's political machine asserted itself, fearing that his departure would lead to its disintegration. I think it is a big mistake to prettify the electoral process that went down here, regardless of the role of imperialism which can be condemned and opposed regardless. Frankly, I don't think Tsvangirai can be condemned from outside for pulling out of the election. If there are domestic oppositional forces who think this was wrong (the ISO, etc) I would like to hear there assessment. But it is false to suggest that he short-circuited a genuinely democratic process because it was going the imperialists' way. As for Louis' attempt to compare the expropriation of the white farmers with forced collectivization in the Soviet Union, it won't fly. Restoring the land to the colonial-settlers will be a purely reactionary development, and a blow to aspirations for the land in South Africa, Kenya, etcetera. To substitute for this fact generalities about agricultural development is a big political mistake. Fred Feldman ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Copyright C 2008 SW Radio Africa. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). From lnp3 at panix.com Thu Jul 3 08:05:37 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:05:37 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <2fa158550807030647g11b48d21h748d0ef7cd7d82d2@mail.gmail.com> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> <2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com> <20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> <537005349.20080703113537@t-online.de> <486CCAF9.9030000@panix.com> <2fa158550807030647g11b48d21h748d0ef7cd7d82d2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <486CDCB1.80108@panix.com> N?stor Gorojovsky wrote: > Imperialism did not have the same influence in Spain, 1936, as it does > in Zimbabwe, 2008. That might be true, but in both instances you have 3 elements: 1. A bourgeois government fighting imperialism, fascist in one instance and British in the other. 2. Imperialism itself. 3. Revolutionary forces opposed to both imperialism and the native bourgeoisie. Like the Stalintern, you regard #3 as an obstacle to the unity of the people's struggle. I am afraid that in your knee-jerk defense of any government in a struggle with imperialism, you have lost track of what it is we are trying to do, namely build a worldwide movement of revolutionary socialism. I posted an excerpt from the ISO's analysis of the situation in Zimbabwe yesterday. I am interested in developing fraternal relationships with such groups, not the homophobic, paternalistic, bourgeois-nationalist ZANU-PF. I am totally opposed to imperialist sanctions and imperialist invasions, but that's about as far as it goes with Zimbabwe. From sartesian at earthlink.net Thu Jul 3 08:06:39 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 10:06:39 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y><486B7824.9000102@panix.com><14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de><2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com><20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> <537005349.20080703113537@t-online.de> Message-ID: <006801c8dd16$03790160$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> LW writes: "The real conflict here is between the people of Zimbabwe -- the whole nation, all classes -- and Imperialism which tries to put the African nations again under its heel." First off, this variation on a theme "the main contadiction is between imperialist and oppressed nations" is used by some, if not many, as a mantra-- lacking meaning in and of itself it gains significance through repetition, through tone. LW needs to show exactly how the whole nation, all classes are in contradiction to international capitalism. But more than a religious intonation, this phrase should lead one to just the opposite conclusion about Zimbabwe from what LW intends, for indeed it certainly looks and sounds like all classes, the whole nation is involved in opposition to the ZANU-PF. Mugabe may use nationalist rhetoric, rhetoric equally comfortable in the mouth of monarchists, corporate-state-ists, national socialists, populists, "radical" capitalists and small capitalists, militarists, etc. etc. but that doesn't mean Mugabe or ZANU-PF has since assuming power, will in the future, or even has the ability to oppose advanced capitalism. Certainly, a close examination of Zimbabwe's economic history will show that ZANU-PF has not done anything to separate Zimbabwe from the tides of the world market. So we need to ask-- are there real, material, economic determinants for the movement against ZANU-PF? Are those economic determinants the product of ZANU-PF administration and execution of a national capitalist program which inevitably requires, at different moments and often at the same time, compliance with international capitalism and a rhetoric of opposition to international capitalism when the very actions taken produce misery and resistance? We can ask this another way: is there a basis for a real social revolution in Zimbabwe? Clearly the answer is yes. Does support of ZANU-PF advance that revolution? No. Does support of UN sanctions advance that revolution? No. Does ZANU-PF offer in any way, shape, or form prospects for resolving the economic contradictions which form the basis for social revolution? No. Does the movement in Zimbabwe against the policies of the ZANU-PF present an opportunity to develop the actions, program, and class organization necessary for the resolution of those contradictions? Yes. From elishastephens at hotmail.com Thu Jul 3 08:28:43 2008 From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 07:28:43 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Fissures in ruling circles over Iran Message-ID: "Backers of the White House's course contend that the increasingly divergent voices coming out of Tehran are thanks, in part, to continued U.S. pressure and the prospect of an Israeli attack." Are there differences in the Iranian leadership over tactics? I'm sure there are. Are there "increasingly divergent voices coming out of Tehran"? I'd need to see a LOT more evidence than the scant to non-existent support present in this article to prove that allegation. Ali Larijani, the Speaker of the Parliament and former top nucear negotiator, is frequently referred to as the "moderate" who might succeed Ahmadinejad. Here's a selection of his recent pronouncements; see if you can detect any "divergence" from Ahmadinejad in them. I can't. http://www.presstv.ir/search.aspx?q=larijani _________________________________________________________________ Watch ?Cause Effect,? a show about real people making a real difference. Learn more. http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/MTV/?source=text_watchcause From nmgoro at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 08:32:15 2008 From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 11:32:15 -0300 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <486CDCB1.80108@panix.com> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> <2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com> <20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> <537005349.20080703113537@t-online.de> <486CCAF9.9030000@panix.com> <2fa158550807030647g11b48d21h748d0ef7cd7d82d2@mail.gmail.com> <486CDCB1.80108@panix.com> Message-ID: <2fa158550807030732j43d6e320i79b775ef477851b2@mail.gmail.com> 2008/7/3, Louis Proyect : > N?stor Gorojovsky wrote: > > Imperialism did not have the same influence in Spain, 1936, as it does > > in Zimbabwe, 2008. > > That might be true, but in both instances you have 3 elements: > > 1. A bourgeois government fighting imperialism, fascist in one instance > and British in the other. There is a mistake, at least from my own viewpoint, above. The Spanish Republic was not just a "bourgeois government". It was a government that _belonged to the imperialist camp_ Would you, Louis, dare say the same of Mugabe? Methinks not. As to your point 3, some comments. a) The "native bourgeoisie" in Spain was and is an imperialist bourgeoisie in its own right, unless we believe the Stalinist (sorry to boomerang the argument on you) idea that a West European bourgeoisie could be anything but essentially imperialist in the 1930s. Is the "native bourgeoisie" in Zimbabwe anything comparable to the Spanish bourgeoisie in the 1930s? Please, the very question sounds bizarre to me. So that there cannot be in Zimbabwe "revolutionary forces opposed to both imperialism and the native bourgeoisie" in the sense there could be (and there existed) in Spain, 1930s What we have in Zimbabwe is an unfinished national revolution, and I would even add that it is a national revolution that has been jeopardized by the leadership of the ZANU front itself. But even under this condition, dear Louis, no "worldwide movement of revolutionary socialism" will ever be built by siding (either without any intention, of course) with imperialism against any fraction of the national movement. While London considers Mugabe its main enemy, it is not up to revolutionary socialists to do the same. Much to the contrary. We shall NEVER build a worldwide movement of revolutionary socialism if we don't defend any government in struggle with imperialism. The main divide runs through this issue. And I don't know what do the ISO people think about imperialist intervention in Zimbabwe, in its ACTUAL form, namely the attack on the Mugabe regime. I hate homophobes and paternalists, I loathe national bourgeois movements in the Third World. But I know that wherever I might be on these issues, the main question is "What did you do against imperialism when they attacked your own Third World Country's sovereignty, dad?" The answer to THIS question gives the clue to build an actual worldwide movement of revolutionary socialists or, conversely, a network of -at best- good will supporters of abstract ideals. BTW: I don't see you tackling my contention that Trotsky's writings on Brazil are more applicable to Zimbabwe than those on Spain. You end your posting with: > > I am totally opposed to imperialist sanctions and imperialist invasions, > but that's about as far as it goes with Zimbabwe. > Will that opposition go as far as supporting the Zimbabwean government against imperialism? If it does, then the debate is pointless. If it doesn't -and this support must be concrete (and unconditional as regards imperialist attack) if we socialists ever want to show ourselves as the best defenders of Zimbabwean peoples' interests, and thus win their souls for our own programme- , then I am afraid we will just have to agree to disagree. In the end, from my own end of the line this is just a theoretical debate because there's little I can do to help either Mugabe, either the ISO you seem to support, either Tsvangirai, either the British Army, in Zimbabwe. So that I guess I should not attempt to outwit the Zimbabwean themselves. I just express my fears (and hopes) when I see an imperialist attack on an African country. And, BTW: I do also believe that neither Zimbabwe nor any African country today can be considered but a splintered part of a larger nation. What takes place there DOES have a real domino effect on at least all of Africa South of the Congo and the Limpopo -- N?stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a From marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu Thu Jul 3 08:08:58 2008 From: marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu (Dennis Brasky) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:08:58 +0200 Subject: [Marxism] torture by "the only democracy in the Middle East" Message-ID: <3e00a088c9952e2cb26700122d5e54cc@www.chris-floyd.com> Dear user, A user, Dennis Brasky would like to share this article / content with you. To visit this article / content, simply click on the following URL / URI: Site: http://www.chris-floyd.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1553&Itemid=135 P/S: This may be a restricted content which requires you to be registered on the site. From nmgoro at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 08:41:16 2008 From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 11:41:16 -0300 Subject: [Marxism] Now that I know... Message-ID: <2fa158550807030741o52c30d85w52450814175ea3fb@mail.gmail.com> 2008/7/3, james daly : > So now that the ISO has belatedly figured out that the MDC is > dominated by "capitalist and Western elites" and will likely pursue "a > neoliberal capitalist agenda," what does it recommend radicals and > working people in Zimbabwe do? > > Unconditionally support Tsvangirai. Yes, that's right. "The ISO?has > now modified its position to call for unconditional but fraternally critical > support to Tsvangirai." [12] If this is true, I am afraid that the position of the ISO has little chances to win the souls of the Zimbabwean people to socialism. If this is true, I am afraid, the ISO is becoming one of the main obstacles for the establishment of a Zimbabwean section of a worldwide network of revolutionary socialists. If this is true, the ISO will be remembered (if ever) in the annals of Zimbabwean history as just another group who sided with the imperialists. And in the annals of socialism as just another group that discredited socialism as "eurocentric" and thus carried water to the "native bourgeoisies'" bucket in the Third World. This might sound Stalinist to Louis Pr., but I am afraid it would have just sounded sensible to Trotsky. And now, off to my own business. -- N?stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a From ssschwartz8 at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 08:43:49 2008 From: ssschwartz8 at gmail.com (yossi schwartz) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 07:43:49 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] ZImbabwe Message-ID: <685ad9b30807030743v60147c11rf44acbb331268dec@mail.gmail.com> LW writes: "The real conflict here is between the people of Zimbabwe -- the whole nation, all classes -- and Imperialism which tries to put the African nations again under its heel" There is no question that we must oppose UN-Sanctions, and in a case that any imperialist state will attack Zimbabwe our duty would be to defend Zimbabwe regardless of who is the local ruler. There is no question that the MDC is backed politically by the imperialists. However, it is no true that ZANU-PF represents the working class or the poor peasants and his regime is very oppressive. The only class that can change the situation and lead out of the horrible conditions the masses find themselves is the working class. The problem is that the Union bureaucracy is tying the workers to the MDC and this connection must be broken under the demand independent and democratic unions-no support for the capitalists. What is needed is for the most advanced workers to form their own revolutionary party and take power by a working class revolution at the head of the poor peasants and their demands for land The only way out is a workers revolution.. From lnp3 at panix.com Thu Jul 3 08:52:44 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:52:44 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <2fa158550807030732j43d6e320i79b775ef477851b2@mail.gmail.com> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> <2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com> <20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> <537005349.20080703113537@t-online.de> <486CCAF9.9030000@panix.com> <2fa158550807030647g11b48d21h748d0ef7cd7d82d2@mail.gmail.com> <486CDCB1.80108@panix.com> <2fa158550807030732j43d6e320i79b775ef477851b2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <486CE7BC.20108@panix.com> N?stor Gorojovsky wrote: > a) The "native bourgeoisie" in Spain was and is an imperialist > bourgeoisie in its own right, unless we believe the Stalinist (sorry > to boomerang the argument on you) idea that a West European > bourgeoisie could be anything but essentially imperialist in the > 1930s. I am really not sure what point you are trying to make. But for clarity's sake, let's look at China in the 20s and 30s--a true colonized country. Trotsky advocated the creation of a class-independent movement against both the imperialist bourgeoisie and the KMT, which was China's ZANU-PF. I believe that Trotsky's approach was correct even if he had a poor understanding of exactly how a revolutionary movement in China could be created. Right now there is an extremely important development on the left in Zimbabwe. It is locked in a struggle with Mugabe. Our purpose should be to build ties with revolutionary socialists everywhere in the world even when their government is being demonized in the Western press. There was no country on earth that Trotsky was more vigorous in his defense of than the USSR, but he never remained silent about the crimes of its government. I am afraid that the instinct to defend Mugabe against imperialism is inadequate. We also have to connect with the Marxists in Zimbabwe who are in the trenches against him. That is why I hail the Greenleft's publication of their articles. That is true internationalism. We on Marxmail have to follow their example, not that of the degraded bloggers and "left" journalists who continue to act as if Mugabe was Zimbabwe's Che Guevara. > > What we have in Zimbabwe is an unfinished national revolution, and I > would even add that it is a national revolution that has been > jeopardized by the leadership of the ZANU front itself. But even under > this condition, dear Louis, no "worldwide movement of revolutionary > socialism" will ever be built by siding (either without any intention, > of course) with imperialism against any fraction of the national > movement. If I come across anybody who is siding with imperialism against Mugabe, I will be sure to beat him or her around the head and shoulders. If that means that I am crossing class lines in your eyes when I post material here calling attention to the Zimbabwe cops tearing down the homes of 700,000 poor people, then I guess we have profound political differences. > > And I don't know what do the ISO > people think about imperialist intervention in Zimbabwe, in its ACTUAL > form, namely the attack on the Mugabe regime. You seem to have an aversion to reading their literature, it would seem. Are you afraid that you will end up like Christopher Hitchens or something? They are actually quite radical, I promise you. Here, let me repeat what they wrote so that you can sleep soundly tonight: "And thus from Poland to Serbia to Zambia to Zimbabwe, these middle classes became the midwives who delivered the militant and rising but trusting and ideologically immature working-class movement into the arms of the neo-liberal forces." Get it, Nestor? Poland? Serbia? These are not people who are for Soros-styled "democratic revolutions". Maybe we can get in touch with them and extract a vow that they are telling the truth and not just writing things to cover their left flank. From walterlx at earthlink.net Thu Jul 3 08:52:43 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 10:52:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Marxism] REBELION: The FARC had Already Expressed Willingness to Liberate the Hostages Message-ID: <8764707.1215096763234.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net> http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=69785 http://machetera.wordpress.com/2008/07/03/someone-get-this-woman-a-newspaper/ Ingrid Betancourt's impromptu airport press conference, flanked by the bloody Colombian Defense Minister Juan Manuel Santos and other military officers with undeniably gringo features was one of the strangest spectacles Machetera has ever seen. Even considering the joy she must have felt at being liberated after so much time in captivity, her effusiveness toward her liberators suggests that the time she spent in the jungle with the FARC left her with no greater understanding of the Colombian conflict than when she was seized on her presidential campaign tour seven years ago. Her extravagant praise of Colombian President Uribe and the Colombian army (who, she implied, had one-upped Israel with its commando tactics) sounded more like a campaign speech than anything else - minus a recent visit to the dentist and blonde highlights in her hair. Betancourt mentioned how shortly after the helicopter lifted off, suddenly, somehow, the lead guerrilla was on the floor, blindfolded, and the soldiers, oh-so-cleverly disguised in Che Guevara t-shirts (the most cynical appropriation of this great man's image ever, but also a confirmation of his everlasting symbolic power), announced that they were actually from the Colombian army, and the hostages were now free. In respect to the capture of the guerrilla, she said, "Don't think that I felt happy; I pitied him a lot, but I gave thanks to God that he was with people who respect the lives of others, even when they are enemies." Someone should suggest that she tell that to the family of the Ecuadoran who was killed with a blow from a rifle butt to his neck after surviving Colombia's bombing of the FARC camp on Ecuadoran soil. The FARC is an easy target these days, with dwindling support from all quarters for its armed struggle, so Machetera has little desire to pile on. Yet there is something strange about the fact that seven years on, a captive should emerge with so little respect for the struggle being waged and should refer to her captors as "humiliators" and "despots." The only hint at sympathy came near the end of what El Tiempo chose to broadcast of Betancourt's statement - if there was more, perhaps it wasn't convenient to the storyline - where she pointed a convoluted message at Alfonso Cano, insisting that the guerrillas were not to blame, that they'd left the hostages alive, but it was simply a "perfect operation." As usual, though, there's more to the story. Pascual Serrano explains: The FARC had Already Expressed to European Delegations Their Willingness to Liberate the Hostages (Doubts over whether the Colombian army intercepted the liberation in order to present it as a government success.) Pascual Serrano - Rebeli?n Translation: Machetera Despite the fact that the Colombian Defense Minister, Juan Manuel Santos, has presented the liberation of Ingrid Betancourt and fourteen other FARC hostages as a brilliant military operation, the reality is that it happened exactly when European delegates, the French Noel Sa?z and the Swiss Jean Pierre Gontard, had managed to make contact with the guerrilla leadership to begin their liberation. The FARC had already expressed its intentions in this regard, and the government had authorized the contact, which was closely monitored. On July 1, a communique from the Colombian army, read by C?sar Mauricio Vel?squez, the Press Secretary at the presidential palace, signaled that the two European delegates: "came to Colombia in recent days and asked for government authorization to go and meet directly with the FARC leadership; authorization that was granted by the government." The Spanish daily, El Pa?s, also reported this matter, the same day: Bogot? has authorized the meeting of two European negotiators to discuss the conditions for future meetings to discuss the future of the FARC hostages, according to reports from the Colombian media. The former French consul in Bogot?, No?l S?enz and the Swiss diplomat, Jean-Pierre Gontard, left at the beginning of last weekend for a meeting in the mountains not facilitated by the government, and may have already met with members of the guerrilla secretariat, the principal governing body, and even with the new FARC leader, Alfonso Cano. According to this daily: The FARC have declared themselves disposed to exchange 40 hostages, Betancourt among them (also with French citizenship), three U.S. citizens, as well as other politicians, police, and members of the Colombian army, for around 500 imprisoned guerrillas. Among the prisoners that the FARC would like to exchange, are three who've been extradited to the United States. One of them, Ricardo Ovidio Palmera, Sim?n Trinidad. According to the French daily, Le Figaro, the French emissaries, Noel Sa?z, and the Swiss, Jean-Pierre Gontard, met last Sunday or Monday in the Colombian jungle with a person close to the new head of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), Alfonso Cano. Already, two weeks prior, sources close to the French government, indicated that France had managed to make contact with the new FARC secretariat, even though the French ambassador in Colombia denied it at the time. In Colombia, the daily El Tiempo, close to the government, acknowledged that the international delegates may have met with Alfonso Cano: Those charged with the task are the French No?l Saez and the Swiss Jean Pierre Gontard, authorized by the government to work with the subversive group in order to find a way to frree the hostages. A source from the Colombian government confirmed that "the two Europeans began their journey to firm up the meeting three days ago," in an unidentified area. The same source did not rule out that the meeting had been with the guerrilla leader who replaced Manuel Marulanda V?lez 'Tirofijo,' who died in March. This would mean that communication channels with the FARC, which had been practically closed since the death of 'Ra?l Reyes' on March 1, had begun to open again. Government Guarantees "The government is guaranteeing the two facilitators passage to make these contacts. They have been given the facilities so that the meeting may be successful," indicated an official. The Colombian government also reported that the two diplomats were going to ask the FARC to accept a proposal for a meeting area in order to begin dialogue over an eventual humanitarian exchange. The Colombian government's version of the liberation is that soldiers infiltrated the guerrilla [camp] having tricked the FARC commander C?sar, in order to gather the hostages and put them in a helicopter which turned out to be an army camouflage; giving the guerrilla leader the impression that they were being moved to a meeting with Alfonso Cano, the head of the FARC. The question that hangs over this version is whether the guerrillas in charge of the hostages already had guidelines for an imminent release, and were therefore easily and naively disposed to collaborate with such a suspicious transfer. Or to what extent the liberation was already agreed upon between the FARC leadership and the mediators sent by France and, at the last minute, the Colombian army intercepted the liberation in order to present it as a successful military operation. In fact, it would be a similar operation to that which took place when Ra?l Reyes' camp was bombed in Ecuador. On that occasion, the Colombian government knew that liberation was brewing and preferred to militarily eliminate the guerrilla spokesmen even if it would abort the liberation, while in this case the release flight was intercepted in order to present it as a success exclusively belonging to the military and government. Machetera is a member of Tlaxcala, the network of translators for linguistic diversity. This translation may be reprinted as long as the content remains unaltered, and the source, author, and translator are cited. *** http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=69785 ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net Thu Jul 3 08:53:34 2008 From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:53:34 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Zimbabwe (or The Power of Prayer) Message-ID: <000001c8dd1c$9228a860$6401a8c0@office1pc> Yossi wrote: The only way out is a workers revolution. Fred: God out of a machine to the rescue! From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net Thu Jul 3 09:03:52 2008 From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 11:03:52 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Iran freezes u-enrichment 6 weeks, okays talks with Solana group Message-ID: <000001c8dd1e$023bf3e0$6401a8c0@office1pc> OFFICIAL SAYS IRAN ACCEPTS P5+1 TALKS PROPOSAL By Gareth Porter Inter Press Service July 2, 2008 http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=43040 WASHINGTON -- A senior Iranian official reportedly told members of the Iranian parliament Monday that Iran has agreed to freeze its enrichment program for six weeks and begin negotiations with the P5+1 group of states as early as next week, according to reports of that decision by the Iranian Student News Agency (ISNA) and by a Farsi-language website in Iran. Remarks by Iranian Foreign Minister Manoucher Mottaki and a top adviser to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Tuesday also seemed to indicate that decision to accept a "freeze for freeze" proposal from the P5+1 to begin at least preliminary negotiations. The P5+1 consists of the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council -- the United States, Britain, France, China, and Russia -- and Germany. The apparent Iranian decision comes in the wake of an atmosphere of heightened threat of attack on Iran by Israel created by a series of moves by Israeli and U.S. officials in recent days. The head of Iran's atomic energy agency, Gholam-Reza Aghazadeh, told members of the Majlis energy committee Monday that Iran has agreed to start the talks, according to the Farsi-language Iranian website Fararou. It said "informed sources" had specified that Iran had accepted a six-week freeze on any expansion of enrichment as a condition on such negotiations, as proposed by European Union foreign affairs chief Javier Solana. The P5+1 proposal also offers to suspend further progress in advancing U.N. sanctions against Iran. It does not address sanctions organized outside the U.N. Security Council framework, however. ISNA reported in a brief item on Monday that an Iranian parliamentary energy committee member, whom it did not name, had declared that Iran "has agreed to start talks with 5+1 countries group." It added that the talks "will begin next week." Although ISNA did not report that the official had said Iran would freeze its nuclear activities, in the sense of foregoing any increase in centrifuges, it implied as much by reporting that the P5+1 proposal delivered by Solana Jun. 14 "required Iran to suspend nuclear activities in exchange for a set of economic and security incentives." The news further quoted unnamed "Iranian officials" as saying that "common points of the two packages can be a launching pad to start talks." The Farsi-language website Fararou identified the member of the committee who had quoted Aghazadeh as informing committee members that Iranian authorities had agreed to negotiate with the 5+1 group as Seyed Admad Hosseini. It was Hosseini who was quoted as telling reporters that the talks should start next week. Fararou also provided additional details on the Aghazadeh's briefing. It said the secretary of the Majlis energy committee, Moayyed Hosseini, told its reporter that the Aghazadeh had pointed to "positive aspects" of the negotiations with the P5+1, "including the fact that the west was accepting Iran's possession of 3,000 centrifuges." That comment suggested that Tehran will present the "freeze for freeze" proposal as a concession to Iran's right to enrich uranium. The committee secretary was quoted by Fararou as stating flatly that the proposal for a six-week freeze on enrichment "has been accepted by Tehran." The same parliamentarian was quoted as saying the atomic energy chief had declared that the "package" of proposals from the P5+1 was still being studied, and that Iran would respond by the end of the week. The formal P5+1 proposal given to Iranian officials by E.U. foreign affairs commissioner Javier Solana Jun. 14 was a repackaging of the mid-2006 proposal to Tehran. But it was accompanied by a six-week "freeze for freeze" proposal under which Iran would not increase the level of its enrichment efforts and the P5+1 would freeze the movement towards tougher sanctions against Iran, according to diplomats in London quoted by Reuters Jun. 21. That would enable "pre-negotiations" to begin between the two sides on "parameters for formal negotiations," according to the diplomats. Beginning formal negotiations, however, were said to require that Iran to "fully suspend" enrichment, meaning that it would actually temporarily halt the enrichment. The formal negotiations envisaged would last "up to six months." according to the diplomats cited by Reuters, during which time the halt to enrichment would have to continue. The remarks by energy committee secretary Hosseini implied that Iran's commitment was only to the six-week freeze on the level of its nuclear activities and not to an actual suspension of enrichment as required for the formal stage of negotiations. But Mottaki, in remarks at a luncheon meeting with reporters at the Iranian mission in New York, suggested that the Iranians might be prepared to go further. Mottaki said that there were sufficient commonalities between the Solana proposal on behalf of the P5+1 and Iran's own proposals for negotiations to provide the basis for talks. That remark, paralleling the unattributed view reported by ISNA on Monday, suggested that Iran was preparing to enter into substantive negotiations. Furthermore, Mottaki failed to repeat the standard Iranian statement that enrichment is Iran's legitimate right, even though he was repeatedly questioned on the point. Further indicating an Iranian desire to take advantage of any diplomatic opening in a period of rising threat from Washington and Tel Aviv, Ali Akbar Velyati, a top foreign policy adviser to Khamenei, said, "Americans wanted Iran not to accept Solana. Therefore our interests imply that we should embrace Solana." --Gareth Porter is an investigative historian and journalist specialising in U.S. national security policy. The paperback edition of his latest book, *Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam*, was published in 2006. From Dbachmozart at aol.com Thu Jul 3 09:03:58 2008 From: Dbachmozart at aol.com (Dbachmozart at aol.com) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 11:03:58 EDT Subject: [Marxism] Russian Roulette: A Bipartisan Consensus for Disaster Message-ID: Chris Floyd - Empire Burlesque Wednesday, 02 July 2008 Stephen Cohen is right on Russia in "_Wrong on Russia_ (http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/01/opinion/edcohen.php) ." After first outlining Russia's global importance and then the vast dangers of the accelerating deterioration in US-Russian relations, Cohen notes in the International Herald Tribune: How did it come to this? In the U.S. policy elite and media, the nearly unanimous answer is that Russian President Vladimir Putin's antidemocratic domestic policies and "neo-imperialism" destroyed that historic opportunity. You don't have to be a Putin apologist to understand that this is not an adequate explanation. During the last eight years, Putin's foreign policies have been largely a reaction to Washington's winner-take-all approach to Moscow since the early 1990s, which resulted from a revised U.S. view of how the cold war ended. In that new triumphalist narrative, America "won" the 40-year conflict and post-Soviet Russia was a defeated nation analogous to post-World War II Germany and Japan - a nation without full sovereignty at home or autonomous national interests abroad. The policy implication of that bipartisan triumphalism, which persists today, has been clear, certainly to Moscow. It meant that the United States had the right to oversee Russia's post-Communist political and economic development, as it tried to do directly in the 1990s, while demanding that Moscow yield to U.S. international interests. It meant Washington could break strategic promises to Moscow, as when the Clinton administration began NATO's eastward expansion, and disregard extraordinary Kremlin overtures, as when the Bush Administration unilaterally withdrew from the ABM treaty and granted NATO membership to countries even closer to Russia - despite Putin's crucial assistance to the U.S. war effort in Afghanistan after 9/11. It even meant America was entitled to Russia's traditional sphere of security and energy supplies, from the Baltics, Ukraine and Georgia to Central Asia and the Caspian. Such U.S. behavior was bound to produce a Russian backlash. It came under Putin, but it would have been the reaction of any strong Kremlin leader. Those U.S. policies - widely viewed in Moscow as an "encirclement" designed to keep Russia weak and to control its resources - have helped revive an assertive Russian nationalism, destroy the once strong pro-American lobby, and inspire widespread charges that concessions to Washington are "appeasement," even "capitulationism." The Kremlin may have overreacted, but the cause and effect threatening a new cold war are clear. Yes, it's our old friend American Exceptionalism again: we are imbued with divinity (or blessed by history for the secular exceptionalists), so everyone must hew to Washington's paternalistic line -- or else Daddy spank. American elites can never comprehend the reality of the outside world because they are too busy admiring their special, exceptional selves in the mirror. Cohen then outlines some immediate steps we could take to reverse the dangerous situation: Three are essential and urgent: a U.S. diplomacy that treats Russia as a sovereign great power with commensurate national interests; an end to NATO expansion before it reaches Ukraine, which would risk something worse than cold war; and a full resumption of negotiations to sharply reduce and fully secure all nuclear stockpiles and to prevent the impending arms race, which requires ending or agreeing on U.S. plans for a missile defense system in Europe. Sounds like a good plan. What do our wannabe leaders have to say? Uh oh: American presidential campaigns are supposed to discuss such vital issues, but neither John McCain nor Barack Obama has done so. Instead, in varying degrees, both have promised to be "tougher" on the Kremlin than George W. Bush has allegedly been and to continue the encirclement of Russia and the hectoring "democracy promotion" there. Great. Not only more of the same disastrous course -- but even more of more of the same. _http://www.chris-floyd.com/content/view/1554/_ (http://www.chris-floyd.com/content/view/1554/) "The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein **************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars. (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007) From lnp3 at panix.com Thu Jul 3 09:04:15 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 11:04:15 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Now that I know... In-Reply-To: <2fa158550807030741o52c30d85w52450814175ea3fb@mail.gmail.com> References: <2fa158550807030741o52c30d85w52450814175ea3fb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <486CEA6F.8030401@panix.com> N?stor Gorojovsky wrote: > 2008/7/3, james daly : > >> So now that the ISO has belatedly figured out that the MDC is >> dominated by "capitalist and Western elites" and will likely pursue "a >> neoliberal capitalist agenda," what does it recommend radicals and >> working people in Zimbabwe do? >> >> Unconditionally support Tsvangirai. Yes, that's right. "The ISO?has >> now modified its position to call for unconditional but fraternally critical >> support to Tsvangirai." [12] > > If this is true, I am afraid that the position of the ISO has little > chances to win the souls of the Zimbabwean people to socialism. If > this is true, I am afraid, the ISO is becoming one of the main > obstacles for the establishment of a Zimbabwean section of a worldwide > network of revolutionary socialists. If this is true, the ISO will be > remembered (if ever) in the annals of Zimbabwean history as just > another group who sided with the imperialists. And in the annals of > socialism as just another group that discredited socialism as > "eurocentric" and thus carried water to the "native bourgeoisies'" > bucket in the Third World. This is Daly's citation of the atrocious article written by Stephen Gowans. Poor Daly seems to lack the interest or motivation to explain his support for Gowans's adulation of Mugabe. I find that rather irresponsible politically myself. The ISO did at one point support Tsvangirai but dropped their support after he veered to the right. Nestor seems rather perturbed by this and would have preferred that they oppose Tsvangirai even when he gave them no reason to, maybe even before he was born. This kind of tactical inflexibility smacks of the idealism of small, sectarian groups and I am happy that the ISO disdains the kind of purism that has reduced most Trotskyist groups to the margins of political life. From spalmer999 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 3 09:10:32 2008 From: spalmer999 at yahoo.com (Steve Palmer) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 08:10:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Marxism] Taking the 'I' out of BIS ... Re: International Financial Catastrophe: Is this the 'BIG ONE'? In-Reply-To: <001b01c8dd0f$cffa3b70$6feeb250$@com> Message-ID: <784041.37197.qm@web81907.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Leaving aside the question of whether I am a soul or not, we are expected to get excited because the BIS finally woke up to what's going on? The important thing is OUR interpretation of what's going on - all sorts of bourgeois economists are saying all sorts of things, bullish and bearish. Some of us have been pointing out what's been going on in the financial world for many many years. Last year the BIS was singing a completely different tune: "The consensus forecast for the global economy ... anticipates that recent high levels of growth will continue, that global inflation will stay quite subdued, and that global current account imbalances will gradually moderate. With respect to financial markets, the consensus forecast for 2007 is that long rates will stay around current levels. ... this forecast implicitly assumes that there will be no major geopolitical disruptions and no disturbances in the financial sector significant enough to affect the real economy. As a near-term proposition, a forecast that says the future will be a lot like the past has much to recommend it. Indeed, looking closely at forecast errors in recent years, one might conclude that there are grounds for even greater optimism. Real growth has, on the whole, been stronger than expected, while inflation has generally stayed in line with predictions, despite sharp increases in commodity prices in the last year or so. Long-term interest rates have also consistently come in below anticipated levels. ... one might with some confidence expect the good news to continue." (p140). --- Jeff Richards wrote: > Looking through all the messages over the last few days there was not one > soul who dropped a reference to the annual report of the Bank of > International Settlements, one of the most important financial institutions > in the world. The BIS is warning that we might not just be facing a > recession; we could be hurtling towards a depression!(In case anyone > forgets, the last time we had a depression we had some rather earth > shattering events e.g. world war 2). In my view, there is a pressing need to > refocus on this global historical event. "I study a lot. That is one of the responsibilities of every revolutionary." Hugo Chavez. From walterlx at earthlink.net Thu Jul 3 09:50:08 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 11:50:08 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Marxism] In Miami, stirrings of change Message-ID: <19897454.1215100208181.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net> (Demographic shifts are having political consequences in South Florida today, and it's entirely possible that we'll see the removal of one or more of those ultra-rightist members of Congress from Miami in the November election. That would be very good news were it to actually take place. The Cubans who've left the island in the past 25 years aren't as hostile as the ones who left in the beginning. They continue to have friends and family members on the island, and to go back there and visit, unlike their predecessors.) ===================================================== In Miami, stirrings of change By W.T. Whitney Jr. June 30, 2008 Peoples Weekly World Relations with Cuba are regularly a major issue in U.S. election campaigns - local and national - in the important state of Florida, especially South Florida. And usually the most anti-Cuban-government voice wins. In this year's congressional elections, Republican Reps. Lincoln and Mario Diaz-Balart face strong Democratic opponents. The brothers Diaz-Balart represent Miami and the South Florida region. They symbolize the sway of the old pro-Batista supporters in Miami. Their father, Rafael, was one of the dictator's henchmen before the 1959 revolution. The father had urged his sons to work politically for the overthrow of socialism in Cuba. They now may be paying the price for this. In Florida's 21st CD, Lincoln Diaz-Balart faces former Hialeah mayor Raul Martinez. Martinez is well financed and has never lost an election since 1981. In the 25th CD, Mario Diaz-Balart is opposed by Joe Garcia, former executive director of the Cuban American National Foundation, long a funding conduit for anti-Cuban plotting. While these challengers aren't about to embrace socialist Cuba, they oppose the worst of the travel and financial limitations that Cuban Americans face. The Diaz-Balart brothers support the Bush-imposed tightening of restrictions on Cuban Americans who want to visit relatives in Cuba on provide them with financial support. The challengers also question the brothers' "obsession" with Cuba to the exclusion of other issues roiling South Florida. Martinez blasted Lincoln Diaz-Balart for having "nothing to show for his 15 years in Congress. Cuba, that's all he talks about." According to Garcia, "With a slowing economy and two wars being waged abroad, South Florida needs an independent-minded voice in Washington who will put our families before partisan politics." Polling data released June 18 by the Miami-based Foundation for Normalization of US/Cuba Relations suggests that Martinez and Garcia reflect prevailing community opinion. In Lincoln Diaz-Balart's district, 61 percent of the respondents would ease travel restrictions on Cuban Americans and 60 percent would ease the travel rules affecting all U.S. citizens. In Mario Diaz-Balart's district, the numbers were 63 percent and 59 percent respectively. In the nearby 17th CD, which represents parts of Broward and Miami-Dade counties and is represented by Democrat Kendrick Meek, the numbers were even higher. Only 12 percent agreed that concentration on regime change in Cuba was an important issue. The U.S. Congress is weighing in on Cuban-American travel to Cuba. On June 17 a House appropriations subcommittee added a provision to a bill funding the Treasury Department that would allow yearly visits to relatives on the island instead of visits only once every three years. Cousins, aunts and uncles would be added to the currently restricted list of relatives approved for visiting. Rep. Jose Serrano (D-N.Y.) introduced an amendment that would relieve Cuba of having to pay for U. S. food shipments prior to delivery. The measures face scrutiny by the appropriations committee and the Senate. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has picked up on the divide among Cuban American voters over travel to Cuba. At a gala event May 23 hosted by the Cuban American National Foundation he promised to ease restrictions on Cuban Americans visiting the island and on money they send to relatives there. Unfortunately, he also promised to keep the embargo against Cuba in place. The Latin American Working Group www.lawg.org has called upon constituents to pressure congressional ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From rowanwilsonwork at yahoo.co.uk Thu Jul 3 09:58:10 2008 From: rowanwilsonwork at yahoo.co.uk (Rowan Wilson) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 15:58:10 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Marxism] EVENT: Verso author Marshall Berman at the Southbank Centre, 17th July 2008 Message-ID: <711645.72206.qm@web25108.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Marshall Berman The City Rises: Cities & Modernism Southbank Centre Lecture Thursday 17th July, 7.30pm Queen Elizabeth Hall Southbank Centre London SE1 8XX Tickets ?10 Marshall Berman is one of the foremost writers on the urban experience and what it means to be modern, and he will discuss his work in depth during this Southbank Centre lecture. Berman first rose to prominence with All That Is Solid Melts Into Air: The Experience of Modernity, an enduringly influential account of the impact of modernization on art, literature and architecture. Over the last quarter of a century, his powerful descriptions of modern life have grown ever more relevant to the anxious, accelerated times in which we live. Special offer to Verso readers: 20% discount on tickets to this event when quoting ?Verso? To book phone 0871 663 2500 Offer not available online MARSHALL BERMAN is Distinguished Professor of Political Science at the City College of New York and at the Graduate Centre of the City University of New York. Among his major works are All That Is Solid Melts Into Air (ISBN 978-0860917854 / ?14) and Adventures in Marxism (ISBN 978-1859843093/ ?12), both published by Verso. Marshall Berman's books on Amazon: http://www.amazon.co.uk/All-That-Solid-Melts-into/dp/0860917851/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1215099864&sr=8-1 http://www.amazon.co.uk/Adventures-Marxism-Marshall-Berman/dp/1859843093/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1215099950&sr=1-3 This event forms part of the London Literature Festival 2008, taking place at the Southbank Centre from July 5th to 19th. Other writers appearing at the festival include Tony Benn, George Monbiot, Andrew O?Hagan, Bishop Gene Robinson, and many more. For more details visit www.londonlitfest.com. __________________________________________________________ Not happy with your email address?. Get the one you really want - millions of new email addresses available now at Yahoo! http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/ymail/new.html From walterlx at earthlink.net Thu Jul 3 10:19:20 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 12:19:20 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Marxism] Fissures in ruling circles over Iran Message-ID: <15262265.1215101960679.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net> That L.A. Times article presented intelligent intelligence from the US military which have their own rather good reasons to sweat over the possible military-political consequences of a war against Iran. Some of the additional reasons which could restrain the U.S. and which could encourage the U.S. to even tug the leash a little bit around Israel's neck would be the even sharper rise in the price of oil. Yesterday, here in Seattle, I saw gasoline going for $4.50 per gallon. It's just about $144.00 per barrel today and someone may wonder if an even deeper depression than the one currently in progress is what Washington really needs right now. The Iranians, who are invariably derided in the U.S. media as a bunch of ignoramuses who, as Bush would say, "hate is because we're free", have shown a sophisticated grasp of the political game. When Washington began to float the notion of establish an interests section in Tehran, they motivated it as a way to better contact the Iranian opposition. Well, the Iranians did not simply reject the U.S. proposal out of hand, but said that it would be taken up normally if submitted through regular diplomatic channels. Iran's stability, and the inability of the international community to unite against Iran (China and Russia lead the foot-draggers) are making it difficult for Washington to pull together a united front against the Islamic Republic at this conjuncture. No wonder there are some people in Washington who are looking in the mirror and asking themselves if this gamble would be worth the possible cost. Walter Lippmann Seattle, Washington =================================================================== LOS ANGELES TIMES: Risk to U.S. troops seen if Israel strikes Iran http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/marxism/2008-July/030950.html ================================================================ WALL STREET JOURNAL July 1, 2008, 3:32 pm Could Iran Be the Dominant Economic Story This Fall? Tensions over Iran are escalating and at least one economist expects the situation in the Mideast to become the dominant story of the second half of the year. Israeli soldiers participate in a combat exercise in a mock Arab village at a training center at the Tze?elim base in southern Israel. (Xinhua/Landov) ?Overshadowing all the economic data is growing speculation that Israel is gearing up to destroy Iran?s uranium enrichment plants,? said Bernard Baumohl of the Economic Outlook Group. ?We assess the probability of such a military strike to be 85%, and that it will likely occur between September and November.? Earlier this month, a flurry of Israeli military maneuvers ignited speculation about a possible strike. Meanwhile, the U.S. has continued to voice concerns about Iranian nuclear capabilities, while making clear that it prefers diplomatic solutions. But reports have surfaced that American covert operations against Iran have been stepped up. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson today said everyone is concerned about the prospect of Iran developing nuclear weapons, and that Iran?s behavior is isolating the country from the financial system. ?And I believe that over time it makes a real difference and sends a clear signal if you have concerted and multilateral action that is conduct-based and which isolates them from much of the outside world, the respectable outside world,? he said. However, it?s not Iran?s financial system that worries economists, but the impact any military action there could have on oil prices. ?The price of crude could spike close to $250 a barrel once the assault commences,? Baumohl said. ?How oil prices will behave afterward will depend on the speed and effectiveness of the Israeli strike and whether the U.S. manages to keep the Strait of Hormuz open.? Baumohl compares the tensions to the Cuban missile crisis, suggesting any assault could also lead to general instability and terrorism. It ?will consume people for the fall of 2008,? he said. ?Phil Izzo and Kelly Evans Permalink | Trackback URL: http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2008/07/01/could-iran-be-the-dominant-economic-story-this-fall/trackback/ Iran Diplomat Sees Potential for New Nuclear Talks Minister Declines To Rule Out a Halt In Uranium Work By JAY SOLOMON July 2, 2008; Page A6 NEW YORK -- Iran's foreign minister expressed optimism that negotiations could begin with the international community over Tehran's nuclear program, saying that his government is "carefully examining" a package of economic incentives offered last month by the U.S. and its negotiating partners and that Iran would respond "within weeks." Iran's top diplomat, Manouchehr Mottaki, steered away from Tehran's long-held negotiating position on its nuclear program by refusing to rule out the possibility that Iran might freeze its uranium-enrichment work while negotiations took place. Iran's Manouchehr Mottaki, at left, with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said Tehran is weighing economic incentives. "We see the potential for a new round of talks," Mr. Mottaki told a group of U.S. journalists gathered at Iran's United Nations mission Tuesday. "The two sides are trying to see if they can arrive at a new modality." U.S. officials reacted cautiously to Mr. Mottaki's comments, stressing that Tehran has offered no sign it is prepared to suspend uranium-enrichment activities, the principal precondition to talks held by the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council -- the U.S., France, Russia, the U.K. and China -- plus Germany. U.S. diplomats also noted that Tehran has competing political camps that often don't speak with a unified voice on key policy issues. "No one is placing any bets" on the talks going forward, the State Department's spokesman, Tom Casey, said Tuesday. Nonetheless, Mr. Mottaki's conciliatory words represent a break from growing expectations of a widening conflict between Iran and the West over the nuclear issue. Fears of a conflict with Iran have contributed to a sharp rise in oil prices in recent weeks. Crude for August delivery settled up 97 cents, or 0.7%, at $140.97 a barrel Tuesday. U.S. military officials have reported that Israel conducted military exercises in early June that appeared to be a trial run for an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities in the city of Natanz. Senior Iranian officials have said in recent days that they would respond to any strike by imposing controls on shipping in the Persian Gulf and possibly launching reprisals against neighbors that participated in the attack. Mr. Mottaki played down in his briefing the possibility of an Israeli or U.S. strike on Iran, arguing that Jerusalem's military exercises were a form of "psychological warfare." He argued that Jerusalem didn't have the military capability to execute such a strike. In addition, he said, "it doesn't seem like American public opinion would be able to accept another attack." The incentive package that the U.S. and its partners offered Iran last month included help in developing Tehran's civilian nuclear program and economic assistance. Tehran, in turn, has presented its own negotiating package to the U.N., which focuses largely on developing international consortiums, including Tehran, to tackle issues ranging from the storing of nuclear fuel to efforts to stabilize the Middle East. Mr. Mottaki said a mixing of "the two packages can put together a good agenda." He was critical of the U.S.'s military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan and said stability in those countries couldn't be achieved without Tehran's active involvement. Mr. Mottaki also said his government was against the U.S. establishing a long-term military presence through a Status of Forces Agreement being negotiated between Washington and Baghdad. He said Tehran believed such an agreement was against the will of the Iraqi people and the other governments in the region. "It's our understanding that they won't sign it," Mr. Mottaki said, referring to Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Mr. Mottaki also challenged Pentagon claims that Iran is playing an active role in arming and training Shiite militias inside Iraq. The Iranian minister said Tehran has played a direct role in seeking to broker truces between Mr. Maliki's government and various insurgent groups. Mr. Mottaki held open the possibility of increased interaction between the Iranian and U.S. public. He said that Tehran is actively supporting cultural and educational exchanges and that the Iranian government hopes to set up direct flights between Tehran and Washington. He also said Tehran might be receptive to the U.S. opening up a diplomatic interest section, or diplomatic office, in Iran. ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Thu Jul 3 10:28:05 2008 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 17:28:05 +0100 Subject: [Marxism] Now that I know... References: <2fa158550807030741o52c30d85w52450814175ea3fb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: ----- Original Message ----- From: "N?stor Gorojovsky" To: "James Daly" Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 3:41 PM Subject: [Marxism] Now that I know... : 2008/7/3, james daly : *********** From spalmer999 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 3 10:28:26 2008 From: spalmer999 at yahoo.com (Steve Palmer) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 09:28:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Marxism] Slow motion recession In-Reply-To: <004f01c8dc69$09320910$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Message-ID: <118199.64625.qm@web81901.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- "S. Artesian" wrote: > Steve, > > I don't recall anyone making vacuous statements about this. Some disagreed > with your view. I am one of those if by the weakness of US capitalism you > mean that there are alternative, stronger capitalisms that will replace the > US. OK, I had in mind the Panitch/Gindin school in particular - we were invited to watch Gindin nonchalantly waving off the seriousness of the financial crisis a few weeks before the Fed was forced to step in and avert what it saw as a potential breakdown in the financial system. But, more generally, it is the tendency, as Lenin remarks, to wish mourners on their way to a funeral many happy returns of the day. US capitalism is economically in a lot more precarious position than the US left seems to recognise. Both the US and the UK are in for some extremely serious trouble because of their overextension financially. > Anyway some of my favorites, from the Statistical Abstract of the United > States (I guess that risks immediate disqualification, but such is life). > > 1. Gross National Income: Number 1 country: 2000 US: $9674 billion; 2005 US: > $12913; Number 2 country: 2000 Japan: $4492 billion; 2005 Japan:$4977. Per CIA year fact book, est 2007 GDP of US: $13.84 trillion, of EC $14.38 trillion. > 2. GDP growth in 2000 constant dollars: > Composite of all OECD countries 1995-2004; $22500 billion to $28665. > US: $7973 billion to $10704 > Second place: Japan: $3100 billion to $3432 So? What's the point? Are you predicting that US GDP is just going to go on increasing for ever and ever? That the past implies what's going to happen in the future? > 3. Average annual rates of growth for labor productivity: > > All OECD not including US: 1995-2000, 1.8%; 2000-2006, 1.9% > US: 2.3%, 2.3% > > EU ("old" 15) 1.8%, 1.1% > EU (total 25) 2.1%, 1.5% My personal take on bourgeois labour productivity measures is that (a) they are internationally incommensurable and (b) only give a general indication, for any particular country, of the direction. But, FWIW, the latest BLS press release on comparative international manufacturing productivity remarks: "Manufacturing productivity increased between 2 and 6 percent in 2006 in most of the compared economies. The United States increase was at the lower end of this interval with a growth of 2.0 percent." The OECD gives about 7 different measures of productivity and you don't say which you have chosen or why. The OECD's own figures are hedged around with numerous qualifications: www.oecd.org/dataoecd/6/3/40605524.pdf. These do show the US out ahead absolutely. I think this is excessive because of what, from the Marxist point of view is double counting of the financial sector. > 4. My personal favorite: rate of profits, manufacturing, after taxes, in > relation to stockholders equity. US 2005 16.6%; 2006 18%. (Still checking > OECD sources for comparable rates). These rates are of course influenced by > the relative restriction on capital investment prior to 2005, stock > buybacks, and reduction of equity (which however did not see increased > rates of accumulation of corporate debt as a substitute for equity), offset > by the recovery of share prices between 2003 and 2007. Why just manufacturing? What counts is the overall state of US capitalism. The May issue of Survey of Current Business carries its annual article on the rates of return of non-financial companies. Table 1 shows the decline to 2000, then a bounce back, exactly as we would expect due to the devaluation of capital resulting from the bursting of the tech bubble. The rate of profit tops out in 2004, plateaus, then starts to decline. Most seriously of all, the absolute amount of the operating surplus peaks in 2006, and then begins to decline, absolutely. http://www.bea.gov/scb/pdf/2008/05%20May/0508_domestic.pdf The latest BEA press release shows that this is true even for manufacturing, despite its relative strength due to the fall in the dollar. Overall domestic profits, financial and non-financial, have declined absolutely, after peaking in the 2nd quarter of 2007. It is only the rise in receipts from the rest of the world that has stopped overall US profits from falling even further. > 5. Another personal favorite: Percent of final household income spent on > food: US 7.5%, tied with Ireland for lowest ratio. Next closest "major"? > UK, 9.1%. Japan 14.4%; Germany 11.9% It's all that non-fat food ... So? 35 million people in the US live with hunger. I'm not clear what the point being made here is. Around $3 trillion - 20% - has been wiped off US equities since October (per Wilshire 5000), so we should expect to see an increase in the rate of profit. But the mass of profit must be increased, extra surplus value has to be garnered from somewhere. They need about $140bn to get back to the 2007 Q2 levels. That's $3000 per household, about $270 per month. Where's this going to come from? US consumers? In part - that's what inflation is - but a sizeable chunk of the gains from eg gas prices is being sent to fatten ruling classes in the Gulf and other countries. From overseas investment? That means pushing up RoW receipts by 25%. For various reasons, that is unlikely within any reasonable timeframe. Which leaves government expenditure, so expect to see assaults on 'Pork', 'wasteful administration', etc etc. This is already under way in CA and elsewhere. The throttling of municipalities thanks to their borrowing in the auction rate market, where the rates of interest have leapt, should help. This is without considering the further decay in the financial sector. The 'temporary' measure come off in September. What then? Options ARM resets start next April. This is before they've completed flushing the existing sewage out of the system. The Fed has half its reserves tied up. To me, this is not a bullish picture. "I study a lot. That is one of the responsibilities of every revolutionary." Hugo Chavez. From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Thu Jul 3 10:30:44 2008 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 17:30:44 +0100 Subject: [Marxism] Now that I know... References: <2fa158550807030741o52c30d85w52450814175ea3fb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <359F05B677E14A95B453E1A5DDA9B2D4@home9sg93n9r5y> ----- Original Message ----- From: "N?stor Gorojovsky" To: "James Daly" Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 3:41 PM Subject: [Marxism] Now that I know... : 2008/7/3, james daly : ********* Nestor, the reference was given in the full article (on A-list). It is: http://links.org.au/node/489 ************** The ISO, in view of MDC?s massive performance in the March parliamentary and presidential elections and the desire of many Zimbabweans to vote, has now modified its position to call for unconditional but fraternally critical support to Tsvangirai. Our criticism is what we perceive as the increasing domination of the party leadership by capitalist and Western elites and the marginalisation of workers and radicals. This will lead to its likely pursing a neoliberal capitalist agenda if it assumes power, to the detriment of working people. And secondly its disastrous strategy of relying on the electoral route rather than mass action. But the Mugabe regime is driving us into hell and the people need some breathing space [government byTsvangirai ? -- J. D.] in order to reorganise and resume our battle for real democracy and against the capitalist and imperialist bloodsuckers. We therefore urge all our members, supporters, allies and working people in general to defy the regime? intimidation and go out and vote in the election for Tsvangirai. *************** [The same statement included the following: "A radio report on Power FM quoted Mugabe declaring at a rally -- ``If you thought Hitler is gone, then you are mistaken, because Hitler is not only back but back here in Zimbabwe.?? " Apparently they could not understand the saeva indignatio behind the irony. It is the same kind of irony as is expressed by Irish political prisoners who proudly call themselves felons because that was a term of abuse bestowed by the Brititish.] *************** Does the Zimbabwean struggle suffer from the same problem as the Irish one suffered the whole of the 20th century: division, deriving from inability to see the unity of the class and the national question? The country people there seem to back Mugabe because they want the land for the people, while the working-class seem prepared to accept MDC's pro-imperialism while they fight for social democracy within it. I still think the imperialist funding of destabilisation campaigns amounts to a form of cold but real war. -- J. D. From nmgoro at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 10:33:26 2008 From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 13:33:26 -0300 Subject: [Marxism] Now that I know... In-Reply-To: <486CEA6F.8030401@panix.com> References: <2fa158550807030741o52c30d85w52450814175ea3fb@mail.gmail.com> <486CEA6F.8030401@panix.com> Message-ID: <2fa158550807030933k3acfcd61j74a1121ea46aa92@mail.gmail.com> Won't break my promise. Just one thing 2008/7/3, Louis Proyect : > > Nestor would have preferred that they [ISO] > oppose Tsvangirai even when he gave them no reason to, maybe > even before he was born. This kind of tactical inflexibility smacks of > the idealism of small, sectarian groups and I am happy that the ISO > disdains the kind of purism that has reduced most Trotskyist groups > to the margins of political life. Well, a couple of mails ago I was a Stalinist. Now, I am a Trotskyist sectarian. Louis, I know that you can do lots better than that. We all know. This list testifies in that sense. Everybody can be wrong. Everyone can (and will) make mistakes in political action. That's OK. As to my preferences, in a sense Louis is somewhat right, because AFAIK a lot of much less learned people than the ISO in Zimbabwe (people who are honestly arcane to me) knew Tsv. since his political birth: the mass of the Zimbabwean population who, IN SPITE OF EVERYTHING, kept supporting Mugabe against Tsv and his imperialist backing. The role of Marxists is to understand what is it that underlies the movement of history, not to impose on it an external pattern. Thus, the question for a Marxist in Zimbabwe should be more or less something like "What does Mugabe do that people support him in spite of all that we know?" -and the answer "People are stupid, we know better" is forbidden, of course, as a form of idealism. Anyway, I can't imagine how can one possibly become both a stale Stalinist and a stale Trotskyist by pointing out that whoever has supported a guy backed by imperialism against a Third World government, no matter what kind of government this is, is at the very least enormously wrong. And now, yes, I will rest my case. In fact there has never been a case on my side. Best to all... -- N?stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a From sartesian at earthlink.net Thu Jul 3 10:35:39 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 12:35:39 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y><486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de><2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com><20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com><537005349.20080703113537@t-online.de> <486CCAF9.9030000@panix.com><2fa158550807030647g11b48d21h748d0ef7cd7d82d2@mail.gmail.com><486CDCB1.80108@panix.com> <2fa158550807030732j43d6e320i79b775ef477851b2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <012f01c8dd2a$d46123c0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> I think it would be very hard to quantify levels of imperialist influence-- but those who think the history of the Spanish Republic and the civil war are not germane to the discussion of Zimbabwe, "national revolutions," cross-class coalitions, etc. would benefit from a truly close study of the issues at hand during that period in that country. I would strongly recommend ]The Spanish Republic and the Civil War, 1931-1939[ by Gabriel Jackson. Jackson points out that the second republic had been grappling for 5 years with the problems that today we now call "underdevelopment," and attempting to do so without giving itself over to civil war and revolutionary expropriation. In addition that problem of underdevelopment was "uneven" in its manifestation with advanced industrial and agricultural areas scattered among and existing adjacent to the most backward relations of landed labor. And indeed, it is that question of landed labor, of land "reform" that proves itself so intractable to reform. It is in the Andalusia that Spain upon the Reconquest developed its latifundia system, complete with a master class of war captains, and the racism against the rural laborers who more and more became landless. I'm sure that this will sound familiar to our comrades in Latin America. And there was foreign ownership of the MOP in Spain-- ATT owned the telephone works, etc. etc. Moreover, the Republic suffered from the same actions that "underdeveloped" nations suffer today from their own and the foreign bourgeoisie whenever a radical government comes to power-- capital flight, refusals to extend credits, currency runs, etc. But the real issue, that cuts across continents and eras is this argument that somehow imperialism oppresses all classes of an "underdeveloped" country, and that therefore all classes will support a program that opposes imperialism, and that is based on the unproven notion that there can even be made a distinction between international and "native" capitalism. I think that close study of Spain, but not just Spain, but Bolivia, Venezuela, Chile, Argentina (including and particularly the Isabel Peron years), Brazil proves that all classes are not oppressed by imperialism, all classes will not support a program that opposes imperialism as, in fact, the distinction between international and native capitalism disappears as the basis of each and both, private property in land and labor, must be attacked in order to resolve the problems of "underdevelopment." ----- Original Message ----- From: "N?stor Gorojovsky" To: Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 10:32 AM Subject: Re: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses > 2008/7/3, Louis Proyect : >> N?stor Gorojovsky wrote: >> > Imperialism did not have the same influence in Spain, 1936, as it does >> > in Zimbabwe, 2008. From walterlx at earthlink.net Thu Jul 3 10:37:52 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 09:37:52 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] GRANMA: The Cuban Revolution Marked Our Path (interview with Uruguayan Education Minister) Message-ID: <000601c8dd2b$25aa5030$4300a8c0@new1501> GRANMA June 20, 2008 The Cuban Revolution Marked Our Path DEISY FRANCIS MEXIDOR Francis_mexidor at granma.cip.cu Marina Arismendi has been to Cuba six times. A teacher by profession, today she is Uruguay's minister of Education. She is in Cuba this week as part of the delegation headed by President Tabare Vazquez. Arismendi's first action as a minister was to declare a Social Emergency Plan directed to nearly one million Uruguayan's living in poverty and 300,000 living in severe poverty. Impressed by what she saw in a visit to the University of Information and Computer Sciences (UCI) she told Granma, "This is marvelous." "Visiting this place were thousands of students from all of Cuba's provinces are studying [and have] the opportunity both to become educated as high-level technicians and as human beings, truly gives us a healthy envy," said Arismendi. "It's very exciting to see young people dancing, singing, celebrating, studying and getting ready to become men and women of today and also tomorrow." Marina is the daughter of Rodney Arismendi, historic leader of the Uruguayan Communist Party and one of the founders of the governing Frente Amplio coalition. "We began in the government barely three years ago, but we are working. The president has implemented the Ceibal Plan, to give the boys and girls of our country greater access to the world of computers," said the minister. "In Uruguay, we are advancing in the fight against poverty and social exclusion," said Arismendi pointing to recent reforms to her country's public healthcare system with coverage for "hundreds of thousands of children that previously had no care." "We are working with the [Cuban] "Yes I can" literacy program and have had more than 2,000 Uruguayan patients that have received cataract operations in Cuba. Today we have an eye hospital thanks to solidarity, science and technology from Cuba. It began functioning recently, but how fantastic for those who have recovered their eyesight or are seeing for the first time. We thank the Cuban government, people and the revolution for these ideas and for the solidarity provided us." Referring to this visit to the island, Arismendi said: "It's impossible to say what has most impressed me because each meeting we've had has been special. Seeing a Cuban school, seeing happy children, is something extraordinary." "My generation was educated and was born into a political activism in support of the Cuban revolution. The Cuban revolution has marked our path, our ideals and our cause to transform society. And those of us that have been here at other times, like in my case, during the hard years of the Special Period [after the disintegration of the Soviet Union], at difficult moments in the life of Cuba and its people, we feel very happy when we see so much knowledge bearing fruit, with so much love and happiness as has always been present." Marina Arismendi commented on next year's general elections in Uruguay. "It would be terrible for our people to return to the situation we were in before. What we've got to do is work hard to continue forward and consolidate the projects that benefit the great majority of the population of our country." From walterlx at earthlink.net Thu Jul 3 10:37:52 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 09:37:52 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] CSM: African Union calls for unity government in Zimbabwe Message-ID: <000a01c8dd2b$26917be0$4300a8c0@new1501> (Looks like the African Union's goal is to get everyone to bury the hatchet, but not in one another's skulls. They would prefer that the MDC join Mugabe's government, in a way not dissimilar to the deal with was done in Kenya. In other words, the regimes in the neighborhood would like for the problem to just go away. They're all worried about the threat of THEIR neighbors possibly intervening in THEIR political disputes. None wants to see that. (This means even more frustration for Washington and London whose idea is that the African governments should do the dirty work so the Westerners can sit back, enjoy the show, and just criticize the performance of the Africans. Barring any revolutionary way out of the crisis, the deal-cutting seems about the only way to avoid a civil war in Zimbabwe. =================================================================== African Union calls for unity government in Zimbabwe Zimbabwe's opposition rejects calls for a unity government, however, citing perceived bias of mediator, South African President Thabo Mbeki. By Scott Baldauf | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor from the July 3, 2008 edition JOHANNESBURG, South Africa - In its most strongly worded statement on Zimbabwe thus far, the African Union (AU) called on President Robert Mugabe to form a government of national unity - a power-sharing arrangement - with his chief rival, Morgan Tsvangirai. The AU statement, which fell short of the full condemnation of Mr. Mugabe sought by some African nations, such as Nigeria, Botswana, Kenya, Liberia, and Senegal, expressed concern over the violence during the three-month-long election process and called on South Africa to continue its work in mediating the political crisis. Neither Mugabe nor Mr. Tsvangirai's party, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), expressed much enthusiasm for a unity government, with Mugabe's spokesman telling reporters in the Egyptian city of Sharm el-Sheik that Zimbabwe would not adopt the "Kenyan way" of negotiating a power-sharing agreement. "Kenya is Kenya. Zimbabwe is Zimbabwe," said George Charamba, Mugabe's spokesman. As for Western critics, Mr. Charamba said, they could "go hang a thousand times." The African Union's inability to directly rebuke Mugabe for an election that even African observers say "fell short" of AU standards, for acts of violence and intimidation that killed some 90 opposition activists and displaced tens of thousands more, shows the limits of the AU's promises of solving African problems with African solutions. While some African nations are pushing hard toward greater democratization, others are digging in their heels against reform and clinging steadfastly to the very tools of violence that Mugabe has used. "This clearly indicates that there are no shared and common values around what good governance is, what democracy is," says Chris Maroleng, a security analyst at the Institute for Security Studies in Tshwane, South Africa, as Pretoria is now called. "A lot of our leaders have questionable democratic credentials, so it's not surprising that the AU fell short of the mark." The AU's resolution contrasted strongly with the call by Zimbabwe's neighbor, Botswana, urging the AU to exclude Mugabe from future meetings by the AU and the Southern African Development Community (SADC). "In our considered view, the representatives of the current government in Zimbabwe should be excluded from attending SADC and AU meetings," Botswanan Vice President Mompati Merafhe said in a statement. Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga, Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, and the leaders of Senegal, Sierra Leone, Nigeria, also urged stronger action against Mugabe and his ruling entourage. Yet the AU's emphasis on dialogue between the MDC and Mugabe means that the AU has punted back to South African President Thabo Mbeki, who has served over the last year as the designated mediator for the 16 nations of SADC. Mr. Mbeki's "quiet diplomacy" with Mugabe has earned him more criticism than praise, and his tendency to protect Mugabe - flying in to Harare amid a wave of post-election violence against opposition members and declaring at Mugabe's side that there is "no crisis in Zimbabwe" - have more than once prompted the MDC to request his replacement by someone seen by everyone as impartial. President Mbeki's spokesman, Mukoni Ratshitanga, expressed satisfaction with the AU resolution, saying, "We will continue to work with the Zimbabweans and we are convinced that the challenges will be resolved." The MDC is not impressed with Mbeki's efforts, claiming that he is biased in favor of Mugabe. "The MDC's reservations about the mediation process under President Mbeki are well known," reads a statement issued Wednesday by the MDC. "It is our position that unless the mediation team is expanded to include at least one permanent representative from the African Union, and the mediation mechanism is changed, no meaningful progress can be made toward resolving the Zimbabwean crisis. If this does not happen, then the MDC will not be part of such a mediation process." The "sham election" on June 27, which Tsvangirai pulled out of, "totally and completely exterminated any prospects of a negotiated settlement," said Tendai Biti, the MDC's secretary general. Mr. Biti is currently out on bail, after his arrest two weeks ago on charges of treason and writing articles that were insulting to Mugabe. Analyst Chris Maroleng says that the current "asymmetry of power" between Mugabe and the opposition - Mugabe retains control over the Army, police, intelligence, judiciary, and all organs of government - makes any talk of a government of national unity impractical. "A government of national unity at this stage is a nonstarter," says Maroleng. Unless there is a complete restructuring of the Constitution, a change in the executive powers of the presidency, any power-sharing deal at this point would tilt the advantage, permanently, in the favor of Mugabe. "It's placing icing over a rotten core. It would look nice, but underneath, it would still be rotten." Find this article at: http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0703/p90s01-woaf.html From sartesian at earthlink.net Thu Jul 3 10:45:13 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 12:45:13 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Slow motion recession References: <118199.64625.qm@web81901.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <017a01c8dd2c$2a2a64a0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Steve, I am not "bullish." Relatively, US capitalism is stronger; is the lynchpin of international capitalism. That is my point. Profitability of US corporations is greater than that of Asian and European counterparts. This does not mean that the US has learned to "defeat the business cycle," is "immune" from crises, or does not experience declines, contractions, recessions. It does mean Japan will not, "Europe" (which doesn't exist as a single economic unit) will not, the BRICs, will not supplant the US as that lynchpin. Yes, profits have declined, are declining, and will continue to decline-- but I was referencing a "longer term view" regarding relative strengths of US, Japan, and EU capitalism. Again, I was discussing relative strength-- I am no partisan of the eternal invulnerability of US capitalism. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Palmer" To: Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 12:28 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Slow motion recession From Dbachmozart at aol.com Thu Jul 3 11:08:35 2008 From: Dbachmozart at aol.com (Dbachmozart at aol.com) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 13:08:35 EDT Subject: [Marxism] Obama's backtracking on immunity for telecom spying Message-ID: "Obama advisor Greg Craig: Adding insult to injury" The campaign's claim that Obama supported the FISA compromise to avoid "expiration of FISA" is factually false and, even when corrected, makes no sense. Glenn Greenwald <_http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/07/02/obama_fisa/index.html_ (http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/07/02/obama_fisa/index.html) > "The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein **************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars. (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007) From lnp3 at panix.com Thu Jul 3 11:10:57 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:10:57 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Now that I know... In-Reply-To: <359F05B677E14A95B453E1A5DDA9B2D4@home9sg93n9r5y> References: <2fa158550807030741o52c30d85w52450814175ea3fb@mail.gmail.com> <359F05B677E14A95B453E1A5DDA9B2D4@home9sg93n9r5y> Message-ID: <486D0821.6050003@panix.com> james daly wrote: > > We therefore urge all our members, supporters, allies and working people in > general to defy the regime? intimidation and go out and vote in the election > for Tsvangirai. > Of course, James neglects to point out that he learned of this quote from Stephen Gowans's diatribe against the ISO and all other enemies of Mugabe. Here's Gowans's conclusion: "The battle in Zimbabwe today is between the democracy of popular land ownership and self-rule and the dictatorship of rule by outsiders working through proxies; between the justice of Zimbabweans reclaiming the land that was stolen from them and the injustice of sanctions; between the right of struggle for national independence and the wrong of neocolonial oppression." It is too bad that James is too demure to state his obvious sympathy for Gowans's analysis overall. This is the same Gowans who once wrote: "The anti-Mugabe screed is a replay of the Trotskyite narrative about pure revolutionaries opposing a revolution that has been hijacked and betrayed by an unworthy power-mad monster (Stalin being the Trotskyites' archetype.) In this view, all revolutions are corrupt and must be overthrown ? that is, all but the one that will never happen. "Trotskyites have always been useful to Washington and London: many are reliably against the same revolutions (though for different reasons), and therefore serve the useful function of whittling away at left support." Full: http://www.raceandhistory.com/Zimbabwe/2007/0804.html Stalintern indeed. From ectoren at sbcglobal.net Thu Jul 3 11:31:16 2008 From: ectoren at sbcglobal.net (Erik Carlos Toren) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 10:31:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Marxism] Che Guevara - Writings Message-ID: <60060.59069.qm@web81804.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Camaradas: I want to buy three or four key books or writings by "Che" Guevara in Amazon or Alibris.com. Can cdes recommend three key books/writings/speeches by Che that I should at minimum have in my library? Since I am bilingual, Span or English will do. por el socialismo, Erik Toren From cbcox at ilstu.edu Thu Jul 3 11:32:01 2008 From: cbcox at ilstu.edu (Carrol Cox) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 12:32:01 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] Slow motion recession References: <118199.64625.qm@web81901.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <486D0D11.BB3BDE5@ilstu.edu> Steve Palmer wrote: > > - > OK, I had in mind the Panitch/Gindin school in particular - we were invited to > watch Gindin nonchalantly waving off the seriousness of the financial crisis a > few weeks before the Fed was forced to step in and avert what it saw as a > potential breakdown in the financial system. But, more generally, it is the > tendency, as Lenin remarks, to wish mourners on their way to a funeral many > happy returns of the day. US capitalism is economically in a lot more > precarious position than the US left seems to recognise. Both the US and the UK > are in for some extremely serious trouble because of their overextension > financially. Capitalism (as opposed to particular capitalist regimes) is in no danger at all, regardless of economic disasters or triumphs, as long as there is not a large and militant anti-capitalist, socialist movment. Economic collapses, far from being in themselves a danger to capitalism are merely the means by which capitalism is reborn, stronger than before. Carrol From Dbachmozart at aol.com Thu Jul 3 11:42:47 2008 From: Dbachmozart at aol.com (Dbachmozart at aol.com) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 13:42:47 EDT Subject: [Marxism] US HAWKS BELIE IRAN'S "EXISTENTIAL THREAT" TO ISRAEL Message-ID: US HAWKS BELIE IRAN'S "EXISTENTIAL THREAT" TO ISRAEL By Gareth Porter, The Electronic Intifada, 1 July 2008 WASHINGTON (IPS) - New arguments by analysts close to Israeli thinking in favor of US strikes against Iran cite evidence of Iranian military weakness in relation to the US and Israel and even raise doubts that Iran is rushing to obtain such weapons at all. The new arguments contradict Israel's official argument that it faces an "existential threat" from an Islamic extremist Iranian regime determined to get nuclear weapons. http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article9659.shtml **************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars. (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007) From fuerdenkommunismus at yahoo.com Thu Jul 3 11:56:36 2008 From: fuerdenkommunismus at yahoo.com (Angelus Novus) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 10:56:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Marxism] Che Guevara - Writings Message-ID: <614108.95459.qm@web50106.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Erik Carlos Toren: > Can cdes recommend three key books/writings/speeches by > Che that I should at minimum have in my library? The "Reminiscences of the Cuban Revolutionary War" published by the estimable Monthly Review Press is justly regarded as a classic. From fuerdenkommunismus at yahoo.com Thu Jul 3 13:17:38 2008 From: fuerdenkommunismus at yahoo.com (Angelus Novus) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 12:17:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Marxism] Event: What Can Be Learned From Karl Marx? (Oakland, CA USA) Message-ID: <531050.93174.qm@web50109.mail.re2.yahoo.com> http://www.ruthlesscriticism.com/ Discussion in Oakland, California, August 9, 2008 What Can Be Learned From Karl Marx: Everything About Work and Wealth in Capitalism When: August 9, 2008, Saturday, 1:00 pm Where: Niebyl-Proctor Marxist Library 6501 Telegraph Ave, Oakland, CA 94609-1113 Ph: (510) 595-7417 Speaker: Frank Winter, co-editor of Gegenstandpunkt (Germany) Leftist groups include the 19th century theorist whose ideas once shook the world in their inventory of traditions, but they are no longer acquainted with his writings. Marx is now a dead dog. All the more as in the universities, inasmuch as he is remembered, he is politely included in the intellectual historical western heritage -- and as a Great: he is to have been a great philosopher, the last after Hegel to have succeeded in dialectical thinking; a great sociologist who created a system in which society is brought by a single principle from the material base up to the superstructure of ideas; a great prophet who early predicted globalization; a great utopian who thought up a nice better world. That the Old Man himself wanted to accomplish none of these greatnesses and, if he were asked, would have refused to tolerate this praise, cannot deter his intellectual-historical friends. They even forgive him that he was a communist. He himself saw his achievement solely in what the subtitle of his theoretical major work announces: the ?criticism of the political economy? of capitalism. Marx was, if anything, an economist. However, economics does not have a good recollection of this classic; actually none at all. No wonder. In the end, he attacked not only the misanthropic and absurd logic of the economic system that they find so reasonable, he also dismantled their theoretical understanding of it. Capitalism, which Marx analyzed and criticized in the phase of its emergence, has changed since his day in this way and that, but in nothing really essential. The accumulation of money is still the dominant purpose of work. Working people are still a cost factor, thus the negative variable of the company?s goal: profit. The development of the productive power of labor, the greatest source of material wealth, still takes place exclusively to save money on wages and lay off employees -- thus making workers poorer. Because of this reality, and only because of this, the long forgotten thinker deserves to be remembered. His books help to explain economic reality today. This talk will demonstrate this by quotations from the first chapter of Das Kapital Volume 1, ?The Commodity.? It offers thoughts about use value and exchange value, concrete and abstract labor, money and benefit, work and wealth ? paired together, terms that our modern world can no longer distinguish, when they really contain the hardest opposites. From johnaimani at earthlink.net Thu Jul 3 13:27:29 2008 From: johnaimani at earthlink.net (johnaimani) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 12:27:29 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] CNBC: Dour Jobs ReportVideo Message-ID: <022801c8dd42$d5b88980$6400a8c0@D4PKYZ41> Even the conservative Heritage Foundation is crying "Uncle" and asking for government intervention in the form of another 'stimulus package:" Pulse of the Job Market Thurs July 3 9:08 AM Discussing the jobs report impact on the economy, with Jared Bernstein, Economic Policy Institute and Rea Hederman, Heritage Foundations Center for Data Analysis http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=783916771&play=1 From spalmer999 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 3 13:32:11 2008 From: spalmer999 at yahoo.com (Steve Palmer) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 12:32:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Marxism] Che Guevara - Writings In-Reply-To: <60060.59069.qm@web81804.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <851081.53561.qm@web81907.mail.mud.yahoo.com> It depends what you're looking for - there are writings on guerilla warfare, imperialism and underdevelopment, planned economy, Africa etc. At the MIA we have both Spanish and English texts, speeches and video: http://www.marxists.org/espanol/guevara/escritos/index.htm http://www.marxists.org/archive/guevara/works.htm You can download a pdf of Obras Escogidas at http://www.nuestrapropuesta.org.ar/librosprop/PDF/che-obrasescogidas%5B1%5D.pdf and a number of other sites. Steve --- Erik Carlos Toren wrote: > Camaradas: > > I want to buy three or four key books or writings by "Che" Guevara in Amazon > or Alibris.com. > Can cdes recommend three key books/writings/speeches by Che that I should at > minimum have in my library? > Since I am bilingual, Span or English will do. > > > por el socialismo, > Erik Toren > > > ________________________________________________ > YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu > Set your options at: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/spalmer999%40yahoo.com > "I study a lot. That is one of the responsibilities of every revolutionary." Hugo Chavez. From lnp3 at panix.com Thu Jul 3 13:39:40 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 15:39:40 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Obama backtrack of the day Message-ID: <486D2AFC.8090806@panix.com> http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/obama-open-to-refine-iraq-withdrawal-timeline/index.html?hp July 3, 2008, 2:28 pm Obama Might ?Refine? Iraq Timeline By Jeff Zeleny FARGO, N.D. ? Senator Barack Obama said Thursday the United States cannot sustain a long-term military presence in Iraq, but added that he would be open to ?refine my policies? about a timeline for withdrawing troops after meeting with American military commanders during a trip to Iraq later this month. Mr. Obama, whose popularity in the Democratic primary was built upon a sharp opposition to the war and an often-touted 16-month gradual timetable for removing combat troops, dismissed suggestions that he was changing positions in the wake of reductions in violence in Iraq and a general election fight with Senator John McCain. ?I?ve always said that the pace of withdrawal would be dictated by the safety and security of our troops and the need to maintain stability. That assessment has not changed,? he said. ?And when I go to Iraq and have a chance to talk to some of the commanders on the ground, I?m sure I?ll have more information and will continue to refine my policies.? As he arrived for a campaign stop in North Dakota, Mr. Obama told reporters on Thursday that he intended to conduct ?a thorough assessment? of his Iraq policy during a forthcoming trip to the country. He stressed that he has long called for a careful and responsible withdrawal of American forces, but he declined to offer a fresh endorsement of his plan to remove one to two combat brigades a month. ?My 16-month timeline, if you examine everything that I?ve said, was always premised on making sure that our troops were safe,? he said. ?I said that based on the information that we had received from our commanders that one to two brigades a month could be pulled out safely, from a logistical perspective. My guiding approach continues to be that we?ve got to make sure that our troops are safe and that Iraq is stable.? He added, ?I?m going to continue to gather information to find out whether those conditions still hold.? It?s been more than two years since Mr. Obama has visited Iraq, which Republicans have used as a point of criticism. After dismissing an invitation from Mr. McCain to visit Iraq together this summer as a ?political stunt,? Mr. Obama began making preparations for his own trip to Iraq. Dates of his visit have not been disclosed for security reasons, aides said, but his trip will be part of a Congressional delegation in his capacity as a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. ?My job is to make sure that the strategic issues that we face, not just in Iraq, but in Afghanistan, Iran and Pakistan,? Mr. Obama said, ?that those are all taken into account and dealt with in a way that enhances America?s national security interests over the long term.? From sartesian at earthlink.net Thu Jul 3 13:51:23 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 15:51:23 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y><486B7824.9000102@panix.com><14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de><2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com><20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com><537005349.20080703113537@t-online.de><486CCAF9.9030000@panix.com><2fa158550807030647g11b48d21h748d0ef7cd7d82d2@mail.gmail.com><486CDCB1.80108@panix.com><2fa158550807030732j43d6e320i79b775ef477851b2@mail.gmail.com> <012f01c8dd2a$d46123c0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Message-ID: <008301c8dd46$2c69f590$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> My friend, William Bowles, wrote a very interesting piece on Mugabe in which he states, among other things, that some on the left seem to be defending Mugabe for "all the wrong reasons." Full at: http://www.creative-i.info:80/?p=279 From spalmer999 at yahoo.com Thu Jul 3 13:56:25 2008 From: spalmer999 at yahoo.com (Steve Palmer) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 12:56:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Marxism] Slow motion recession In-Reply-To: <017a01c8dd2c$2a2a64a0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Message-ID: <310253.92091.qm@web81903.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Obviously I think US and Europe are much more evenly matched than you do. Let's keep throwing our $0.02 in and see where this thing goes. Steve --- "S. Artesian" wrote: > Steve, > > I am not "bullish." > > Relatively, US capitalism is stronger; is the lynchpin of international > capitalism. That is my point. > > Profitability of US corporations is greater than that of Asian and European > counterparts. > > This does not mean that the US has learned to "defeat the business cycle," > is "immune" from crises, or does not experience declines, contractions, > recessions. > > It does mean Japan will not, "Europe" (which doesn't exist as a single > economic unit) will not, the BRICs, will not supplant the US as that > lynchpin. > > Yes, profits have declined, are declining, and will continue to decline-- > but I was referencing a "longer term view" regarding relative strengths of > US, Japan, and EU capitalism. > > Again, I was discussing relative strength-- I am no partisan of the eternal > invulnerability of US capitalism. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steve Palmer" > To: > Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 12:28 PM > Subject: Re: [Marxism] Slow motion recession > > > > ________________________________________________ > YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu > Set your options at: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/spalmer999%40yahoo.com > "I study a lot. That is one of the responsibilities of every revolutionary." Hugo Chavez. From sartesian at earthlink.net Thu Jul 3 14:11:54 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:11:54 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Slow motion recession References: <310253.92091.qm@web81903.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <008a01c8dd49$0a38b9e0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> OK by me-- don't know that I have much to add right now, but I'm sure opportunities will arise later. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Palmer" To: Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 3:56 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Slow motion recession > Obviously I think US and Europe are much more evenly matched than you do. > Let's > keep throwing our $0.02 in and see where this thing goes. > > Steve > > --- "S. Artesian" wrote: > >> Steve, >> >> I am not "bullish." >> >> Relatively, US capitalism is stronger; is the lynchpin of international >> capitalism. That is my point. >> >> Profitability of US corporations is greater than that of Asian and >> European >> counterparts. >> >> This does not mean that the US has learned to "defeat the business >> cycle," >> is "immune" from crises, or does not experience declines, contractions, >> recessions. >> >> It does mean Japan will not, "Europe" (which doesn't exist as a single >> economic unit) will not, the BRICs, will not supplant the US as that >> lynchpin. >> >> Yes, profits have declined, are declining, and will continue to decline-- >> but I was referencing a "longer term view" regarding relative strengths >> of >> US, Japan, and EU capitalism. >> >> Again, I was discussing relative strength-- I am no partisan of the >> eternal >> invulnerability of US capitalism. >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Steve Palmer" >> To: >> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 12:28 PM >> Subject: Re: [Marxism] Slow motion recession >> >> >> >> ________________________________________________ >> YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. >> Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu >> Set your options at: >> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/spalmer999%40yahoo.com >> > > > "I study a lot. That is one of the responsibilities of every > revolutionary." Hugo Chavez. > > > > > ________________________________________________ > YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu > Set your options at: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/sartesian%40earthlink.net From elishastephens at hotmail.com Thu Jul 3 14:41:54 2008 From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 13:41:54 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Obama backtrack of the day Message-ID: For once I have to agree completely with Obama; this isn't a "backtrack" at all: ?I?ve always said that the pace of withdrawal would be dictated by the safety and security of our troops and the need to maintain stability. That assessment has not changed,? he said. Actually, I'll qualify that. This isn't a backtrack from what he has been saying, which is as he describes it; I've heard him say similar things on many occasions. In writing, however, it's a different story. Here's what his website says: "Obama [hard to trust someone who speaks about himself in the third person, by the way] will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months." No qualifications there. I'll predict that not only won't he fulfill that "all of our combat brigades out within 16 months" promise, but he won't even fulfill the "immediate" removal of one to two brigades each month promise. Unless he's convinced that the same brigades or their replacements are desperately needed in Afghanistan. Then he will start taking them out of Iraq...just not bringing them home. _________________________________________________________________ Enter the Zune-A-Day Giveaway for your chance to win ? day after day after day http://www.windowslive-hotmail.com/ZuneADay/?locale=en-US&ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Mobile_Zune_V1 From sartesian at earthlink.net Thu Jul 3 14:42:43 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:42:43 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Slow motion recession References: <310253.92091.qm@web81903.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <008a01c8dd49$0a38b9e0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Message-ID: <009201c8dd4d$57d89090$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Must remember to clip text, though. Sorry. From bauerly at yorku.ca Thu Jul 3 15:00:55 2008 From: bauerly at yorku.ca (bauerly at yorku.ca) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:00:55 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Slow motion recession Message-ID: <1215118855.486d3e070c21e@mymail.yorku.ca> >>>Capitalism (as opposed to particular capitalist regimes) is in no danger at all, regardless of economic disasters or triumphs, as long as there is not a large and militant anti-capitalist, socialist movement. Economic collapses, far from being in themselves a danger to capitalism are merely the means by which capitalism is reborn, stronger than before. Carrol>>> I would second Carrol's point and add that the strength of the US is in the fact that as the economy tailspins into what could be a major recession, no one is questioning capitalism (articles such as the one sited are propaganda telling labor to bite the bullet and acquiesce to being pinched). In fact, the bourgeoisie has gotten out in front and been the ones calling for 'reform' and state intervention. It is also important to point out that no one said the US was omnipotent but that it was stronger relative to everyone else. Because of the nature of US Empire, a crisis in the US is a global crisis. All of the national statistics piled up don't grasp the nature of a US led global capitalism (in fact I think national economic indicators are antiquated and based on Keynesian logic in a non Keynesian global economy). This system may be threatened by the conjunctural downturn, however with out some sort of legitimation crisis of global capitalism this will only act to devalue capital, thereby weakening some capitalists and strengthen the rest. Brad From markalause at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 15:05:14 2008 From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:05:14 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] Obama backtrack of the day In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Maybe a backtrack in terms of clarifying that he really always meant this when he was saying something that sounded like something else.... Obama had always played those liberal word games on Iraq. Replacing all the combat troops as soon as can safely be done with armed pacification engineers or stability technicians or something. ML From elishastephens at hotmail.com Thu Jul 3 15:37:38 2008 From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 14:37:38 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Obama backtrack of the day Message-ID: Now it's become a backtrack on the backtrack. Here's from the article Louis posted: ?My 16-month timeline, if you examine everything that I?ve said, was always premised on making sure that our troops were safe." Now here's what AP is reporting he's saying (although, to be fair, only a portion of this is a direct quote): http://www.miamiherald.com/campaign08/story/592972.html "He said what he learns from military commanders on his upcoming trip to Iraq will refine his policy but 'not the 16-month timetable' for withdrawing U.S. troops from combat in Iraq. He said what he learns could affect how many residual troops might be needed to train the Iraqi army and police." Make up your mind, fella! Either the "16-month timeline" is firm, or it isn't. _________________________________________________________________ Enter the Zune-A-Day Giveaway for your chance to win ? day after day after day http://www.windowslive-hotmail.com/ZuneADay/?locale=en-US&ocid=TXT_TAGLM_Mobile_Zune_V1 From jbustelo at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 15:51:43 2008 From: jbustelo at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Joaqu=C3=ADn_Bustelo?=) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 17:51:43 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] REBELION: The FARC had Already Expressed Willingness to Liberate the Hostages In-Reply-To: <8764707.1215096763234.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <8764707.1215096763234.JavaMail.root@elwamui-polski.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: I found the Machetera piece not just disappointing, but offensive, and Walter's sending it to this list without even the slightest attempt to differentiate himself from it another example of his disappointing political evolution. It must be said that the FARC's taking of civilians as hostages is not just a war crime, but has also proved to be a strategic political catastrophe that will long haunt the revolutionary movement in Columbia. To mention just one relatively minor aspect of this, it has delegitimized the FARC's holding of enemy soldiers as prisoners of war, allowing even three U.S. intelligence operatives who were conducting espionage in civilian dress over rebel territory to be covered with the aura of innocent victims of warlords. It has now led to the immediate disaster that President Uribe has scored a major political triumph just when the waters were rising all around him, with countless cronies under investigation for corruption and a Supreme Criminal Court decision asking the court of constitutional guarantees to examine whether constitutional amendment that allowed him to be re-elected was properly ratified, given the confession and conviction of a legislator for taking bribes in connection with those votes. Despite Machetera's assurances, seconded by Walter. that "The FARC had Already Expressed to European Delegations Their Willingness to Liberate the Hostages," the truth is that several years of the hostage negotiations release game has proved that if there is someone almost as unwilling to see the hostages released as Uribe, it has been the FARC leadership. Such has been the resistance by the FARC that even Hugo Chavez, who has had the patience of Job in dealing with this matter, which he did out of Bolivarian solidarity and a desire to help the FARC climb out of the morass it had put itself in, eventually just threw up his hands, and, despite lots of smiles and gentle phrasing, publicly broke with the FARC by telling them they should release the hostages --all of them-- unconditional., "In exchange for nothing" -- those were his exact words. This position was quickly seconded by Evo Morales, and Correa, and that Cristina Fernandez of Argentina also seems to have now aligned with it, judging from snippets of her comments in the last 24 hours I've caught on the news. And Chavez's comments came in the context of a broader strategic understanding outlined by Chavez, that the era of guerrilla warfare in Latin America was over, meaning that the FARC's continuation of the war could only lead to defeat. What is wrong with taking a presidential candidate hostage, one generally regarded as being leftish and an enemy of the corruption prevalent in government circles, and given Latin American culture and traditions, especially a woman? And with holding her for so long and under such conditions that when a "proof of life" video is made, there is a worldwide outpouring of concern that she may not survive much longer in captivity? And with the response of her captors to this outcry being to continue using her as a bargaining chip to try to extort concessions from the government? If you have to ask, I really have no answer for you. I can only hope that if this is the case, you find some other outlet for your energies than revolutionary politics. Machetera heaps scorn on the just-released Betancourt. "One of the strangest spectacles Machetera has ever seen ... her effusiveness toward her liberators suggests that the time she spent in the jungle with the FARC left her with no greater understanding of the Colombian conflict than when she was seized on her presidential campaign tour seven years ago." Talk about misspent irony! Six or seven years of humiliation and enslavement, and STILL Ingrid Betancourt has failed to apprehend the innate sweetness and goodness of her captors. Perhaps Machetera might consider the reason for that is that the FARC maes it so easy for their hostages to miss these qualities in their captors.. For Machetera, Betancourt's remarks "sounded more like a campaign speech than anything else - minus a recent visit to the dentist and blonde highlights in her hair." I listened to the same comments machetera did and to me it sounded more like the comments of someone who had been to hell and back, looked it, and somehow had managed not to lose her humanity in the process. This came home to me from Betancourt's very obvious and conscious attempt to highlight that the way this operation was planned and excecuted as the way the army should behave in its conflict with the FARC. But Machetera turns this into an occassion for pouring on the scorn. After describing how the FARC commander who had humiliated her and acted like a despot towards her for years has been bound and gagged in the helicopter, Betancourt added: "Don't think that I felt happy; I pitied him a lot, but I gave thanks to God that he was with people who respect the lives of others, even when they are enemies." To which machetera responds, "Someone should suggest that she tell that to the family of the Ecuadoran who was killed with a blow from a rifle butt to his neck after surviving Colombia's bombing of the FARC camp on Ecuadoran soil." The quite sharply pointed character of Betancourt's praise went right over the head of Machetera. "The FARC is an easy target these days, with dwindling support from all quarters for its armed struggle, so Machetera has little desire to pile on." The issue isn't "piling on." It is understanding WHY the FARC has lost popular support within Colombia and grown increasingly isolated, even on the revolutionary left, internationally. "Yet there is something strange," Machetera avers, "about the fact that seven years on, a captive should emerge with so little respect for the struggle being waged and should refer to her captors as 'humiliators' and 'despots.'" No, not strange, REVEALING is more like it. There is a dialectical relationship between means and ends, and the means being used by the FARC are quite simply not those that can lead to the ends revolutionaries should seek. As for Betancourt's description of how she was treated by her FARC captors, what basis can Machetera possibly have for challenging the veracity of what Betancourt said? Isn't what Betancourt described consistent with an outlook of taking civilians hostage and holding them for ransom? And of keeping these same civilians under the same concentration camp regime as captured agents of U.S. intelligence services? And of showing truly sovereign contempt for public opinion by trying to use the concern evoked by reports on Betancourt's health and the "proof of life" video as a lever to pry concessions from the government. I referred to earlier Chavez's public warning to the FARC that the era of guerrilla warfare in Latin America was over, and that this meant that the FARC's continuation of the war would lead to defeat. It should be noted, and not simply dismissed, that the Colombian government says the hour of the FARC's complete defeat is coming. This operation was made possible, the Uribe government claims, because the FARC's command, control and communications structures have broken down and the government has penetrated it on multiple levels, even at the top leadership level. On the face of it, the claim that command, control and communications have broken down seems to be substantially true. Those holding FARC's most important hostages, hostages which the FARC had made a key if not the key weapon in its fight, were surrendered without hesitation to a false-flag entrapment of the sort no succesful irregular force can afford to fall for. And most likely that's because the government has obtained cooperation at high command levels in the FARC. Almost certainl\y, the reason the hostages were turned over is because the commander of the guerrilla units that kept them imprisoned was given a direct order to do so by a higher-ranking government collaborator, or had become a government collaborator himself. Either way, before likely exposing their FARC command asset by carrying out this operation, the Colombian general staff undoubtedly assured itself the further exploitation of this advantage. More significant blows to the FARC are quite possible, even likely. One last point: the article translated by Machetera suggests that there was an all-but-final or even final agreement on this release or even a broader one that the army intercepted at the last minute and turned into a "rescue." The evidence cited in the article is thin -- that contacts by French diplomats had been authorized and that contacts *might* have taken place. But had the hijacking of an agreement happened, one would have expected that the outrageous swindle would have been immediately denounced by the FARC. I haven't heard anything like that, and it's been more than 24 hours. And one would have expected that the hostages themselves would have been told they were being taken to a release point, or a staging area for their release, if only to increase their cooperation. But they were told the opposite, that they weren't being freed but rather transferred. This grasping at speculative straws is an attempt to avoid looking reality in the face and calling things by their right names. To be a revolutionary means to tell the truth, no matter how bitter it may be. Joaquin From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 16:26:59 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 18:26:59 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Che Guevara - Writings In-Reply-To: <60060.59069.qm@web81804.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <60060.59069.qm@web81804.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <908b689f0807031526u1eb5c7e7t8325bc0ac68c1f9@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Erik Carlos Toren wrote: > Camaradas: > > I want to buy three or four key books or writings by "Che" Guevara in Amazon or Alibris.com. > Can cdes recommend three key books/writings/speeches by Che that I should at minimum have in my library? > Since I am bilingual, Span or English will do. In my view, Che's major contribution was that he provided an answer to the question "Why join the side of the oppressed?" He tried to provide an answer based on human solidarity. (In this sense, his work has affinities with that of Rosa Luxemburg.) For this reason, rather than his technical writings, I would recommend the more philosophical writings from the latter part of his life. Try: El socialismo y el hombre en Cuba. (1965) Mensaje a los pueblos del mundo a traves de la Tricontinental. (1967) Both are available via . R. Critic From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 16:32:42 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 18:32:42 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] =?windows-1252?q?The_=9260s_Begin_to_Fade_as_Liberal_Pr?= =?windows-1252?q?ofessors_Retire?= Message-ID: <908b689f0807031532t18200254n8a61ee670df43f97@mail.gmail.com> The '60s Begin to Fade as Liberal Professors Retire http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/arts/03camp.html?ref=education July 3, 2008 The '60s Begin to Fade as Liberal Professors Retire By PATRICIA COHEN MADISON, Wis. ? When Michael Olneck was standing, arms linked with other protesters, singing "We Shall Not Be Moved" in front ofColumbia University's library in 1968, Sara Goldrick-Rab had not yet been born. When he won tenure at the University of Wisconsin here in 1980, she was 3. And in January, when he retires at 62, Ms. Goldrick-Rab will be just across the hall, working to earn a permanent spot on the same faculty from which he is departing. Together, these Midwestern academics, one leaving the professoriate and another working her way up, are part of a vast generational change that is likely to profoundly alter the culture at American universities and colleges over the next decade. Baby boomers, hired in large numbers during a huge expansion in higher education that continued into the '70s, are being replaced by younger professors who many of the nearly 50 academics interviewed by The New York Times believe are different from their predecessors ? less ideologically polarized and more politically moderate. [...] From lnp3 at panix.com Thu Jul 3 16:39:28 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:39:28 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] The ’60s Begin to Fade as Liberal Pr ofessors Retire In-Reply-To: <908b689f0807031532t18200254n8a61ee670df43f97@mail.gmail.co m> References: <908b689f0807031532t18200254n8a61ee670df43f97@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080703223925.3EEA41184C@mailbackend.panix.com> At 06:32 PM 7/3/2008, you wrote: >The '60s Begin to Fade as Liberal Professors Retire > >http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/arts/03camp.html?ref=education > >July 3, 2008 > >The '60s Begin to Fade as Liberal Professors Retire > >By PATRICIA COHEN > >MADISON, Wis. ? When Michael Olneck was standing, arms linked with >other protesters, singing "We Shall Not Be Moved" in front ofColumbia >University's library in 1968, Sara Goldrick-Rab had not yet been born. This article doesn't address the real change taking place, which is the replacement of tenured professors my age with adjuncts who will very likely never be tenured. Not having tenure makes it very difficult to hold outspoken positions. If the university faculty becomes less radical, it will be because of this rather than a changing political mood, although this is a factor as well. From marvgandall at videotron.ca Thu Jul 3 16:42:39 2008 From: marvgandall at videotron.ca (Marvin Gandall) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:42:39 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] International Financial Catastrophe: Is this the 'BIG ONE'? References: <784041.37197.qm@web81907.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <023901c8dd5e$18e982c0$0202a8c0@MARV> Steve Palmer writes: > --- Jeff Richards wrote: > >> Looking through all the messages over the last few days there was not one >> soul who dropped a reference to the annual report of the Bank of >> International Settlements, one of the most important financial >> institutions >> in the world. The BIS is warning that we might not just be facing a >> recession; we could be hurtling towards a depression... > Leaving aside the question of whether I am a soul or not, we are expected > to > get excited because the BIS finally woke up to what's going on? > Last year the BIS was singing a completely different tune:... .. "one might with some confidence expect the good news to > continue." (p140). ======================================== Seems to be mostly a scare story by the BIS - raising the spectre of a "potential" Weimer-style hyper-inflation followed by a crash "over time" as further encouragement to the central banks, particularly the Fed, to act against the commodity-driven uptick in inflation by raising interest rates. Since the Fed-led Bear Stearns bailout, the central bankers - whom the BIS represents - are hoping with fingers crossed that the danger of a financial collapse/deflationary depression has peaked and there's no longer a need to flood the system with as much liquidity. Pending the reappearance of a further system-threatening shock, the bankers are reverting to their default position of tight money and stable currencies. In the current context, this means gently nudging up interest rates to bring down the dollar price of oil and other commodities, even if it means precipitating a "mild" manageable recession in the US. Overcoming resistance to higher rates requires warning of the danger of hyper-inflation leading to a catastrophic depression. Of course, the liberal wing of the bourgeoisie represented, for example, by Soros and Buffett, and others like Pimco's Bill Gross, don't agree with this outlook or direction, and think the danger of a US financial and economic meltdown remains very real, justifying large preventative dollops of fiscal and monetary stimulus. * * *. Central Bankers Warn of 'Tipping Point' By PAUL HANNON and NINA KOEPPEN Wall Street Journal July 1, 2008 BASEL, Switzerland -- The global economy may be close to a "tipping point" that could see it enter a slowdown so severe that it transforms the current period of rising inflation into a period of falling prices, the Bank for International Settlements said Monday. "Over time, this could potentially even lead to deflation," it said. For central bankers from around the world gathered in Basel for the BIS's annual meeting Sunday and Monday, the report made for chastening reading. Not only does it highlight the difficulty of the dilemma facing central banks -- confronted with slowing growth at a time when inflationary pressures are rising -- it also lays much of the blame for their predicament at the feet of the central banks themselves. High inflation rates may not ease in 2009, as expected, and central bankers need to be extra vigilant to stop inflation expectations from creeping upward, Malcolm Knight, the BIS general manager told a news conference. There is "a clear and present danger of rising global inflation and inflationary expectations," Mr. Knight cautioned. The BIS said that in the early part of this decade, central banks had failed to set interest rates high enough to restrain an unsustainable credit boom. And it added that if a repeat of the current financial crisis is to be avoided in the future, central banks must be prepared to keep interest rates high even when there are no obvious signs that inflation rates are about to pick up. It also suggested that regulators make banks set aside more capital during boom times, an approach that could curb their risk-taking and lessen their need to pull back on lending during busts. The BIS regards a slide into deflation as an unlikely outcome, and for now, rising inflation is a more imminent danger than a severe slowdown. "These threats differ in their immediacy, in that inflation is actually rising, while significantly slower growth remains only a possibility in many parts of the world," it said. The BIS said that although rising energy and food prices have been at the heart of the pickup in inflation rates, "inflationary pressures are now being seen across a broader front." It urged most central banks to raise their key interest rates. "With inflation a clear and present threat, and with real policy rates in most countries very low by historical standards, a global bias towards monetary tightening would seem appropriate," the BIS said, but advised against a "one size fits all" response. While a severe slowdown is not inevitable, it believes that the risks of a sharp downturn are very real, and centered on the financial system. From schaffer at optonline.net Thu Jul 3 16:46:16 2008 From: schaffer at optonline.net (Les Schaffer) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:46:16 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] clipping quoted text (was: ...) In-Reply-To: <009201c8dd4d$57d89090$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> References: <310253.92091.qm@web81903.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <008a01c8dd49$0a38b9e0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> <009201c8dd4d$57d89090$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Message-ID: <486D56B8.5050706@optonline.net> S. Artesian wrote: > Must remember to clip text, though. Sorry. > > xoxoxox a reminder to everyone: particularly when a topic heats up, we get lots of one-line responses to posts that piss us off. always check to make sure you've clipped all text from a message reply that is not pertinent to your post. for newcomers, we require this for one hundred reasons: 1. we have subscribers from countries with slow internet access and we do our part to limit bandwidth whenever we can. 2. readability: the more you clean up your post of extraneous elements, the more you can be assured that busy people will read your post. 3. readability: the more you clean up your post, the more time you put into its composition, the more pertinent and relevant your post will be for others. ... 99. we have subscribers for whom reading a computer screen is not an easy task, for medical reasons or other. the more you clean up your post, the easier it is for these people to read. we have subscribers who need to take lengthy posts and copy them into other applications so that they can enlarge the font to see what's being said. if they have to do this for a one line comment that looked initially to them like one hundred lines because they couldn't see you had 99 lines of quoted text, you are wasting their time. 100. readability: ... remember, you are not talking to the person you think you are replying to. you are (potentially) talking to over one thousand people from around the globe, behind numerous forms of internet access, with eyes of all capabilities, with time possibly limited. Les From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 16:50:20 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 18:50:20 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <2fa158550807030732j43d6e320i79b775ef477851b2@mail.gmail.com> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> <2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com> <20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> <537005349.20080703113537@t-online.de> <486CCAF9.9030000@panix.com> <2fa158550807030647g11b48d21h748d0ef7cd7d82d2@mail.gmail.com> <486CDCB1.80108@panix.com> <2fa158550807030732j43d6e320i79b775ef477851b2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <908b689f0807031550t122b7bb1sc8f94ab028c021d6@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 10:32 AM, N?stor Gorojovsky wrote: > But I know that wherever I might be on these issues, the main > question is "What did you do against imperialism when they attacked > your own Third World Country's sovereignty, dad?" In regard to this issue, it is helpful to think of Trotsky's comments, during his Mexican exile, to an Argentinian journalist, Mateo Fossa, on September 23, 1938 (_Writings of Leon Trotsky, 1938-39_, Pathfinder Press, 2nd.ed, 1974, pp. 31-36). Trotsky said: "I will take the most simple and obvious example. In Brazil there now reigns a semifascist regime that every revolutionary can only view with hatred. Let us assume, however, that on the morrow England enters into a military conflict with Brazil.I ask you on whose side of the conflict will tha working class be? I will answer for myself personally -- in this case I will be on the side of 'fascist' Brazil against 'democratic' Great Britain. Why? Because in the conflict between them it will not be a question of democracy or fascism. If England should be victorious, she will put another fascist in Rio de Janeiro [Brasilia became capital city in 1960 -- Ruthless Critic] and will place double chains on Brazil. If Brazil on the contrary should be victorious, it will give a mighty impulse to national and democratic consciousness of the country and will lead to the overthrow of the Vargas dictatorship". R. Critic From schaffer at optonline.net Thu Jul 3 16:53:17 2008 From: schaffer at optonline.net (Les Schaffer) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 18:53:17 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] clipping quoted text In-Reply-To: <486D56B8.5050706@optonline.net> References: <310253.92091.qm@web81903.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <008a01c8dd49$0a38b9e0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> <009201c8dd4d$57d89090$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> <486D56B8.5050706@optonline.net> Message-ID: <486D585D.4070608@optonline.net> Les Schaffer wrote: > we have subscribers who need to take lengthy posts and copy them into other applications so that they can enlarge the font to see what's being said. Another push for Thunderbird, i assume other apps can do this: View --> Text Size --> Increase enlarges the font for the message you are currently reading. Makes it QUITE LARGE if you select this option several times. On a Max, its also the Apple + combination. On windows, its the Ctrl + combination. Les From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 17:00:58 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 19:00:58 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] clipping quoted text In-Reply-To: <486D585D.4070608@optonline.net> References: <310253.92091.qm@web81903.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <008a01c8dd49$0a38b9e0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> <009201c8dd4d$57d89090$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> <486D56B8.5050706@optonline.net> <486D585D.4070608@optonline.net> Message-ID: <908b689f0807031600i377c1fc9q8596a93492d23bee@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 6:53 PM, Les Schaffer wrote: > Les Schaffer wrote: >> we have subscribers who need to take lengthy posts and copy them into other applications so that they can enlarge the font to see what's being said. > > Another push for Thunderbird, i assume other apps can do this: > > View --> Text Size --> Increase > > enlarges the font for the message you are currently reading. Makes it > QUITE LARGE if you select this option several times. On a Max, its also > the Apple + combination. On windows, its the Ctrl + combination. For people who read the list via their gmail or other webmail account, using an Internet browser rather than an email app like Thunderbird: Yes, Firefox (a free, open-source and downloadable browser) does this too. (On a Mac, it's the Apple + combination. On windows, it's the Ctrl + combination.) RC From jansen.l12 at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 17:05:00 2008 From: jansen.l12 at gmail.com (Linda Jansen) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:05:00 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Steve Bloom: Assessing the Cleveland Conference Message-ID: Thanks for the reports on the meeting. Fred says (in part): > First an assumption that goes into the following analysis: Probably about > half of those in the room and voting at any one time were conscious > leftists/revolutionaries of one kind or another, affiliated or unaffiliated. > On the Palestine vote that layer was probably split pretty much 50-50. The > members of Socialist Action, along with others who appreciate the need to > think strategically (in terms of making links with more conservative forces, > particularly in the labor movement) voted for the presiding committee > language. Others, who were either interested in consciously pushing a left > agenda, or else just voting their individual consciences, supported the MECC > language. If this is true (that the conscious leftists were split) then the > decisive vote came from others, who did not arrive in Cleveland with a > consciously "revolutionary" agenda. *That layer as represented at this > conference, then, would seem to have a substantial majority which is > prepared to put Palestine in its rightful place politically, *as a cause > which anti-war activists ought to place front and center in their political > program. . > > The above (in bold) is good news to me. I've been in antiwar meetings where the issue of the Palestine has stopped labor-related organizers from being active in the coalition. Does anyone really think that labor organizers have gone to their membership with this issue before opting out? Or is it that the symbiotic relationship between unions and the Democratic party de facto rule out organized labor's involvement if Palestine is raised? Integrity is not on display in the Democratic party campaign for the president. I think it is good if people are just asked to do "the right thing." It will separate them and us from the Democrats who definitely are doing "whatever (however lowdown dirty and lacking in principle) it takes to get elected." Linda -- Power concedes nothing without a demand--Frederick Douglass Make the demand! From markalause at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 17:13:28 2008 From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 18:13:28 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] =?windows-1252?q?The_=9260s_Begin_to_Fade_as_Liberal_Pr?= =?windows-1252?q?_ofessors_Retire?= In-Reply-To: <20080703223925.3EEA41184C@mailbackend.panix.com> References: <908b689f0807031532t18200254n8a61ee670df43f97@mail.gmail.com> <20080703223925.3EEA41184C@mailbackend.panix.com> Message-ID: Actually, this particular item contradicts the earlier material on the bracero nature of academe, which goes back decades. (It's only getting serious notice now because the sewerage has backed up to where even the elite universities are getting their feet wet.) If we look behind the facade, there are legions of boomers in the biz who have no real prospect of retirement. ML From christopher.hutch at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 17:20:48 2008 From: christopher.hutch at gmail.com (Christopher Hutchinson) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 19:20:48 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] =?windows-1252?q?The_=9260s_Begin_to_Fade_as_Liberal_Pr?= =?windows-1252?q?_ofessors_Retire?= In-Reply-To: <20080703223925.3EEA41184C@mailbackend.panix.com> References: <908b689f0807031532t18200254n8a61ee670df43f97@mail.gmail.com> <20080703223925.3EEA41184C@mailbackend.panix.com> Message-ID: Most of the professors that I have come across who have been politically active at some point in their lives do not hold principled views. For example, at a university in CT the "liberal" professors recently lead the charge to censor the school newspaper in the face of what many considered to be an obscene and racist comic strip. Instead of taking the time to hold forums and open discussions to examine where racism comes from their knee jerk reaction was to shut down the student newspaper and put all the blame on the university president. Their cries of censorship however fell upon the deaf ears of students who failed to be inspired by the professors ridiculous protest. The only thing liberal professors have ever done for students (at least in the classes i participated in) is to encourage a vote for the Democratic Party. The Profs. couldn't even mount a strong opposition to very real accusations that the president of the university denied a raise to three female profs. (who were strongly recommended by committee for the raise) because they were female. It was only the very few profs. with a revolutionary perspective that really inspired me and others to become active. It seems, however, the students when they become radicalized can push the professors to take more principled revolutionary stand. It is a shame the way in which the school administration is trying to push out tenured professors for the less experienced adjuncts. But what else can we expect in a society that closes libraries (Hartford, CT) and instead increases the police budget. Christopher H. On 7/3/08, Louis Proyect wrote: > > At 06:32 PM 7/3/2008, you wrote: > >The '60s Begin to Fade as Liberal Professors Retire > > > >http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/03/arts/03camp.html?ref=education > > > >July 3, 2008 > > > >The '60s Begin to Fade as Liberal Professors Retire > > > >By PATRICIA COHEN > > > >MADISON, Wis. ? When Michael Olneck was standing, arms linked with > >other protesters, singing "We Shall Not Be Moved" in front ofColumbia > >University's library in 1968, Sara Goldrick-Rab had not yet been born. > > This article doesn't address the real change taking place, which is > the replacement of tenured professors my age with adjuncts who will > very likely never be tenured. Not having tenure makes it very > difficult to hold outspoken positions. If the university faculty > becomes less radical, it will be because of this rather than a > changing political mood, although this is a factor as well. > > > ________________________________________________ > YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu > Set your options at: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/christopher.hutch%40gmail.com > From philip.ferguson at canterbury.ac.nz Thu Jul 3 18:18:26 2008 From: philip.ferguson at canterbury.ac.nz (Philip Ferguson) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 12:18:26 +1200 Subject: [Marxism] Southern Irish capitalists make average profit of 45 800 Euro per worker Message-ID: <6939483EA0E7574D9BE975D31D3E59370CF777@ucexchange2.canterbury.ac.nz> THE IRISH TIMES Wednesday, July 2, 2008 Irish firms make profit of ?45,800 per worker, report says MARTIN WALL, Industry Correspondent IRISH COMPANIES make an average of ?45,800 profit per employee or about twice the figure for British firms, a report produced by the country's second largest trade union, Unite, has claimed. In an analysis of profits in Ireland, the union said there were no grounds for believing that these were too low or being squeezed by high wages. It said various methodologies all told the same story - that Ireland was a high-profit economy. "Any suggestion by employers that their profits are coming under pressure is not backed up by independent data," it stated. The publication of the Unite report today is timed to coincide with talks between the Government, unions and employers on a new pay deal. Employers' group Ibec has called for a pay pause in the public sector, given the downturn in the Government's finances, while unions have said this would be unacceptable. Unions will be seeking the Government to spell out the scale of the economic problems which it faces and its proposals for dealing with them as part of social partnership. Parties at the talks are expected to set out their positions today. The meeting is likely to be followed by bilateral engagements involving Government officials and unions and employers. The report said that, based on CSO data, overall profit growth in the non-financial services sector had greatly outstripped wage growth by more than two to one. It maintained that in the business services sector, profits had increased by nearly three-fold over wages. "In total terms, profits in the sector increased by over ?5.6 billion in the five-year period [2000 - 2005], while total wages - despite a substantial increase in employees [over 50,000] rose by well under half," it stated. Unite said the transport and communications sector had experienced "extraordinary profit growth", outstripping wage growth by nearly seven -fold. "The average enterprise in this sector experienced over 40 per cent profit growth during this period." The report also said that profit growth in the wholesale/retail sector had outstripped wages by nearly two to one. It said the global crisis had placed a strain on the financial sector, but that this should not detract from the fact that this was one of the most profitable areas of the economy. "In gross terms, bank profits have increased by nearly two and a half times the rate of personnel costs. And lest anyone thinks that employees are sharing in these inflated profits, nearly 50 per cent of all employees in this sector earn below the average full-time wage with a small percentage officially categorised as low paid," it said. The report said in the manufacturing sector, wages were declining as a proportion of the cost base. "Wages are low at less than 9 per cent. So when we hear debates about Ireland's high-cost base and an alleged squeeze on profits, let's remember, it has little to do with wages." Unite regional secretary Jimmy Kelly said employers in Ireland paid some of the lowest wages in the EU. "They justify this state of affairs by falsely claiming that their profits are being squeezed, that high costs and high wages are undermining competitiveness and productivity. "We have found that profits are extraordinarily high throughout all sectors and all the while wage growth lags far behind." From philip.ferguson at canterbury.ac.nz Thu Jul 3 18:23:44 2008 From: philip.ferguson at canterbury.ac.nz (Philip Ferguson) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 12:23:44 +1200 Subject: [Marxism] Southern Irish capitalists - massive rate of exploitation Message-ID: <6939483EA0E7574D9BE975D31D3E59370CF778@ucexchange2.canterbury.ac.nz> The average wage in the south of Ireland is 32,000 Irish punts; a euro is about .8 of a punt, so the average wage equals about ?40,000. This would mean the rate of exploitation across the whole of the working class can be roughly calculated from ?40,000 in average wage and ?45,800 in profit per employee, so a 40:46 approx situation, about 114% rate. Strictly speaking, this is not the rate of surplus-value (and exploitation) because we don?t actually know what has come out before the surplus-value has been converted into profit. So the actual rate of exploitation ? ie the ratio of surplus-value to variable capital (the funds the employer/s spend on wages) ? would be higher than 114%. And, since most of the southern Irish working class don?t produce surplus-value, the rate of exploitation in the sectors that do produce surplus-value would be much higher again. In any case, we are talking about a massive rate of exploitation. Not hard to see where the growing inequality comes from in the ?Celtic Tiger? nor what ?partnership? has delivered to the working class in the 26 Counties. Phil THE IRISH TIMES Wednesday, July 2, 2008 Irish firms make profit of ?45,800 per worker, report says MARTIN WALL, Industry Correspondent IRISH COMPANIES make an average of ?45,800 profit per employee or about twice the figure for British firms, a report produced by the country's second largest trade union, Unite, has claimed. From philip.ferguson at canterbury.ac.nz Thu Jul 3 18:30:15 2008 From: philip.ferguson at canterbury.ac.nz (Philip Ferguson) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 12:30:15 +1200 Subject: [Marxism] NSW Labor government introduces draconian new legislation Message-ID: <6939483EA0E7574D9BE975D31D3E59370CF779@ucexchange2.canterbury.ac.nz> Socialists call for defiance of anti-democratic pope visit laws July 2, 2008 The Socialist Alliance today called on all people wanting to show their concern about the positions of Pope Benedict XIV on issues like same sex-marriage, condom use and abortion to collectively ignore the New South Wales government's new powers to arrest and fine people up to $5500 for "causing annoyance" to World Youth Day participants. See: http://www.socialist-alliance.org/page.php?page=769 From gaijinronnie at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 18:48:00 2008 From: gaijinronnie at gmail.com (Ronnie Corporon) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 19:48:00 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] Che Guevara - Writings In-Reply-To: <908b689f0807031526u1eb5c7e7t8325bc0ac68c1f9@mail.gmail.com> References: <60060.59069.qm@web81804.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <908b689f0807031526u1eb5c7e7t8325bc0ac68c1f9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: 2008/7/3 Ruthless Critic of All that Exists >: > > Try: > > El socialismo y el hombre en Cuba. (1965) > > Mensaje a los pueblos del mundo a traves de la Tricontinental. (1967) > > Both are available via > . > Any chance that these have been translated somewhere into English for us non Spanish speaking folks? Thanks! From philip.ferguson at canterbury.ac.nz Thu Jul 3 18:49:22 2008 From: philip.ferguson at canterbury.ac.nz (Philip Ferguson) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 12:49:22 +1200 Subject: [Marxism] Capitalist meltdown? Message-ID: <6939483EA0E7574D9BE975D31D3E59370CF77A@ucexchange2.canterbury.ac.nz> Carrol wrote: > Capitalism (as opposed to particular capitalist regimes) is in no danger at all, regardless of economic disasters or triumphs, as long as there is not a large and militant anti-capitalist, socialist movment. Economic collapses, far from being in themselves a danger to capitalism are merely the means by which capitalism is reborn, stronger than before. Agree completely. It's good to see notes of sanity being sounded. When people on the left predict capitalist meltdown every time there are some blips in the financial markets it just makes the left look daft. Capitalism is certainly senile and, in terms of its internal dynamic, probably weaker today than for most of its past. But it is not about to implode. Like Carrol says, in the absence of a powerful working class movement, even if there are capitalist recessions (and even muted depressions), the result is simply that some capitalists go to the wall, workers' living standards are driven down somewhat further, the more efficient sections of capital are further concentrated and invigorated and the system is revitalised. Also, instead of concentrating on the finance sector, a thorough examination of the productive sphere is needed - even just to understand the finance sector and what is happening there. Instead, a lot of the left use the same superficial methods as bourgeois economics, fixated with surface appearances and manifestations instead of the actual essence of the system. Phil From einde at gmx.de Thu Jul 3 18:49:57 2008 From: einde at gmx.de (Einde O'Callaghan) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 02:49:57 +0200 Subject: [Marxism] Southern Irish capitalists - massive rate of exploitation In-Reply-To: <6939483EA0E7574D9BE975D31D3E59370CF778@ucexchange2.canterbury.ac.nz> References: <6939483EA0E7574D9BE975D31D3E59370CF778@ucexchange2.canterbury.ac.nz> Message-ID: <486D73B5.6000605@gmx.de> Philip Ferguson wrote: > The average wage in the south of Ireland is 32,000 Irish punts; a euro > is about .8 of a punt, so the average wage equals about ?40,000. > Why are you still using punts? - the punt was replaced by the euro in 2002. Einde O'Callaghan No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.135 / Virus Database: 270.4.4/1532 - Release Date: 03.07.2008 08:32 From philip.ferguson at canterbury.ac.nz Thu Jul 3 19:05:42 2008 From: philip.ferguson at canterbury.ac.nz (Philip Ferguson) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:05:42 +1200 Subject: [Marxism] Oops, southern Ireland rate of exploitation Message-ID: <6939483EA0E7574D9BE975D31D3E59370CF77C@ucexchange2.canterbury.ac.nz> Cheers, Einde. It really isn?t my day! My stats were wrong because the 32,000 I had as punts should, of course, have been euros. I did a google search on average wage in the 26 counties and just saw the numerical figure and immediately thought punts (and did the exchange rate calculation) - I left Ireland in 1994 so I still think punt! So the rate of exploitation is ?32,000: ?46,000! So 143% rate of exploitation, not 114%, keeping in mind the caveats about this being across the working class as a whole, so the rate of exploitation of the productive sector being higher, and also the rate being higher because this is profits to wages, and we don?t know the total surplus-value. I see the average industrial wage in 2006 is a somewhat lower than ?32,000 for men and under ?25,000 for women. In any case, massive levels of surplus-value extraction/exploitation. Phil From walterlx at earthlink.net Thu Jul 3 19:13:21 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 21:13:21 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Marxism] REBELION: The FARC had Already Expressed Willingness to Liberate the Hostages Message-ID: <3876304.1215134001289.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Were I to express personalized estimates of those whose views I don't agree with, it would become difficult to maintain the kind of decorum needed to try to conduct useful political dialogue. Less verbal abuse and more political clarity would improve the environment here.f Much more importantly, I've said more than once in previous discussions of Colombia, as was the case both in South Africa and Ireland, that the revolutionary forces were too never strong enough to win militarily, yet too strong to be defeated militarily. That is why the South Africans and the Irish finally negotiated an end to their armed struggles. It's obvious that similar circumstances apply in Colombia, only now the situation is far more disadvantageous to the FARC as well as to the ELN. The Cubans have for a long time advocated the resolution of the Colombian situation through a process of negotiations, which could well have led to a better outcome than what seems likely in this circumstance. It's not necessary to repeat the same thing over and over and over again. Here's one item I linked to Marxmail two weeks ago: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/marxism/2008-June/030389.html Joaquin is welcome to take offense at any political views with which he disagrees. There's no reason go do that, in my opinion. I simply hold another point of view. There's far too much nasty vindictiveness practiced here anyway. Walter Lippmann Seattle, Washington -----Original Message----- >From: Joaqu?n Bustelo >Sent: Jul 3, 2008 5:51 PM >To: walterlx at earthlink.net >Subject: Re: [Marxism] REBELION: The FARC had Already Expressed Willingness to Liberate the Hostages > >I found the Machetera piece not just disappointing, but offensive, and >Walter's sending it to this list without even the slightest attempt to >differentiate himself from it another example of his disappointing >political evolution. ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From rfidler_8 at sympatico.ca Thu Jul 3 19:13:09 2008 From: rfidler_8 at sympatico.ca (Richard Fidler) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 21:13:09 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] FW: [SocialistProject] USW and the Fiasco at Dofasco Message-ID: This is an excellent analysis of an important trade-union experience at a major Canadian steel-making plant in the country's industrial heartland. Hamilton is situated about 40 miles (60 km) west of Toronto, about midway between the latter and Buffalo, New York. The article says a lot about the state of the labour movement in Canada and the challenges of organizing workers in the current neoliberal environment. -- RF ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(((( T h e B u l l e t ))))~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A Socialist Project e-bulletin .... No. 120 .... July 3, 2008 http://www.socialistproject.ca/bullet/bullet120.html __________________________________________________________ USW and the Fiasco at Dofasco John Humphrey Rumours had been swirling for a few weeks about "a big one." Then, on March 18, United Steelworkers (USW) Ontario District 6 Director Wayne Fraser and Dofasco/Mittal management both broke the news. Within a couple of days, Steelworker representatives would be allowed into the various Hamilton plants of this notoriously anti-union steelmaking enterprise. They would chat to workers informally, one-on-one and in small groups, listen to their concerns, and see if they were interested in joining the Union. The process would be patient, not rushed. If it deemed the reaction of workers to be sufficiently positive, the union would arrange for the election of a committee of Dofasco workers to sit down with union staff and the company and negotiate a tentative collective agreement. If the workers then voted to ratify the deal, the company would recognize the USW as their bargaining unit. Although unorthodox in its genesis, the promise was that the future relationship between the parties would revert to a traditional one: elected stewards and negotiating committees, a proper grievance and arbitration process, contract ratification, the right to strike, and so on. An unspoken message within District 6's announcement was aimed at the Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) and its recent controversial "Framework of Fairness" at Magna. USW glee was barely hidden. Steel 'can think outside the box', was the word, and strike a deal with a company even more historically formidable than Frank Stronach's, without sacrificing genuine representation for its dues-paying members. There was an additional kicker: Dofasco's "neutrality" (actually its acquiescence) had been negotiated by the so-called 'International Union' down in the USA, where the expanding Arcelor-Mittal empire now owns a huge chunk of North American's restructured steel industry and has inherited dozens of contracts with the USW. In other words, unions with a narrow 'national' focus are less geared to the requirements of this increasingly globalized world. It was a mind-boggling development, a coup out of the blue. It turned Hamilton on its ears. Dofasco? Union? The Steel Capital had been a "two company" town forever it seemed. Both Stelco (in 1910) and Dofasco (1912) -- founded as deliberate acts of national industrial policy with the help of the Canadian state -- had local manufacturing roots going back another half century. They became tweedledum and tweedledee on the waterfront, night and day, union and non-union, troubled and profitable. Stelco workers had joined the Steelworkers in 1946, after a long, bitter, heroic recognition strike. Succeeding years saw a series of tough negotiations, classic industrial labour disputes and militant actions which often pitted the local leadership against their own District 6 staff. By contrast, Dofasco stood steadfastly above the fray, defiantly unorganized. Its owners, the Shermans, were deeply anti-union. Successive organizing drives, increasingly half-hearted, were thwarted by various repressive tools, but more significantly by a systematic policy of cooptation. Wages and benefits won at Stelco were matched dollar for dollar by those granted at Dofasco. Worker-involvement schemes, a recreation park, 'profit-sharing', 'team-building', the famous Christmas Party and a torrent of propaganda built a 'familial' workplace culture over several generations. Indeed a community culture: there were Stelco families and Dofasco families. A significant block of Dofasco workers thus became stubbornly impervious to the idea of unionization. Over time, as the company became more nimble and financially successful than Stelco, it attributed this to the differences in labour relations ('modern' vs 'archaic'). Prosperity, it implied, meant keeping a union out, and a lot of workers swallowed that. ** Restructuring the Steel Industry ** Though sensational in its suddenness, the March 'coup' did not entirely come out of left field. Technological advances have steadily shrunk the huge workforce at both enterprises to a fraction of their former size. Stelco had 20,000 unionized workers in 1946, but fewer than 5,000 nowadays. Dofasco also grew much slimmer, mainly by attrition, while production at both enterprises has increased significantly. Over the past three years, worldwide restructuring in the steel industry, as a result of neoliberal corporate globalization, has led to each one of Canada's several Steel companies being sold off to foreign multinationals. The federal government dropped any pretence of protecting Canada's steel industry as part of a deliberate industrial strategy and let them all go. In 2006, the fiercely independent Dofasco became part of the European-Indian colossus Arcelor-Mittal. Last year it was Stelco's turn -- after a 2-year brush with bankruptcy protection -- swallowed by the giant US Steel. This dramatic change of global circumstances and local ownership certainly shook the workers' applecart at Dofasco. The old cosy but slick, cooptative Canadian management was replaced by a new generation of leaner, meaner executives, following a new corporate mantra and tightly answerable to offshore headquarters. The unthinkable -- large-scale layoffs -- loomed as a distinct possibility. There were new questions about 'profit-sharing' and revised work methods. Employees were becoming unsure about the company's future. Old certainties were evaporating. Nevertheless, for the company to suddenly invite union representatives inside its walls, where before it would have set the dogs on them, was astounding. The original owners, the Sherman family, would be churning in their galvanized steel vault. Dofasco's former management team, notably ex-CEO John Mayberry, replaced in the 2006 takeover, denounced the deal in the Hamilton press as an act of 'betrayal'. What unfolded next was just as dramatic. It was, let us say, 'a whirlwind campaign'. Union representatives were greeted with deep-seated, vituperative hostility from the employees. So intense was the hostility, in fact, that on March 27, barely a week after it began, the union cut bait, pulled all its organizers, and put the drive "temporarily on hold". ** Dofasco Workers ** So what happened, and what are the lessons? The union was naive if it believed that the ingrained deference of Dofasco workers to their company would translate into deference to the (new) company's sudden suggestion that they listen to overtures from the union. Did the USW really imagine, like Donald Rumsfeld in Iraq, that the liberated inhabitants of the workshops would strew the aisles with flowers? After all that Hamilton history? Deference to Dofasco always went hand-in-hand with scorn for unions and specifically for the Steelworkers at Stelco. And trust in the Company was under serious review. What were the new owners up to? As union reps strolled from department to department, machine to machine, looking for a chat on the red carpet, many workers understandably smelled a rat, a set-up, a done deal arranged over their heads. The Hamilton Spectator -- amid a barrage of joyous 'told-you-so's' - quoted one worker as saying that, if they were going to have a union, they would decide that for themselves, including when and which union, not have the Company decide for them. From their interactions with Stelco counterparts down the years, Dofasco workers had imbibed a certain distrust of corporate intrigue and of Union brass, and this sudden 'coup' was too much to take at face value. Now they rejected the company along with the USW. The union also made elementary mistakes. The International sealed the deal in Pittsburgh, but inevitably had to hand it over to District 6 to implement. The District 6 campaign began with a joint letter to workers from Arcelor-Mittal CEO Jurgen Schachler and USW Director Wayne Fraser, an apparent signal that 'the fix was in'. Before that development had time to sink in, the wooing began immediately, without foreplay, too hasty, blatant and clumsy. The union handpicked a team of full-timers to send in, including the Director himself, to talk to the workers. These were not shop-floor steelmaking activists. Seasoned members of Local 1005 at Stelco -- fresh from their successful, militant struggle against the CCAA (Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act) and attempts to plunder their pension fund -- were kept in the dark and uninvolved. They knew most of the issues, and had ties with pro-union groups within the plants, but were conspicuously kept in quarantine throughout. Those who were sent in were ill informed about Dofasco realities, processes and concerns. Reportedly, they talked in generalities about what a union could or might do, rather than nailing specific workplace issues from their own experience. ** Neutrality Agreements ** But the lessons for organizing are much broader than this. The first, simple one is that there are no short-cuts. If a situation looks too good to be true, it probably is. Which raises questions about the deal with Arcelor-Mittal, the 'neutrality agreement' itself. Bosses are almost always the enemies of unionization and nowadays they adopt ever-more-sophisticated methods of scaring workers, undermining union support and driving campaigns into the ditch. To defuse, prevent or offset this kind of hostility is a definite bonus for union organizers. So-called "neutrality agreements" -- whereby a company is persuaded to stand back during a certification attempt and "let the workers decide", not intervene to dissuade them -- are a pleasant relief for organizers, freeing them from torrents of bullshit. However, our target, our battle, our primary task remains to win over the hearts and minds of the workers, our potential members, not of management. A 'neutrality' deal can only be a sidebar to, not the centrepiece of, a certification drive. The hard slog of leafleting outside the gates, going house to house, arranging small-group worker-to-worker meetings in homes, coffee-shops, taverns or mosques, is still required. Inside committees need to be formed, cards released carefully and confidentially, contacts built up department by department. Such a process builds legitimacy, provides feedback, develops leaders, and ensures that the pivotal local issues are understood. It also makes it clear that solidarity vis ? vis the employer is the key to future progress. A company -- even when used to compliance, and endowed with employee goodwill -- cannot deliver its workers cold into the arms of a designated bargaining agent, unless it's a done deal with a yellow in-house union or a bogus pre-emptive arrangement with the likes of the Christian Labour Association of Canada. Even if a legitimate union "succeeds" in such a manner, the result of short-circuiting the democratic involvement of the workers will almost certainly be apathy and lack of involvement, a union in name only. There are certainly campaigns like 'Justice for Janitors', where organizing cannot realistically be done on a workplace-by-workplace and worker-by-worker basis. Unions like SEIU then stage major community mobilizations and publicity campaigns -- perhaps citywide or nationwide -- to force large-scale employers to grant voluntary recognition or at least "neutrality" for all their employees. This has proven an effective way to achieve collective representation under such circumstances. But by-passing member involvement at the sign-up stage still creates future difficulties in getting workers truly involved and engaged. A second lesson is that campaigns should be steady, under-the-radar, low-key. They shouldn't be proclaimed ahead of time from the rooftop of Union headquarters -- especially with the Company logo on the letterhead. As my granny used to say, don't count your chickens before they're hatched, or you end up with egg on your face. Competitiveness between individual unions must not be allowed to distort campaign strategies. Arcelor-Mittal's operations in Hamilton may well become unionized before too long, as conditions continue to evolve within and without. And the Steelworkers are the obvious union to do it. Their aborted Do-fiasco this March has undoubtedly set things back for a year or two, and serious lessons have to be absorbed before a new attempt is made. The next campaign will have to be done the hard way, patiently, modestly, from below. And in conjunction with the other Steelworkers, community allies, and the rest of the labour movement in Hamilton and beyond. If the company can be persuaded that it's in its own broader interest not to resist this, so much the better. But our focus has to be on the workers themselves, their fears, their pride, their hopes, their needs. Not on the boardroom, not on the headlines. John Humphrey is a former president of Steelworkers Local 5338. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(((( T h e B u l l e t))))~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The Bullet is produced by the Socialist Project. Readers are encouraged to distribute widely. Comments, criticisms and suggestions are welcome. Write to info at socialistproject.ca If you wish to subscribe: http://www.socialistproject.ca/lists/?p=subscribe The Bullet archive is available at http://www.socialistproject.ca/bullet For more analysis of contemporary politics check out 'Relay: A Socialist Project Review' at http://www.socialistproject.ca/relay ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From lnp3 at panix.com Thu Jul 3 19:19:42 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 21:19:42 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] We are Together Message-ID: <20080704011938.1A4411133D@mailbackend.panix.com> Although I will have some critical comments to make about the mindset that went into the making of the documentary "We Are Together", I strongly urge New Yorkers to see this totally affecting documentary about an orphanage in South Africa made up of children who have lost parents to the AIDS epidemic. In order to cope with their losses and also to connect to the outside world, they take part in traditional choral singing of the kind that Ladysmith Black Mambazo made famous. The children live at the Agape orphanage, which was founded by Gogo "Grandma" Zodwa. When she was working as an HIV counselor, she found that many of her clients were worried about what would happen to their children when they were gone. So she established Agape to look after these children. One of these children, a featured singer in the chorus, is a 12 year old girl named Slindile Moya who is really the star of the movie. With a smile that lights up the entire screen when she is on camera, you marvel at her ability to endure such a hard life. Not only has she lost both parents, her brother is sick with AIDS and dies during the movie. During the burial ceremony, Slindile and her siblings, both those living with her at the orphanage and those old enough to look after themselves, console each other with a beautiful hymn about the eternal life to come. Until every human being lives in a world free from poverty and horrible diseases like AIDS, it is understandable that religion will continue to provide solace against a heartless world. full: http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2008/07/04/we-are-together/ From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 19:49:36 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 21:49:36 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Che Guevara - Writings In-Reply-To: References: <60060.59069.qm@web81804.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <908b689f0807031526u1eb5c7e7t8325bc0ac68c1f9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <908b689f0807031849u2ddd7425u877a13376fbd8605@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Ronnie Corporon wrote: >> Try: >> >> El socialismo y el hombre en Cuba. (1965) >> >> Mensaje a los pueblos del mundo a traves de la Tricontinental. (1967) >> >> Both are available via >> . >> > > > Any chance that these have been translated somewhere into English for us non > Spanish speaking folks? Yes. March, 1965: Man and Socialism in Cuba (El socialismo y el hombre en Cuba. (1965)) April 16, 1967: Message to the Tricontinental (Mensaje a los pueblos del mundo a traves de la Tricontinental. (1967)) Both available in English translation at: . RC From ectoren at sbcglobal.net Thu Jul 3 19:51:43 2008 From: ectoren at sbcglobal.net ( Erik Carlos Toren) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 20:51:43 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] Che Guevara - Writings References: <60060.59069.qm@web81804.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <908b689f0807031526u1eb5c7e7t8325bc0ac68c1f9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <006901c8dd78$831fea20$210110ac@your4f1261a8e5> Camaradas: Gracias a tod at s! Thanks to all for your on and off-list responses. Really helped with creating a list. por el socialismo, Erik ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ruthless Critic of All that Exists" From arthurymer at yahoo.com Thu Jul 3 20:02:46 2008 From: arthurymer at yahoo.com (Arthur Rymer) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 19:02:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Marxism] Steve Bloom: Assessing the Cleveland Conference Message-ID: <673897.5840.qm@web30205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Steve Bloom's report on the National Assembly in Cleveland omits a fact so important that the report is a distortion of what actually happened: Bloom does not inform the reader that the meeting voted decisively in favor of an amendment to change the name of the National Assembly itself to include Afghanistan in the name. Bloom explains that he "did not take time to elaborate" the Afghanistan discussion, because "a consensus developed in the end." This is false. There was not a consensus on the question of Afghanistan. The leadership of the Assembly, including Jerry Gordon, Jeff Mackler, and all of Socialist Action, opposed the Afghanistan amendment, spoke against it, and voted against it. Yet a decisive majority defied the leadership and voted in favor of the amendment. This amendment changed the name of the National Assembly to include Afghanistan in the name, and added "and Afghanistan" to every mention of Iraq in the National Assembly's action proposal. And by the way, the original motion to change the name of the National Assembly to include Afghanistan in the name was submitted by the League for the Revolutionary Party (LRP), which Bloom dismisses as one of the "various sects" that "came to disrupt and expose." The LRP did not disrupt, we did expose, and we exposed so well that we played a key role in winning a clear majority of the assembly to support our motion on Afghanistan. The two times that an LRPer, Jeff Covington, spoke from the floor against the leadership of the anti-war movement and of this assembly for their accommodation to the Democratic Party, his statements were repeatedly met with loud applause from a significant portion of the meeting. A number of people approached him afterward to thank him for his comments. For the record, Carol Seligman of Socialist Alternative as well as the Freedom Socialist Party / Radical Women also supported, spoke for, and voted for the Afghanistan amendment. The Spartacist League and the Internationalist Group indeed only came to denounce -- the IG made the embarrassing mistake of walking in and denouncing the assembly for not opposing the occupation of Afghanistan, shortly after the assembly had just voted in favor of the amendment to oppose the occupation of Afghanistan. A stopped clock is sometimes right, but not this time. Art Rymer From markalause at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 20:27:10 2008 From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 21:27:10 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] =?windows-1252?q?The_=9260s_Begin_to_Fade_as_Liberal_Pr?= =?windows-1252?q?_ofessors_Retire?= In-Reply-To: References: <908b689f0807031532t18200254n8a61ee670df43f97@mail.gmail.com> <20080703223925.3EEA41184C@mailbackend.panix.com> Message-ID: Well, even Marxism means something different in the academic world for most of those who claim to be Marxists. I wouldn't begin to guess what they mean by "liberal." But professors have a lot less power over university and college policies than they did when we were undergraduates...even where they get to vote on these things. That erosion has been gradual, with some dramatic leaps, depending on the institution. So much of it, though, has to do with faculty itself voting against its group self-interest. For my own part, I've never seen a single case in my entire career where faculty failed to vote for what the administration wanted. If you want to understand this, you have to look at the politics of the wider society, where most of the people do exactly that. Indeed, I think professors are no different than any other group of particularly privileged workers in the US. Solidarity! Mark L. From markalause at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 20:35:25 2008 From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 21:35:25 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] Mumia Abu Jamal backs Nader's critique of Obama Message-ID: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck Giese" To: Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 9:09 PM Subject: [new-party] Mumia Abu Jamal backs Nader's critique of Obama > In Mumia Abu Jamal's commentary on Free Speech Radio News > today, he speaks positively of Ralph Nader's recent critique > of Obama in the past week. Abu-Jamal described Obama as a > candidate of image, not of substance, and essentially supports > Nader's critique, saying the Nader is a "smart cookie" and "he > knows what he is talking about". > > It Abu Jamal's commentary runs from 24:48 to 27:46 (min:sec) > in the 30-minute program. > > Flash player stream: http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=27147 > (-enable Javascript for the Flash player) > URL (MP3 file): http://aud1.kpfa.org/data/20080703-Thu1530.mp3 > > > Chuck > From dave.walters at comcast.net Thu Jul 3 20:42:06 2008 From: dave.walters at comcast.net (David Walters) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:42:06 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Mumia Abu Jamal backs Nader's critique of Obama...but endorses McKinney Message-ID: <486D8DFE.4070207@comcast.net> Just in case anyone was curious... http://www.runcynthiarun.org/Endorsements/MumiaAbuJamal David From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Thu Jul 3 21:56:09 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 23:56:09 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] =?windows-1252?q?The_=9260s_Begin_to_Fade_as_Liberal_Pr?= =?windows-1252?q?_ofessors_Retire?= In-Reply-To: References: <908b689f0807031532t18200254n8a61ee670df43f97@mail.gmail.com> <20080703223925.3EEA41184C@mailbackend.panix.com> Message-ID: <908b689f0807032056m2fa32638x62c2fcd389e38f17@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 10:27 PM, Mark Lause wrote: > > But professors have a lot less power over university and college > policies than they did when we were undergraduates...even where they > get to vote on these things. That erosion has been gradual, with some > dramatic leaps, depending on the institution. There's a discussion happening about this article at the NY Times blog, where you can post your comments: From ppz at optusnet.com.au Thu Jul 3 22:40:32 2008 From: ppz at optusnet.com.au (PPZ) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 14:40:32 +1000 Subject: [Marxism] Environmental Activists' Conference Adelaide, October 10-11, 2008 Message-ID: <1215146432.5383.20.camel@ppz-desktop> "Climate Emergency - No More Business as Usual!" Adelaide, Australia, October 10-11, 2008 Currently confirmed speakers include: David Spratt, author of Climate Code Red; Dr Mark Diesendorf, Institute of Environmental Studies, University of NSW; Professor Barry Brook, Director, Research Institute for Climate Change and Sustainability, University of Adelaide; Renfrey Clarke, Green Left Weekly environment correspondent The Environmental Activists' Conference "Climate Emergency - No More Business as Usual" will be held from Friday 10 October to Saturday 11 October 2008. The conference is designed to provide an open forum for education, ideas, solidarity and campaigning perspectives on how to avert the global warming threat. It aims to initiate wide-ranging discussion that will include exchanges between climate scientists and educators, activists and community organisations, environmental groups and concerned individuals. Existing climate change policy has lagged behind the emergency the world faces. Vested interests stand in the way of climate sustainability, and have to be confronted. To effect change, the broadest possible alliance for social justice and climate sustainability must be formed. The Environmental Activists' Conference "Climate Emergency - No More Business as Usual" will consider practical alternatives to the now-lethal "business as usual" approach. We invite you to participate. Despite the enormity of the global warming danger, effective change is still possible. Carbon reduction mechanisms, renewable energy technologies, clean industrial practices and forms of economic and social organisation compatible with a sustainable world already exist or can be created. While some progress has been made toward implementing sustainable energy policies and reducing energy demand, these measures remain drastically inadequate and under-resourced. The conference will include plenary sessions and workshops addressing the following themes: * This is an Emergency - An Introduction to the Real Science of Global Warming * Why not business as usual? * Ways Forward - Offering Directions * Let?s get active! What can we do Locally, Nationally, Globally? and * Beyond Business as Usual There will be two banks of workshops, run by teachers and community groups on the workshop sub-themes: 1. ?Why not business as usual?? Implications and effects of the science Challenging vested interests and barriers The politics of education (with a focus on the environment) Students as maintainers of the status quo or agents of change? 2. ?Let?s get active! What can we do locally, nationally, globally?? Developing school students as environmental activists How do we organize/educate for change? What are we actually doing now - stories from the teachers and community groups Political Activism Teachers, academics, community and environmental groups are invited to provide 100-200 word descriptors of proposed workshops addressing the workshop sub?themes. Please include details of the space, layout and equipment needs. Workshops should be educative, and where possible should share resources and stories of successful teaching practice and/or campaigns. To submit a proposal for a workshop, please e-mail lhall at aeusa. asn.au. To join the list of sponsors of the conference email jennbain at internode.on.net or ruth_ratcliffe at yahoo.com Endorsed by: Australian Education Union (SA-NT Branch), Ecosocialist Network, Green Left Weekly. From jeremy at infowells.com Thu Jul 3 23:38:19 2008 From: jeremy at infowells.com (Jerry Wells) Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 22:38:19 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] The next logical step for Obama: McCain for Vice President! Message-ID: <1215149899.4629.13.camel@pool-96-251-83-25.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net> FYI- The first article below prompted my comment in Letters 7/4/08: Given Obama?s mad rush to the ?center? (i.e., right), the next step is obvious. McCain should be Obama?s vice president! This would be a simple solution for everyone in power, Democrats and Republicans, and their corporate masters. Obama?s patriotism tour: the last refuge of a Democratic scoundrel By Bill Van Auken 2 July 2008 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/jul2008/obam-j02.shtml "Barely one month after sealing his victory in the primaries and with four months to go before the general election, the Democratic Party?s presumptive presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama has embarked on a campaign swing that has the declared aim of proving his patriotism. In practice, this exercise in self-abasement before the political right is aimed not at winning votes from the Republican Party, but rather at establishing Obama?s credentials with the constituency that the junior senator from Illinois values most: America?s corporate and financial elite." ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Obama continues lurch to the right on Iraq war and militarism By Bill Van Auken 4 July 2008 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/jul2008/obam-j04.shtml The embrace of key elements of the Republican agenda and jettisoning of positions that he advanced during his ?Change you can believe in? primary campaign have become a daily routine, as the Democratic Party?s presumptive presidential candidate Barack Obama carries out a dizzying turn to the right. In speeches and press appearances on Wednesday and Thursday, Obama continued to identify his campaign with support for American militarism, while backing away from his primary-campaign pledge to withdraw US combat forces from Iraq based on a definite timetable. From paul at gnostica.be Fri Jul 4 01:29:45 2008 From: paul at gnostica.be (Paul Van Britsom) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 09:29:45 +0200 Subject: [Marxism] REBELION: The FARC had Already ExpressedWillingness to Liberate the Hostages In-Reply-To: <3876304.1215134001289.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <3876304.1215134001289.JavaMail.root@mswamui-cedar.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <704D6F8386824DA6A3E13748FD7009D9@PCvanpaul> > Were I to express personalized estimates of those whose > views I don't agree with, it would become difficult to > maintain the kind of decorum needed to try to conduct > useful political dialogue. Less verbal abuse and more > political clarity would improve the environment here.f > Walter, you are paranoid. Being critical or to disagree is not verbal abuse. No one is calling you names and the focus is on WHAT you write, not who you are. You cry faul every time someone dares to say that Morales 'might' be acting slowly, or that Allende 'might' have been a fool. The one using verbal abuse is you - you are the one that equates healthy and supportive criticisism with an assassination wish. Joaquin painfully laid out the problems he has, from a Marxist point of view, with FARC. He did so in an adult and polite manner, and I think his comments are outstanding. I wonder how you can ever read Lenin - from where you stand his books and essays are surely full of verbal abuse. From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Fri Jul 4 04:05:53 2008 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 11:05:53 +0100 Subject: [Marxism] Now that I know... References: <2fa158550807030741o52c30d85w52450814175ea3fb@mail.gmail.com><359F05B677E14A95B453E1A5DDA9B2D4@home9sg93n9r5y> <486D0821.6050003@panix.com> Message-ID: <97E962211D2E4EE1BF69E02F6333B34B@home9sg93n9r5y> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Louis Proyect" To: "James Daly" Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2008 6:10 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Now that I know... : james daly wrote: *************** Dear Lou, Your increasingly bitter ad hominems, and your third person reference to me in a post to someone else as "poor Daly", have joined other factors which have made me feel most unwelcome on the list for a long time. An earlier third person reference was to my alleged theocracy (no evidence given). I did not think even off-list condolences on your mother's death would be welcome. The angel with a fiery sword has now demanded my credentials. I didn't think they were necessary... but here goes. I would call myself a Marxist (among other things), but I am not a Trotskyist, nor a Stalinist, nor a Maoist -- nor a Council Communist, Frankfurt School-er etc. etc. But I reserve the human and rational right to (very fallibly) criticise them and all others claiming to be Marxists. I believe (sic) that no one has a complete answer which would be the scientific truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, pointing scientifically to "the next step" in a unilinear progress in enlightenment. Reality is just too vast and complex and we only have partial insights, and many attempts at enlightenment. There is one "right" thing to do *only* when there is no good alternative. In general we should be looking for enlightenment as to good things to do -- not the "right" thing. I have posted material by Stephen Gowans when I have agreed with it -- perhaps I should have added something of my own, but it was in the spirit of a subject line I put on one of them -- "Surely this should be taken for granted by all Marxists". I have not read all of his writings, nor come across specifically Maoist items as yet. I would simply have snipped references to Trotskyism. But I agree with his defence of Zimbabwe, including from imperialist-funded organisations. By the way, I did not see the offending URL http://www.raceandhistory.com/Zimbabwe/2007/0804.html and I deplore and condemn its virulent anti-Trotskyism, which I did not post. I have learned a great deal from Marxmail, and enjoyed the comradely cyber friendship. I hope that continues. Comradely, Poor Daly From glparramatta at greenleft.org.au Fri Jul 4 04:09:35 2008 From: glparramatta at greenleft.org.au (glparramatta) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 20:09:35 +1000 Subject: [Marxism] Baruch Hirson: The South African left and the Russian connection (1991) | Links Message-ID: <486DF6DF.5000609@greenleft.org.au> View a CVET video production of a seminar at the University of the Western Cape on the past, present and future of Marxism in South Africa, held in September 1991. It was addressed by veteran South African Trotskyist activist Baruch Hirson. Participating in the seminar were Ciraj Rassool, Baruch Hirson, Andrew Nash, Colin Bundy, Adam Habib, Paul Allen and Neville Alexander. http://links.org.au/node/507 From Jscotlive at aol.com Fri Jul 4 04:16:29 2008 From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 06:16:29 EDT Subject: [Marxism] REBELION: The FARC had Already Expressed Willingness to Liberate the Hostages Message-ID: Joauquin: Talk about misspent irony! Six or seven years of humiliation and enslavement, and STILL Ingrid Betancourt has failed to apprehend the innate sweetness and goodness of her captors. Perhaps Machetera might consider the reason for that is that the FARC maes it so easy for their hostages to miss these qualities in their captors.. For Machetera, Betancourt's remarks "sounded more like a campaign speech than anything else - minus a recent visit to the dentist and blonde highlights in her hair." I listened to the same comments machetera did and to me it sounded more like the comments of someone who had been to hell and back, looked it, and somehow had managed not to lose her humanity in the process. Reply: Betnacourt's six years of humiliation in comparison to the generations of humiliation and exploitation and misery suffered by Colombia's poor pales by comparison. The notion that we should join in the deluge of sympathy and glorification of this member of a privileged class I personally find nauseating coming from a self declared proponent of revolutionary politics. Yes, we may have questions to ask with regard to the trajectory of the Farc, and yes there is no doubt that they have been backed into a corner, a victim of their inability to take the struggle forward. But to disengage from dialectics in favour of moralism in the process is not the way to do it. The Farc arose out of concrete material conditions and their struggle against the prot-fascist, US funded and assisted Colombian oligarchy has for the most part been a valiant one. The adoption of the tactic of hostage taking, though I still prefer to describe it as placing people under arrest who come into territory controlled by them, has run its course, there is no doubt. Wider events that have taken place in the region as a whole -namely the leftward shift in Latin American politics - have undubtedly overtaken them. This in no way justifies the calumny being directed at them by people on this list. Being held as a hostage for six years for any individual must be one of the most traumatic and difficult experiences imaginable. That said, for every individual the Farc have taken into capitivity, they have liberated thousands of the poorest and exploited in that wretched country. Unfortunately, their constituents are not rich and privileged enough to be the focus of the world's media and will forever remain faceless and anonymous. That Betancourt has been the focus of the world's media is not a reflection of her humanity, but instead a reflection of the social relations which obtain in Colombia and throughout the western world - i.e., the domination of the rich and their progeny. Finally, I find this continued harassment of Walter and his contributions on this list to be nothing more than bullying. Political discussion and comradely disagreement is one thing, but personal insults are another. For example: 'If you have to ask, I really have no answer for you. I can only hope that if this is the case, you find some other outlet for your energies than revolutionary politics'. This is a disgraceful way to conduct a political discussion, I suggest, reflective of an ego gone out of control. Walter Lippmann has been active as a commentator and activist for probably longer than most of the people on this list. I personally disagree with much of what he says and writes, but that does not give me the right to attempt to paint him as a renegade. Respect is due. From james.irldaly at ntlworld.com Fri Jul 4 04:46:54 2008 From: james.irldaly at ntlworld.com (james daly) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 11:46:54 +0100 Subject: [Marxism] Western intervention put Zimbabwe into an economic straitjacket Message-ID: <494A17E7907E46909C75E397F1F4CDF5@home9sg93n9r5y> Apologies if the following article from spiked has already been posted: Zimbabwe and the new Cowardly Colonialism by Brendan O'Neill Western intervention against Robert Mugabe's 'evil regime' put Zimbabwe into an economic straitjacket and disempowered its people. http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/4942/ From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net Fri Jul 4 05:07:36 2008 From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 07:07:36 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Official corrects claim Iran would suspend u-enrich to open talks Message-ID: <000001c8ddc6$2b1b1f40$6401a8c0@office1pc> Tehran returns to hard line on nuclear activity By Najmeh Bozorgmehr in Tehran http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/03385cca-4961-11dd-9a5f-000077b07658.html Published: July 4 2008 03:00 | Last updated: July 4 2008 03:00 Iran yesterday sought to quell speculation that it was about to bow to inter-national demands for a suspension of its nuclear programme, insisting that the more conciliatory tone adopted in remarks in recent weeks did not amount to a surrender. Two days after Ali-Akbar Velayati, a senior adviser to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader, said Tehran should consider -taking up aspects of an offer made by world powers last month, he appeared on television to clarify the interview he had given to a local newspaper. In the statements made this week, Mr Velayati said the package of incentives by five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany - the so-called P5+1 - could be acceptable "in principle" and that it was "expedient" for Iran to resume negotiations so as not to appear -"isolated". Specifically Mr Velayati said talks could start with a pre-negotiation phase or the so-called "freeze-for-freeze" which was offered by the western powers as a sweetener. Under this phase, Iran would not expand nuclear enrichment while the UN Security Council would halt further sanctions for six weeks. Mr Velayati did not address the more sensitive issue of enrichment suspension stipulated by UN resolutions. Iran would have to suspend its uranium enrichment programme in a second phase, when talks with world powers would begin on the wider fate of its nuclear programme. However, Mr Velayati, who advises Ayatollah Khamenei on international issues, yesterday said he had not commented on the international proposal, which was delivered to Tehran by Javier Solana, European Union foreign policy chief. He said that his intention in the newspaper interview was simply to say that negotiating with world powers was acceptable. This time, he clearly stated that suspension of uranium enrichment was not an acceptable condition ahead of full-negotiations. Analysts said the backtracking reflected the debate inside the regime at a time of rising tensions, provoked by speculation of a possible Israeli airstrike on Iran's nuclear facilities. Mr Veyalati's statements this week were followed by more conciliatory remarks from Manouchehr Mottaki, the foreign minister, and suggested some flexibility on the Iranian side. The comments led to speculation that Iran might agree to freeze the expansion of its programme for a set time - perhaps until a new US administration comes into office - thereby delaying economic sanctions and military action. It is not unusual for politicians in Iran to appear on television to "correct" earlier interviews and this tends to happen on two particularly sensitive issues - the nuclear programme and rapprochement with the US. "Mr Velayati's interview sounded like what he believes in," said one former senior official. "Since Velayati is adviser to the supreme leader, it must have been Ayatollah Khamenei urging him to correct his remarks on concerns that it gave the impression that that was his view, too." A security official said Iran was not close to any decision on the freeze phase yet but he said "a solution out of this impasse definitely needs to be found". Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008 Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008 From lnp3 at panix.com Fri Jul 4 05:19:16 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 07:19:16 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Now that I know... In-Reply-To: <97E962211D2E4EE1BF69E02F6333B34B@home9sg93n9r5y> References: <2fa158550807030741o52c30d85w52450814175ea3fb@mail.gmail.com> <359F05B677E14A95B453E1A5DDA9B2D4@home9sg93n9r5y> <486D0821.6050003@panix.com> <97E962211D2E4EE1BF69E02F6333B34B@home9sg93n9r5y> Message-ID: <20080704111916.E0ECB12467@mailbackend.panix.com> James Daly wrote: >I have posted material by Stephen Gowans when I have agreed with it -- >perhaps I should have added something of my own, but it was in the spirit of >a subject line I put on one of them -- "Surely this should be taken for >granted by all Marxists". I have not read all of his writings, nor come >across specifically Maoist items as yet. I would simply have snipped >references to Trotskyism. But I agree with his defence of Zimbabwe, >including from imperialist-funded organisations. Well, you should be aware that this character has been libeling the left for quite some time now. He is highly provocative. He makes amalgams between George Soros and Patrick Bond on quite a regular basis. As somebody who has written critically about the demonization of Milosevic but who agrees with Patrick's analysis, I absolutely resent this line of attack. I would add that Patrick invited him to a public debate that he turned down. He doesn't even permit comments on his blog, nor does he participate in listserv's. I think that you are mesmerized by his nonsense because you haven't had a chance to hear it debated out in a forum like this. Later this week I plan to write something on this kind of knee-jerk "anti-imperialism" that makes political bedfellows with Mugabe and other politicians who are inimical to Marxism. I do find it extremely troubling that you remain seduced by Gowans's writings while at the same time writing books on morality. I have worries all the time about being able to afford a home in New York. The idea of some cop coming along and busting down my house in the name of a campaign called "Operation Murabatsvina", or operation garbage removal, makes my blood boil. Here's a debate on the subject that might give you pause to think a bit deeper beyond facile "anti-imperialism": http://www.democracynow.org/2005/6/30/zimbabwe_amb_vs_trade_union_leader From lnp3 at panix.com Fri Jul 4 05:31:04 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 07:31:04 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Western intervention put Zimbabwe into an economic straitjacket In-Reply-To: <494A17E7907E46909C75E397F1F4CDF5@home9sg93n9r5y> References: <494A17E7907E46909C75E397F1F4CDF5@home9sg93n9r5y> Message-ID: <20080704113105.AAB72123E7@mailbackend.panix.com> J. Daly wrote: >Apologies if the following article from spiked has already been posted: > >Zimbabwe and the new Cowardly Colonialism >by Brendan O'Neill > >Western intervention against Robert Mugabe's 'evil regime' put Zimbabwe >into an economic straitjacket and disempowered its people. > >http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/4942/ Do you agree with the conclusion of this article that states that the movement against Mugabe has been exaggerated in the bourgeois press (my term, not theirs). Hume cites David Chandler, another Furedi-ite, to back up his claim, which is like Bush citing Limbaugh if you gather my drift. Chandler starts his article as follows: "Recent media coverage of events in Zimbabwe suggests that popular opposition to Mugabe's regime is on the rise and that Mugabe is only holding on to power through the use of media censorship and police repression. " Do you agree with Chandler? If so, what evidence do you have that he is not relying on repression? Btw, you really have to start writing your own thoughts on Zimbabwe if that is not too much to ask. From walterlx at earthlink.net Fri Jul 4 06:23:58 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 05:23:58 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [Marxism] Fidel on Marulanda, Ingrid Betancourt, and journalistic tasks Message-ID: <4873431.1215174238758.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> The true story and the challenge of the Cuban journalists by Fidel Castro [excerpt] Yesterday, an important event took place, which will be an issue the following days. This is the release of Ingrid Betancourt and a group of people held by the FARC, that is, the Revolutionary Armed Forces from Colombia. On January 10th this year, our ambassador to Venezuela, German Sanchez, following a request of the Venezuelan and Colombian governments, took part in the release of Clara Rojas to the International Red Cross. She had been a candidate to vice President of Colombia when Ingrid Betancourt was running for President and was kidnapped on February 23, 2002. Consuelo Gonzalez, a member of the House of Representatives, kidnapped on September 10, 2001, was released with her. An era of peace was opening for Colombia. This is a process Cuba has been supporting for over two decades, as it is most convenient for the unity and peace of the peoples of our America, using new ways in the special and complex circumstances prevailing after the demise of the USSR in the early 1990s --which I wont try to analyze here-- very different from those existing in Cuba, Nicaragua and other countries in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s of the 20th century. The bombing of a camp in Ecuadorian soil in the early hours of March 1st, --while Colombian guerrillas and young visitors from different nationalities were sleeping-- using Yankee technology; the occupation of the territory, the coup de grace on the wounded and the kidnapping of corpses as part of the terrorist plan from the United States government was repudiated the world over. A Rio Group meeting was then held in the Dominican Republic on March 7th. There the events were strongly condemned while the US administration applauded. Manuel Marulanda, a peasant and communist militant, the main leader of that guerrilla founded almost half a century ago was still alive. He passed away on the 26th of that same month. Ingrid Betancourt, feeble and sick, as well as other captives with a serious health condition could hardly resist any longer. Out of a basically humanist sentiment, we rejoiced at the news that Ingrid Betancourt, three American citizens and other captives had been released. The civilians should have never been kidnapped neither should the militaries have been kept prisoners in the conditions of the jungle. These were objectively cruel actions. No revolutionary purpose could justify it. The time will come when the subjective factors should be analyzed in depth. We won our revolutionary war in Cuba by immediately releasing every prisoner absolutely unconditionally. The soldiers and officers captured in battle were released to the International Red Cross; we only kept their weapons. No soldier will ever surrender if he thinks he will be killed or subjected to cruel treatment. We are watching with concern how the imperialists try to capitalize on what happened in Colombia in order to hide and justify their heinous crimes of genocide against other peoples. They want to deflect international attention from their interventionist plans in Venezuela and Bolivia and from the presence of the 4th Fleet in support of the political line that intends to obliterate the independence of the countries located south of the United States while taking possession of their natural resources. These should be illustrative examples for all of our journalists. In our times, truth is navigating rough seas, where the mass media are in the hands of those threatening human survival with their immense economic, technologic and military resources. That?s the challenge faced by the Cuban journalists! Fidel Castro Ruz July 3, 2008 4:26 p.m. FULL: http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/reflexiones/2008/ing/f030708i.html ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From gaijinronnie at gmail.com Fri Jul 4 06:56:17 2008 From: gaijinronnie at gmail.com (Ronnie Corporon) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 07:56:17 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] Che Guevara - Writings In-Reply-To: <908b689f0807031849u2ddd7425u877a13376fbd8605@mail.gmail.com> References: <60060.59069.qm@web81804.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <908b689f0807031526u1eb5c7e7t8325bc0ac68c1f9@mail.gmail.com> <908b689f0807031849u2ddd7425u877a13376fbd8605@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: 2008/7/3 Ruthless Critic of All that Exists >: > > March, 1965: Man and Socialism in Cuba (El socialismo y el hombre en > Cuba. (1965)) > April 16, 1967: Message to the Tricontinental (Mensaje a los pueblos > del mundo a traves de la Tricontinental. (1967)) > > Both available in English translation at: > . > > RC > Thanks for that. I use Marxists.org quite a bit (even ordered the DVD a few years back) but had never really poked around Che's section. Thanks again! From walterlx at earthlink.net Fri Jul 4 07:13:39 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 06:13:39 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [Marxism] Machatera responds to Joaquin Bustelo Message-ID: <14003996.1215177219116.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> From: Ma Chetera Sent: Jul 4, 2008 6:05 AM To: Walter Lippmann Subject: Re: fyi Could you please send this to the Marxism list when you get a moment? I think Joaquin misinterpreted a number of things because the point I was trying to make is one that Machetera's readers will be familiar with...the Cubans made a point of NOT mistreating their captives, even when they'd done horrible things, because as Fidel has said very clearly, they could never have gained such widespread support if they hadn't. If someone comes out of the jungle after spending 6 or 7 years with you (the Cubans wouldn't have held people that long either, but they were victorious comparatively quickly, and logistics didn't allow for carting lots of prisoners around with them) and still has nasty things to say about you, then you are doing something WRONG. So in that sense, Joaquin and I are in agreement and I'm not sure why he's getting so worked up about it. There is not enough evidence to say what stage the latest hostage negotiations had reached, but it would be completely in character for the Uribe/U.S. government to short circuit them with a "Hollywood- style" commando interception. That's why I suggested that someone fetch a newspaper for Betancourt because her effusive praise for her liberators (which I did not and still do not view as sharply pointed) might have been tempered a bit had she had the whole story. I think that may be giving her a lot of credit, but I'm not the one coming out of 7 years in the jungle with people who weren't very nice to me, and if I were, you can be sure that a full-on press conference would be the last thing on my mind. Ma. ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From walterlx at earthlink.net Fri Jul 4 07:47:55 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 06:47:55 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [Marxism] NYT: Freeing Ingrid Betancourt (editorial) Message-ID: <6642480.1215179275305.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> THE NEW YORK TIMES July 4, 2008 EDITORIAL Freeing Ingrid Betancourt There is every reason to celebrate the daring rescue from FARC guerrillas of the Colombian-French politician Ingrid Betancourt, three American military contractors and 11 members of the Colombian security forces. The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia still holds many more hostages. But the operation by undercover Colombian commandos ? who tricked the rebels into handing over the captives without a shot ? offered further evidence that the guerrilla group is in disarray. President ?lvaro Uribe should now capitalize on that disarray and offer the rebels, who long ago traded the business of political liberation for drug trafficking, a political settlement. Ms. Betancourt was raised in France but had returned to Colombia for a run for the presidency when she was seized six years ago. The three American contractors who were held with her were doing anti-narcotics work when their plane was shot down five years ago. The rescue (pulled off with intelligence from the United States) was another coup for Mr. Uribe?s relentless assault on the FARC, which he has waged with billions in American aid. The movement has lost three of its top seven commanders in recent months, and defectors say the forces are increasingly fractured. The FARC is still flush with drug money and still holds more than 700 hostages. The rebels are unlikely to be so easily tricked again, and an all-out assault could cost many lives. Mr. Uribe should instead press for a political settlement. Any deal must require the rebels to fully disarm and get out of the business of drug trafficking and extortion. In exchange, Mr. Uribe could offer amnesty for most guerrillas and the possibility to participate in Colombian politics. Given the huge sums that the United States has spent backing the Colombians? fight against the FARC, President Bush and Senators John McCain and Barack Obama should now join in congratulating Mr. Uribe ? and in urging him to press for a full political victory. ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From lnp3 at panix.com Fri Jul 4 08:11:15 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 10:11:15 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] James Daly Message-ID: <20080704141115.9FAAF12723@mailbackend.panix.com> James Daly, a philosophy professor and long-time Marxmail subscriber, just unsubbed. I guess that he found me unbearably abusive. Too bad he didn't stick around. I was just getting warmed up. I would have told him this at some point: Comrade Daly, you express distaste for Gowans's comment that "Trotskyites have always been useful to Washington and London: many are reliably against the same revolutions (though for different reasons), and therefore serve the useful function of whittling away at left support." But he couldn't make the connection between this kind of vile Stalinist calumny and the pro-Mugabe apologetics. Talk about cognitive dissonance. It is like not being able to make the connection between Trotsky's assassination in 1940 and the Moscow Trials that preceded it. Gowans's writings on Zimbabwe, to get straight to the point, is *exactly* the methodology of the Stalintern except that it substitutes decrepit bourgeois nationalist regimes for the USSR. If Trotsky had to be silenced in order to "defend" the Soviet Union, then it is necessary today to scandalize people like Patrick Bond who has the temerity to point out that Emperor Mugabe is not wearing any clothes. Here's some tidbits from Gowans: "Board member Reginald Matchaba Hove won the NED democracy award in 2006. Described by its first director as doing overtly what the CIA used to do covertly, the NED ? and by extension the NGOs it funds ? are not politically neutral organizations... It doesn't take long to connect Hove to left scholar Patrick Bond (of Her Majesty's NGOs) and his Center for Civil Society. The Center is a program partner with the Southern Africa Trust, one of whose trustees is ZESN board member Reginald Matchaba Hove." Get it, comrades? NED, CIA, Patrick Bond. Six degrees of separation. I wonder if there is any truth to the rumor that Patrick is digging a tunnel from Zambia into Zimbabwe in order to smuggle in guns from the CIA... From lnp3 at panix.com Fri Jul 4 08:14:50 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 10:14:50 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] [Pen-l] We are Together In-Reply-To: <09137909-D53C-4DD6-9F2F-6465BA1768C5@gmail.com> References: <20080704011956.EABCF1179B@mailbackend.panix.com> <09137909-D53C-4DD6-9F2F-6465BA1768C5@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080704141450.E8990F00A@mailbackend.panix.com> >>Until every human being lives in a world free from poverty and >>horrible diseases like AIDS, it is understandable that religion will >>continue to provide solace against a heartless world. > > >I notice the nods to religion in your recent writings... is this a >recent turn? Am I reading too much? > > --ravi > > >P.S: I consider the "nods to religion" a good thing. Well, I did point out to my wife shortly after watching it that the Zulus took turns putting a handful of dirt into the fallen brother's grave, just as was the case at my mother's funeral. I don't believe in supernatural forces, but I am learning more and more about the social uses of religion which are not uniformly reactionary. Btw, the movie just opened up at the Cinema Village in NYC. From ectoren at sbcglobal.net Fri Jul 4 08:27:59 2008 From: ectoren at sbcglobal.net ( Erik Carlos Toren) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 09:27:59 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] Che Guevara - Writings References: <60060.59069.qm@web81804.mail.mud.yahoo.com><908b689f0807031526u1eb5c7e7t8325bc0ac68c1f9@mail.gmail.com><908b689f0807031849u2ddd7425u877a13376fbd8605@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <005101c8dde2$2971f260$210110ac@your4f1261a8e5> I also use MIA for our local reading group. As a matter of fact, I have it on "links" sections for a couple of web pages I have worked on. A big THANKS! for their work and effort. Send donations! ;) por el socialismo, Erik ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ronnie Corporon" > I use Marxists.org quite a bit (even ordered the DVD a few years back) but > had never really poked around Che's section. From sartesian at earthlink.net Fri Jul 4 08:33:43 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 10:33:43 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Western intervention put Zimbabwe into an economicstraitjacket References: <494A17E7907E46909C75E397F1F4CDF5@home9sg93n9r5y> Message-ID: <018601c8dde2$f5b9c8c0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> James, So everything said in this article, about the manipulative economic pressures of the IMF is correct, and.... so what? There is economic collapse of Zimbabwe. What is the solution? Opposing sanctions? We ( figuratively, I am not speaking for anyone else) oppose such sanctions. No one here is arguing for sanctions or for an invasion of Zimbabwe. Is there or is there not a real, social, basis for workers' and the poor class struggle against ZANU-PF? The MDC does not represent that struggle in its full development. It is riddled with "liberal," pro-capitalist elements. But what do you expect? A full blown self-conscious Marxist movement from the gitgo? Never happens that way. Would we have opposed support for the struggle of Polish workers in 1980-81 because Solidarnosc was riddled with pro-capitalist, pro-church elements and a pro-capitalist, pro-church leadership? Would we, or you, have supported Jaruzelski? Does supporting Mugabe, arguing that opposition to ZANU-PF cannot be supported because it feeds into the pro-West hysteria, do anything to advance that "self-conscious" class struggle? From walterlx at earthlink.net Fri Jul 4 08:37:49 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 07:37:49 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [Marxism] FARC leaders were paid millions to free hostages: Swiss radio Message-ID: <13632078.1215182269194.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> (Well, there may have been a bit more to this operation than was described in the initial gloating press releases about the events.) ====================================================================== FARC leaders were paid millions to free hostages: Swiss radio 07.04.08, 9:19 AM ET http://www.forbes.com/afxnewslimited/feeds/afx/2008/07/04/afx5184293.html PARIS (Thomson Financial) - Leaders of the Colombian FARC rebel movement were paid millions of dollars to free Colombian politician Ingrid Betancourt and 14 other hostages, Swiss radio said on Friday, quoting 'a reliable source'. The 15 hostages released on Wednesday by the Colombian army 'were in reality ransomed for a high price, and the whole operation afterwards was a set-up,' the radio's French-language channel said. Saying the United States, which had three of its citizens among those freed, was behind the deal, it put the price of the ransom at some $20 million. The radio said its source was 'close to the events, reliable and tested many times in recent years.' The report added said the wife of one of the hostages' guards was the go-between, having been arrested by the Colombian army. She was released to return to the guerrillas, where she persuaded her husband to change sides. Switzerland, along with France and Spain, has been mediating with the FARC on behalf of Colombian President Alvaro Uribe. According to the official version of Wednesday's operation, a Colombian army intelligence agent infiltrated the FARC and tricked the rebels into believing their top leader had sent a helicopter to pick up the hostages. Colombian soldiers posing as FARC guerrillas flew the hostages from a jungle hideout where they had been assembled before revealing their identity. White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said the rescue 'was conceived by the Colombians and executed by the Colombians with our full support,' while implying that Washington had provided intelligence and even operational help. U.S. ambassador to Bogota William Brownfield also told CNN that Washington had provided 'technical support,' while Colombian Defence Minister Juan Manuel Santos insisted it was a '100 percent Colombian' effort. The top U.S. military officer for Latin America, Admiral Jim Stavridis, head of United States Southern Command, said the rescue of Americans Thomas Howes, Marc Gonsalves and Keith Stansell had been 'a priority of this command'. The three were seized by the rebels as they conducted an anti-drug mission for the Pentagon in February 2003. The operation enhanced Uribe's prestige as he seeks a third term in office, and enabled him to stick to his line of no talks with the rebels without the hostages being freed, the radio noted. tf.TFN-Europe_newsdesk at thomsonreuters.com ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From walterlx at earthlink.net Fri Jul 4 08:40:53 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 07:40:53 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Ingrid Betancourt Hugs Her Children (Granma) Message-ID: <000601c8dde3$fc202960$4300a8c0@new1501> ("CNN reported that Chavez congratulated Colombia and stated his willingness to help achieve the release of all remaining hostages.") ==================================================================== GRANMA July 4, 2008 Ingrid Betancourt Hugs Her Children BOGOTA, July 3.- Ingrid Betancourt, a former Colombian presidential candidate, was reunited Thursday with her children who arrived from Paris hours after the military operation that freed their mother and 14 other hostages of the Revolutionary Armed Forces (FARC). INGRID WITH HER DAUGHTER MELANIE "I am so proud of them, because they struggled alone and they grew up alone in their anguish to be with me,'' said Betancourt after hugging Melanie, 22, and Lorenzo, 19, and recalling that the last time she saw them they were small children. Speaking on the runway of the Bogota Air Force Base, Betancourt also recognized the efforts of the presidents of Venezuela and Ecuador, Hugo Chavez and Rafael Correa, for their mediation efforts. CNN reported that Chavez congratulated Colombia and stated his willingness to help achieve the release of all remaining hostages. Betancourt, 46, was held in the Colombian jungle for more than six years and was rescued on Wednesday in Guaviare, in southeastern Colombia, along with US citizens Thomas Howes, Marc Gonsalves and Keith Stansell, contractors for the US Defense Department, and 11 Colombian soldiers and police officers. The US hostages, held since February 13, 2003, arrived early Thursday morning to San Antonio, Texas. Meanwhile, the Colombian troops, who had been in captivity for more than a decade, began to reunite with their families. The two guerrillas of the FARC detained in the rescue operation were presented to the press on Thursday. On Friday, Ingrid will travel to Paris, where she will be received by French President Nicolas Sarkozy. Next week she will meet with Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican, informed AFP. ======================================== WALTER LIPPMANN, CubaNews Los Angeles, California http://www.walterlippmann.com http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Paraiso bajo el bloqueo" ======================================== ======================================== WALTER LIPPMANN, CubaNews Los Angeles, California http://www.walterlippmann.com http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Paraiso bajo el bloqueo" ======================================== From lnp3 at panix.com Fri Jul 4 08:48:53 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 10:48:53 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Western intervention put Zimbabwe into an economic straitjacket In-Reply-To: <494A17E7907E46909C75E397F1F4CDF5@home9sg93n9r5y> References: <494A17E7907E46909C75E397F1F4CDF5@home9sg93n9r5y> Message-ID: <20080704144854.789311033E@mailbackend.panix.com> >Apologies if the following article from spiked has already been posted: > >Zimbabwe and the new Cowardly Colonialism >by Brendan O'Neill > >Western intervention against Robert Mugabe's 'evil regime' put Zimbabwe >into an economic straitjacket and disempowered its people. > >http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/4942/ Daly's gone but a word or two about Spiked is in order. This group of ex-Marxists have always been distinguished by their opposition to "human rights" imperialism. Their shining moment was when they pointed out correctly that a Bosnian concentration camp run by Serbs was no concentration camp at all. This led to a libel suit against them by the newsmen involved with the story that led in turn to the liquidation of LM magazine. This was the initials of Living Marxism, when they were still organized as the Revolutionary Communist Party. O'Neill's article makes a number of useful points along the lines that have been made here, namely that the West is hypocritical, etc., etc., etc. But it is packaged with their libertarian mantra about how the citizens of Zimbabwe are "infantilized": "Lots of the current news coverage continually shows Zimbabweans queuing up for hours to buy a newspaper for a few thousand dollars so that they can read about the elections. This footage is supposed to show how bad inflation has become in Zimbabwe, but it also reveals something else: that the West's attempted strangulation of Mugabe's regime reduced the people of Zimbabwe to observers rather than masters of their fate, who look to the front pages of newspapers to find out what might happen next in their country." So the goal is to become "masters" of your fate--just what you'd expect from people who have thrown away Marx's Capital and replaced it with Atlas Shrugged. Anybody who was seriously interested in developing an analysis of Zimbabwe would have to examine the political economy. Zimbabwe's problems are not just related to economic blockade. Cuba has been subject to one of the most intense economic blockades in 20th century history, but that has not prevented it from achieving G8 type social indicators. Obviously something else is going on and it is called capitalism. Too bad that Spiked lacks the interest to scrutinize this aspect of the Zimbabwean tragedy. It might jeopardize their invitation to the next cocktail party at Hill-Knowlton. From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net Fri Jul 4 09:03:33 2008 From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 11:03:33 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Marxism] Fidel on Marulanda, Ingrid Betancourt, and journalistic tasks Message-ID: <000001c8dde7$21942540$6401a8c0@office1pc> Walter submitted and Fidel Castro wrote: Out of a basically humanist sentiment, we rejoiced at the news that Ingrid Betancourt, three American citizens and other captives had been released. The civilians should have never been kidnapped neither should the militaries have been kept prisoners in the conditions of the jungle. These were objectively cruel actions. No revolutionary purpose could justify it. The time will come when the subjective factors should be analyzed in depth. We won our revolutionary war in Cuba by immediately releasing every prisoner absolutely unconditionally. The soldiers and officers captured in battle were released to the International Red Cross; we only kept their weapons. No soldier will ever surrender if he thinks he will be killed or subjected to cruel treatment. We are watching with concern how the imperialists try to capitalize on what happened in Colombia in order to hide and justify their heinous crimes of genocide against other peoples. They want to deflect international attention from their interventionist plans in Venezuela and Bolivia and from the presence of the 4th Fleet in support of the political line that intends to obliterate the independence of the countries located south of the United States while taking possession of their natural resources. Fred comments: This is a classic statement of views that Fidel has stated again and again, beginning in the armed struggle in Cuba itself, but extending to the struggle of the FALN in Venezuela in the 1960s, Grenada, and down to the present. The position has never changed on this. NOTE THAT THERE IS NO CONDEMNATION OF THE DIRECT ROLE OF US TROOPS IN RELEASING THE HOSTAGES. Even though he makes clear that he understands and condemns the reactionary purposes that guided the US action. The freedom of these hostages is treated as a positive development unconditionally, regardless of who freed them or why. And in my view, that is consistent with the NEED to draw Colombia -- whose masses basically face the same problems as Venezuela, Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Paraguay -- into today's struggle and revolutionary process. The FARC was already oriented toward releasing them? A leadership that has made a wrong decision has to be able to correct it in a stroke of time. Well, they were not politically strong enough to react immediately to their own orientation. And they let others take the glory. Life is hard. Fred Feldman From walterlx at earthlink.net Fri Jul 4 09:12:19 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 08:12:19 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [Marxism] Zimbabwe - a blockaded country Message-ID: <25610379.1215184339286.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> While not as strict as its blockade of Cuba, Washington does have a blockade in place against Zimbabwe. It's purpose is to pressure the president of Zimbabwe out of office and replace Mugabe with a president more acceptable to Washington, London and others of their ilk. It is this which should be first in the minds of people who call themselves Marxists and who live in the countries which are conducting such a blockade against a third world country. This is not to say that Mugabe is Mr. Nice Guy, but is he any worse than Haile Selassie, or any other Third World leader whose under attack from the imperialist powers? While verbal abuse is too often a staple of what passes for political discussion and debate on the net, it would be a much better thing to keep such dialogue as takes place on such lists as this focused on the political issues involved. The use of such terms as "Stalintern" do have a political meeting. It's an example of red-baiting in lieu of discussion. It's a term which goes back to the 1930s, a far as a quick search could find. It's supposed to generate an instinctive, emotionally-laden kind of revulsion against a rejected viewpoint. Walter Lippmann Seattle, Washington ==================================================================== U.S. Working on Zimbabwe Penalties Following 'Sham' Presidential Vote Associated Press June 28, 2008 11:39 p.m. HARARE, Zimbabwe -- Zimbabwe came under threat of further sanctions on Saturday as President Bush said the U.S. was working on new ways to punish longtime leader Robert Mugabe and his allies following the widely denounced presidential runoff election. Earlier Saturday, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the U.S. plans to introduce a U.N. resolution as early as next week seeking tough measures against Zimbabwe. "We will press for strong action by the United Nations, including an arms embargo on Zimbabwe and travel ban on regime officials," Mr. Bush said in a statement issued while he spent the weekend at Camp David presidential retreat in Maryland. ----------------------------------------- "The international community has condemned the Mugabe regime's ruthless campaign of politically motivated violence and intimidation with a strong and unified voice that makes clear that yesterday's election was in no way free and fair," Mr. Bush said. The U.S. already has financial and travel penalties in place against more than 170 citizens and entities with ties to Mr. Mugabe, White House spokesman Emily Lawrimore said. The Bush administration is considering punishing the government of Zimbabwe as well as further restricting the travel and financial activities of Mugabe supporters, she said. ============================================ REVIEW & OUTLOOK Mugabe's African Pals July 2, 2008; Page A12 The world rarely looks to summit meetings of the African Union for statesmanship, and this week's meeting in the Egyptian resort of Sharm El-Sheik met those expectations. Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe, illegitimately "re-elected" to a sixth term in office last week, was accorded the honor of being personally escorted to the plenary session by host Hosni Mubarak, himself in his fifth term. Dictators have a way of enjoying one another's company. Western leaders had hoped the summit would prompt African leaders to have a stern talking-to with "Comrade Bob," if not for the catastrophe he has inflicted on Zimbabwe then for the embarrassment he has brought their continent. But despite a muted resolution urging a power-sharing deal between Mr. Mugabe and opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai, the summit mainly proved an opportunity for Mr. Mugabe to embrace African leaders for the TV cameras, apparently without rebuff. At least not all of Africa's leaders are buying into this charade. From lnp3 at panix.com Fri Jul 4 09:20:46 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 11:20:46 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Zimbabwe - a blockaded country In-Reply-To: <25610379.1215184339286.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa .earthlink.net> References: <25610379.1215184339286.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20080704152047.5A6FD16D70@mailbackend.panix.com> Walter Lippmann wrote: >While not as strict as its blockade of Cuba, Washington does have a >blockade in place against Zimbabwe. It's purpose is to pressure the >president of Zimbabwe out of office and replace Mugabe with a >president more acceptable to Washington, London and others of their >ilk. It is this which should be first in the minds of people who >call themselves Marxists and who live in the countries which are >conducting such a blockade against a third world country. We must oppose sanctions against Zimbabwe, just as Trotsky opposed any attempts to economically destabilize the USSR in the 20s and 30s. But that does not obligate us to become propagandists for ZANU-PF like Stephen Gowans. Our model should be Leon Trotsky when it comes to the question of beleaguered states run by enemies of the working class. >This is not to say that Mugabe is Mr. Nice Guy, but is he any worse >than Haile Selassie, or any other Third World leader whose under >attack from the imperialist powers? While verbal abuse is too often >a staple of what passes for political discussion and debate on the >net, it would be a much better thing to keep such dialogue as takes >place on such lists as this focused on the political issues >involved. The use of such terms as "Stalintern" do have a political >meeting. It's an example of red-baiting in lieu of discussion. It's >a term which goes back to the 1930s, a far as a quick search could >find. It's supposed to generate an instinctive, emotionally-laden >kind of revulsion against a rejected viewpoint. Walter Lippmann >Seattle, Washington I have no idea what other term except Stalinist can apply to sewage of the sort that Gowans wrote about the "Trotskyites" acting as tools of the West. From sartesian at earthlink.net Fri Jul 4 09:29:52 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 11:29:52 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Zimbabwe - a blockaded country References: <25610379.1215184339286.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <01c301c8ddea$cdc73750$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> WL writes: It's purpose is to pressure the president of Zimbabwe out of office and replace Mugabe with a president more acceptable to Washington, London and others of their ilk. It is this which should be first in the minds of people who call themselves Marxists and who live in the countries which are conducting such a blockade against a third world country. _______________ What should be first is the analysis of the real economic conditions, internal and international, that drive the classes and clashes in Zimbabwe, and that one class, the capitalist class uses, varying at times its tactics and its choice of agents, to prevent and undercut the other classes-- which are the workers and poor. I have not seen one word of concrete analysis of the internal economic structure of Zimbabwe and its relations with global capitalism in all these supposed "anti-imperialist" defenses of Mugabe. Anybody want to talk about the organization of agriculture? Landed property? Wage rates? Does anyone really believe that IMF sanctions and CIA money are the sole sources of the struggle in Zimbabwe? Is there no history of capitalist accommodation by ZANU-PF, adherence to IMF policies, and immiseration of the general population by the Mugabe government? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Walter Lippmann" To: Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 11:12 AM Subject: [Marxism] Zimbabwe - a blockaded country From nmgoro at gmail.com Fri Jul 4 09:33:03 2008 From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 12:33:03 -0300 Subject: [Marxism] (Spanish, short intro in English) Speech by Galeano, first Illustrious Citizen of Mercosur Message-ID: <2fa158550807040833p14f6a6b3o609dca3cf23c96b1@mail.gmail.com> [It is by no means a minor issue that Mercosur has chosen Eduardo Galeano to name him its first "Illustrious citizen". These are gestures with a strong load of meaning. And Mercosur choses as an emblematic intellectual no other than Galeano! I must say that not everything by Galeano moves me so much. In fact, I believe that "Las inversiones extranjeras en Am?rica Latina", by the Bolivian Carlos Montenegro, is miles above Galeano's very good "Open veins..." And Montenegro's book was written 15 or 20 years before the "Open veins..." But my personal preferences are unimportant. What is really important is the speech by Galeano, who traces back the struggle for unity to the years of the Wars of Emancipation, and grounds it on Jos? Artigas, the man that Galeano, most brilliantly, defined as the "general de los sencillos", that is the "general of the folk". Those who can read Spanish will enjoy. Sorry, can't translate. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: hugopresman en yahoo.com.ar Date: 04-jul-2008 11:04 Subject: [R-P] EDUARDO GALEANO, PRIMER CIUDADANO ILUSTRE DEL MERCOSUR, Y UN DISCURSO INOLVIDABLE To: nmgoro en gmail.com Cc: Lucha de masas para recuperar la Argentina [Ay?denos a financiar la lista, escriba a recpopmod en gmail.com.] CITANDO LA FUENTE,EL MATERIAL DE ESTA LISTA ES DE LIBRE REPRODUCCI?N EDUARDO GALEANO, PRIMER CIUDADANO ILUSTRE DEL MERCOSUR, Y UN DISCURSO INOLVIDABLE "Los mapas del alma no tienen fronteras" Por Eduardo Galeano Nuestra regi?n es el reino de las paradojas. Brasil, pongamos por caso: parad?jicamente, el Aleijadinho, el hombre m?s feo del Brasil, cre? las m?s altas hermosuras del arte de la ?poca colonial; parad?jicamente, Garrincha, arruinado desde la infancia por la miseria y la poliomelitis, nacido para la desdicha, fue el jugador que m?s alegr?a ofreci? en toda la historia del f?tbol y, parad?jicamente, ya ha cumplido cien a?os de edad Oscar Niemeyer, que es el m?s nuevo de los arquitectos y el m?s joven de los brasile?os. - - - O pongamos por caso, Bolivia: en 1978, cinco mujeres voltearon una dictadura militar. Parad?jicamente, toda Bolivia se burl? de ellas cuando iniciaron su huelga de hambre. Parad?jicamente, toda Bolivia termin? ayunando con ellas, hasta que la dictadura cay?. Yo hab?a conocido a una de esas cinco porfiadas, Domitila Barrios, en el pueblo minero de Llallagua. En una asamblea de obreros de las minas, todos hombres, ella se hab?a alzado y hab?a hecho callar a todos. -Quiero decirles estito -hab?a dicho-. Nuestro enemigo principal no es el imperialismo, ni la burgues?a ni la burocracia. Nuestro enemigo principal es el miedo, y lo llevamos adentro. Y a?os despu?s, reencontr? a Domitila en Estocolmo. La hab?an echado de Bolivia, y ella hab?a marchado al exilio, con sus siete hijos. Domitila estaba muy agradecida de la solidaridad de los suecos, y les admiraba la libertad, pero ellos le daban pena, tan solitos que estaban, bebiendo solos, comiendo solos, hablando solos. Y les daba consejos: -No sean bobos -les dec?a-. J?ntense. Nosotros, all? en Bolivia, nos juntamos. Aunque sea para pelearnos, nos juntamos. - - - Y cu?nta raz?n ten?a. Porque, digo yo: ?existen los dientes, si no se juntan en la boca? ?Existen los dedos, si no se juntan en la mano? Juntarnos: y no s?lo para defender el precio de nuestros productos, sino tambi?n, y sobre todo, para defender el valor de nuestros derechos. Bien juntos est?n, aunque de vez en cuando simulen ri?as y disputas, los pocos pa?ses ricos que ejercen la arrogancia sobre todos los dem?s. Su riqueza come pobreza y su arrogancia come miedo. Hace bien poquito, pongamos por caso, Europa aprob? la ley que convierte a los inmigrantes en criminales. Paradoja de paradojas: Europa, que durante siglos ha invadido el mundo, cierra la puerta en las narices de los invadidos, cuando le retribuyen la visita. Y esa ley se ha promulgado con una asombrosa impunidad, que resultar?a inexplicable si no estuvi?ramos acostumbrados a ser comidos y a vivir con miedo. Miedo de vivir, miedo de decir, miedo de ser. Esta regi?n nuestra forma parte de una Am?rica latina organizada para el divorcio de sus partes, para el odio mutuo y la mutua ignorancia. Pero s?lo siendo juntos seremos capaces de descubrir lo que podemos ser, contra una tradici?n que nos ha amaestrado para el miedo y la resignaci?n y la soledad y que cada d?a nos ense?a a desquerernos, a escupir al espejo, a copiar en lugar de crear. - - - Todo a lo largo de la primera mitad del siglo diecinueve, un venezolano llamado Sim?n Rodr?guez anduvo por los caminos de nuestra Am?rica, a lomo de mula, desafiando a los nuevos due?os del poder: -Ustedes -clamaba don Sim?n-, ustedes que tanto imitan a los europeos, ?por qu? no les imitan lo m?s importante, que es la originalidad? Parad?jicamente, era escuchado por nadie este hombre que tanto merec?a ser escuchado. Parad?jicamente, lo llamaban loco, porque comet?a la cordura de creer que debemos pensar con nuestra propia cabeza, porque comet?a la cordura de proponer una educaci?n para todos y una Am?rica de todos, y dec?a que al que no sabe, cualquiera lo enga?a y al que no tiene, cualquiera lo compra, y porque comet?a la cordura de dudar de la independencia de nuestros pa?ses reci?n nacidos: -No somos due?os de nosotros mismos -dec?a-. Somos independientes, pero no somos libres. - - - Quince a?os despu?s de la muerte del loco Rodr?guez, Paraguay fue exterminado. El ?nico pa?s hispanoamericano de veras libre fue parad?jicamente asesinado en nombre de la libertad. Paraguay no estaba preso en la jaula de la deuda externa, porque no deb?a un centavo a nadie, y no practicaba la mentirosa libertad de comercio, que nos impon?a y nos impone una econom?a de importaci?n y una cultura de impostaci?n. Parad?jicamente, al cabo de cinco a?os de guerra feroz, entre tanta muerte sobrevivi? el origen. Seg?n la m?s antigua de sus tradiciones, los paraguayos hab?an nacido de la lengua que los nombr?, y entre las ruinas humeantes sobrevivi? esa lengua sagrada, la lengua primera, la lengua guaran?. Y en guaran? hablan todav?a los paraguayos a la hora de la verdad, que es la hora del amor y del humor. En guaran?, ?e?? significa palabra y tambi?n significa alma. Quien miente la palabra traiciona el alma. Si te doy mi palabra, me doy. - - - Un siglo despu?s de la guerra del Paraguay, un presidente de Chile dio su palabra, y se dio. Los aviones escup?an bombas sobre el palacio de gobierno, tambi?n ametrallado por las tropas de tierra. El hab?a dicho: -Yo de aqu? no salgo vivo. En la historia latinoamericana, es una frase frecuente. La han pronunciado unos cuantos presidentes que despu?s han salido vivos, para seguir pronunci?ndola. Pero esa bala no minti?. La bala de Salvador Allende no minti?. Parad?jicamente, una de las principales avenidas de Santiago de Chile se llama, todav?a, Once de Setiembre. Y no se llama as? por las v?ctimas de las Torres Gemelas de Nueva York. No. Se llama as? en homenaje a los verdugos de la democracia en Chile. Con todo respeto por ese pa?s que amo, me atrevo a preguntar, por puro sentido com?n: ?No ser?a hora de cambiarle el nombre? ?No ser?a hora de llamarla Avenida Salvador Allende, en homenaje a la dignidad de la democracia y a la dignidad de la palabra? - - - Y saltando la cordillera, me pregunto: ?por qu? ser? que el Che Guevara, el argentino m?s famoso de todos los tiempos, el m?s universal de los latinoamericanos, tiene la costumbre de seguir naciendo? Parad?jicamente, cuanto m?s lo manipulan, cuanto m?s lo traicionan, m?s nace. El es el m?s nacedor de todos. Y me pregunto: ?No ser? porque ?l dec?a lo que pensaba, y hac?a lo que dec?a? ?No ser? que por eso sigue siendo tan extraordinario, en este mundo donde las palabras y los hechos muy rara vez se encuentran, y cuando se encuentran no se saludan, porque no se reconocen? - - - Los mapas del alma no tienen fronteras, y yo soy patriota de varias patrias. Pero quiero culminar este viajecito por las tierras de la regi?n, evocando a un hombre nacido, como yo, por aqu? cerquita. Parad?jicamente, ?l muri? hace un siglo y medio, pero sigue siendo mi compatriota m?s peligroso. Tan peligroso es que la dictadura militar del Uruguay no pudo encontrar ni una sola frase suya que no fuera subversiva y tuvo que decorar con fechas y nombres de batallas el mausoleo que erigi? para ofender su memoria. A ?l, que se neg? a aceptar que nuestra patria grande se rompiera en pedazos; a ?l, que se neg? a aceptar que la independencia de Am?rica fuera una emboscada contra sus hijos m?s pobres, a ?l, que fue el verdadero primer ciudadano ilustre de la regi?n, dedico esta distinci?n, que recibo en su nombre. Y termino con palabras que le escrib? hace alg?n tiempo: 1820, Paso del Boquer?n. Sin volver la cabeza, usted se hunde en el exilio. Lo veo, lo estoy viendo: se desliza el Paran? con perezas de lagarto y all? se aleja flameando su poncho rotoso, al trote del caballo, y se pierde en la fronda. Usted no dice adi?s a su tierra. Ella no se lo creer?a. O quiz?s usted no sabe, todav?a, que se va para siempre. Se agrisa el paisaje. Usted se va, vencido, y su tierra se queda sin aliento. ?Le devolver?n la respiraci?n los hijos que le nazcan, los amantes que le lleguen? Quienes de esa tierra broten, quienes en ella entren, ?se har?n dignos de tristeza tan honda? Su tierra. Nuestra tierra del sur. Usted le ser? muy necesario, don Jos?. Cada vez que los codiciosos la lastimen y la humillen, cada vez que los tontos la crean muda o est?ril, usted le har? falta. Porque usted, don Jos? Artigas, general de los sencillos, es la mejor palabra que ella ha dicho. __________________________________________________ Correo Yahoo! Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ?gratis! ?Abr? tu cuenta ya! - http://correo.yahoo.com.ar ________________________________________ INFORMACI?N SOBRE LA LISTA Y SUSCRIPCIONES POR V?A INTERNET: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/reconquista-popular. SUSCRIPCI?N POR CORREO ELECTR?NICO: env?e un mensaje escribiendo 'help' en el asunto (no escriba nada en el cuerpo del mensaje) a reconquista-popular-request en lists.econ.utah.edu EL CORREO ELECTR?NICO DE LA PERSONA QUE ADMINISTRA LA LISTA ES: reconquista-popular-admin en lists.econ.utah.edu TODOS LOS MENSAJES DE ESTA LISTA QUEDAN ARCHIVADOS Y PUEDEN CONSULTARSE EN: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/reconquista-popular/ ________________________________________ Lista de correo electr?nico Reconquista-Popular Reconquista-Popular en lists.econ.utah.edu http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/reconquista-popular -- N?stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a From giobon at comcast.net Fri Jul 4 09:42:46 2008 From: giobon at comcast.net (Bonnie Weinstein) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 08:42:46 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Steve Bloom: Assessing the Cleveland Conference - correction In-Reply-To: <673897.5840.qm@web30205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Correction: Three hundred copies of the following were written and distributed by Carole Seligman and Bonnie Weinstein of Socialist Viewpoint (www.socialistviewpoint.org) beginning early Saturday Morning, June 28 before the conference began. And Carole wrote the actual amendment listing each place Iraq was mentioned in the Coordinating Committee's Action proposal adding the phrase, "and Afghanistan" after each one. As we were handing out our statement and proposal it became clear to us that this amendment would probably win since almost everyone we spoke to (except those in SA and who were on the CC) thought it was an oversight that it was left out and were shocked to find out it was, indeed, intentional. It is true that there were others who presented similar amendments. And it is also true that those in the Coordinating Committee of the Assembly, including Jerry Gordon, Jeff Mackler and all of Socialist Action opposed this amendment as well as the Palestine amendment. They did not oppose the amendment on Iran. I think perhaps three people opposed that amendment. Following is the proposal we handed out to the conference giving our arguments for why Afghanistan should be included in the conference action demands. Comradely, Bonnie Weinstein ---------------------- Stop the Wars! U.S. Out of Iraq and Afghanistan Now! This position argues for adding the U.S. war against Afghanistan to the conference action demands. The most important, single task at this assembly is to unite to stop the U.S. wars against the people of Iraq and Afghanistan. This means solidarity with the peoples under attack, supporting their right to self-determination; telling the truth about who the aggressor is (the U.S. government); struggling to save the lives of the people under attack, and those of the U.S. soldiers by bringing them home immediately; using the resources the U.S. now spends on war to instead benefit people by building schools, housing, infrastructure, environmental protection, disaster relief, medical care; and forging links across borders with the international antiwar movement to end these wars. The Bill passed by Congress on June 19th continued funding for both wars. Politicians of both parties supported it. And, although many hope that peace can be achieved through the presidential election, the war-funding vote proves that the peace movement, to achieve any step forward, must be totally independent of the political parties and elected officials responsible for these wars. The position raised by politicians running for election, that we must withdraw troops from Iraq so we can send them to Afghanistan, is a mockery of an antiwar position. These wars are two fronts of the so-called War on Terror and the peace movement must oppose both vigorously! The best example this year of inspiring antiwar action was the May 1st work stoppage by the International Long Shore Workers Union. Twenty-nine thousand workers shut down all west coast ports to protest both wars on Iraq and Afghanistan. This workers? act of protest and international solidarity set the example for the entire antiwar and labor movements. This conference should emulate the ILWU mass action and spread its message of opposition to both wars throughout the country. The election has hindered efforts to mount mass antiwar actions. But, united street demonstrations and mass work actions are the only means by which the peace movement can collectively present an alternative to the government war makers. That is why the absence of a united mobilization on the fifth anniversary of the war on Iraq was such a blow. While mass actions are not the only useful tactics in the peace movement, mass demonstrations are the only collective means of bringing the whole peace movement together, and reaching out with a unified voice to the masses of people opposed to the war. The antiwar movement is up against an administration hell-bent on owning Iraq and Afghanistan; a Congress, which votes war funding; and two political parties sharing power who together represent the same politics of war and militarism. The U.S. has bases the world over and supplies weapons to countries at war, including those at war against their own inhabitants. It has more weapons of mass destruction than any other country, and spends more on military expenditures than the rest of the world altogether! But, the U.S. is sending its own soldiers to shoot at Iraqi and Afghan people. Ending those wars is the single issue that must unite the movement. U.S. Out of Iraq and Afghanistan! Bring all the troops home now! Submitted by: Carole Seligman and Bonnie Weinstein, participants in Bay Area United Against War, bauaw.org; JROTC Must Go! www.jrotcmustgo.blogspot.com/; Socialist Viewpoint magazine (organizations for identification purposes only) --------------- On 7/3/08 7:02 PM, "Arthur Rymer" wrote: > Steve Bloom's report on the National Assembly in Cleveland > omits a fact so important that the report is a distortion of what > actually happened: Bloom does not inform the reader that the > meeting voted decisively in favor of an amendment to change > the name of the National Assembly itself to include Afghanistan > in the name. > > Bloom explains that he "did not take time to elaborate" the > Afghanistan discussion, because "a consensus developed in the > end." This is false. There was not a consensus on the question > of Afghanistan. The leadership of the Assembly, including > Jerry Gordon, Jeff Mackler, and all of Socialist Action, opposed > the Afghanistan amendment, spoke against it, and voted against it. > Yet a decisive majority defied the leadership and voted in favor > of the amendment. This amendment changed the name of the > National Assembly to include Afghanistan in the name, and > added "and Afghanistan" to every mention of Iraq in the National > Assembly's action proposal. > > And by the way, the original motion to change the name of the > National Assembly to include Afghanistan in the name was > submitted by the League for the Revolutionary Party (LRP), > which Bloom dismisses as one of the "various sects" that "came > to disrupt and expose." The LRP did not disrupt, we did expose, > and we exposed so well that we played a key role in winning a > clear majority of the assembly to support our motion on Afghanistan. > The two times that an LRPer, Jeff Covington, spoke from the floor > against the leadership of the anti-war movement and of this assembly > for their accommodation to the Democratic Party, his statements > were repeatedly met with loud applause from a significant portion > of the meeting. A number of people approached him > afterward to thank him for his comments. > > For the record, Carol Seligman of Socialist Alternative as well as > the Freedom Socialist Party / Radical Women also supported, spoke > for, and voted for the Afghanistan amendment. The Spartacist > League and the Internationalist Group indeed only came to denounce > -- the IG made the embarrassing mistake of walking in and denouncing > the assembly for not opposing the occupation of Afghanistan, shortly > after the assembly had just voted in favor of the amendment to oppose > the occupation of Afghanistan. A stopped clock is sometimes right, > but not this time. > > Art Rymer > > > > > > > > ________________________________________________ > YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu > Set your options at: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/giobon%40comcast.net From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Fri Jul 4 09:55:33 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 11:55:33 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Sandinistas split over revolution hymn Message-ID: <908b689f0807040855u54d155eeq6d505485e3974cc0@mail.gmail.com> Sandinistas split over revolution hymn Sat Jun 14, 2008 MANAGUA, Nicaragua ? A famous Nicaraguan revolutionary singer-songwriter has asked the government to stop using his music. Carlos Mejia Godoy, who penned the hymn of the ruling Sandinista National Liberation Front, said in a letter published Saturday that President Daniel Ortega and his staff are not authorized to use his songs during government events. He did not dispute the use of the party hymn he wrote, but he gave government-supported television and radio outlets a week to stop using a version he recorded. Mejia Godoy is among several Sandinistas who formed a new party after breaking with Ortega, who also served as Sandinista leader in the 1980s and fought U.S.-backed Contra rebels. "I cannot allow songs inspired by the sacrifice of thousands of Nicaraguan people to serve as a musical backdrop for ... the most embarrassing tragicomedy in recent years," said Mejia Godoy, who ran unsuccessfully for vice president in 2006 when Ortega won the presidency. From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Fri Jul 4 10:08:51 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 12:08:51 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Lenin's Tomb on Marxism 2008 Message-ID: <908b689f0807040908n510354e1w26c2a6cb6baa1047@mail.gmail.com> From hunterbadbear at hunterbear.org Fri Jul 4 10:09:37 2008 From: hunterbadbear at hunterbear.org (Hunter Gray) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 10:09:37 -0600 Subject: [Marxism] Jesse Helms [of contemporary North Carolina -- and the 19th century] Message-ID: <002901c8ddf0$5c47ad70$0400a8c0@computer> NOTE BY HUNTER BEAR: [July 4 2008] Jesse Helms has now passed into The Fog and on to The Beyond -- where he'll have much of a personal nature to think about. [My theology includes the Afterlife, but not Hell.] His departure leaves me with mixed emotions but, in all honesty, somewhat less poignant regret than I've ever felt recently when a leaf has fallen from the tree. This is a well received post I sent out a few years ago -- dealing with my own experiences and reflections concerning the Museum Piece from North Carolina. Among all of his many nefarious deeds, was his unremitting racist opposition to Federal recognition -- and the important accompanying Federal Indian services -- for the Lumbee Indian Nation. The Lumbees are the largest Native nation in North Carolina and one of the largest in the United States. Their extremely important struggle continues -- Federal recognition is closer than ever for them -- but not yet in hand. See our webpage for the Lumbees and their long campaign for a full measure of social justice: http://www.hunterbear.org/lumbee_indians_of_north_carolina.htm Personal Reminiscence: North Carolina and Jesse Helms [Hunter Gray, 8/22/01] PUBLISHED IN THE SOCIALIST [JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2003] The departure of Jesse Helms [hopefully forever] from the national political scene is a vastly pleasant and encouraging development -- much, much more than, say, even the fading of an especially cruel winter in the Northern Plains or rain in Death Valley. I met him directly only once -- a long, long time ago. More on that in a few moments. Helms comes from Monroe -- Union County -- North Carolina. Even into historically recent times, the racism of this place was among the worst in the South [today, it's becoming a suburb of Charlotte -- but I suspect even a thin scratch would produce the heavy and oppressive odor of contemporary, essentially unyielding racism.] This was the setting where, in the late '50s and just into the '60s, Black leader Rob Williams, a World War II vet and then president of the local NAACP, and with other very courageous souls, conducted a series of hard-fought desegregation campaigns at Monroe. The Black community in that hate-filled town was violently attacked at different points by increasingly heavy Klan forces -- and Williams, with an NRA charter, organized an armed self-defense group. Condemned increasingly by the North Carolina state government, he also wound up on the "hate-list" of the FBI because of his strong support of the Cuban Revolution. In 1961, a massive, armed Klan attack was directed against the Black community of Monroe which climaxed at night. Rob Williams called the office of North Carolina governor, Terry Sanford, to demand state protection -- but was told pleasantly by Sanford's assistant, "I would have thought you'd be swinging from that big tree in the Monroe courthouse yard by this time, Rob." In the chaos of that final terrible late afternoon and night, Williams and his people took into protective custody a white couple that, either with malice or accidentally, had gone "behind the lines" in the Black community. Although the white couple was released quite unharmed a few hours later, Williams and others were charged with kidnapping -- and, though he was able to make his getaway to Cuba, others were caught. They came to trial in February, 1964 at Monroe. In those rich and turbulent days, I was Field Organizer for the radical Southern Conference Educational Fund [SCEF], and based at Raleigh, NC, working across the Deep South in grassroots civil rights organizing and anti-Klan work. I was also a very publicly listed and active supporter of the Committee to Aid the Monroe Defendants [CAMD] -- headed by the excellent Berta Green [a Trotskyist] and George Weissman and others. The principal lawyer for my group, SCEF, was Bill Kunstler who was also one of the attorneys for the Monroe victims. I got into Monroe for the trial in the early evening before, noting the huge lighted [Christian?] cross on the hill above, and stopped for gas at what we rather callously used to refer to in those days as a "cracker nest." A young white man handled the gas and, when that was completed, I asked him directions to a particular address -- which was that of the home of the embattled Dr Albert Perry, a civil rights stalwart where Berta and the others were staying. He looked at me with great distaste. "Why that's Coon Town," and he spit it out. "Just tell me where it is, " I said. He gestured vaguely and backed away. At Dr Perry's home, the CAMD leaders were gathered -- enmeshed in an extremely difficult crisis. The "other" defense committee, the Monroe Defense Committee [MDC] [ Workers World], was also of course, at that moment, in Monroe. Relationships between the two groups and their followers were extremely hostile. There had been altercations. The prospect of going into a major legal defense trial in such a divisive context -- a trial that was drawing considerable national and international attention -- was clearly very bad business for everyone on our general side. Since I was very much of the ecumenical Left, I immediately offered to go to the local headquarters of the Monroe Defense Committee to see if a pragmatic armistice could be arranged. I did and, ushered in by heavily armed guards, met the very charming Mrs Clarence Senior, who with her husband, spearheaded the MDC. I had no sooner introduced myself when she warmed very visibly, with a huge smile. "Professor Salter of Tougaloo College," she said, "I know all about you!" Very soon, and congenially, we had agreement on treaty basics -- and, with only a few more back and forth middle-of-the-night trips [Berta et al. and CAMD were as agreeable as Mrs Senior and MDC], we had full agreement on joint cooperation in all key areas -- including media presentations and statements. The trial, as massive a perversion of justice as I've ever seen anywhere, took place in this absolutely hate-filled town of Monroe [the Helms' home-town], saturated with obvious [if ungarbed] Ku Kluxers, a raft of Federal and state finks, and newspersons from the four corners of the globe. A blatantly stacked-deck -- a completely unabashed one from the outset -- the "trial" ran its obviously racist course -- presided over by an openly " hanging judge" type flanked by a gaggle of heavily armed deputies. The Monroe victim defendants were, of course, convicted -- and appealed -- and eventually were finally freed. One of the most conspicuous regional media outfits in Monroe for this nefarious affair was the racist television station from Raleigh in which Jesse Helms was the major fixture -- WRAL-TV. It also always played a conspicuously prolonged rendition of "Dixie" each night before its merciful shut-down. About a year later, I was -- as I had been for some many, many months -- directing a major, intensive and increasingly successful civil rights, voter registration, and anti-Klan campaign in the extremely racist, rigidly-segregated, poverty-stricken, Klan-infested multi-county Northeastern North Carolina Blackbelt. This region, although predominately Black , also had a substantial and equally victimized Native American population which was deeply involved in our Movement. Our campaign was, in the face of virulently racist opposition -- e.g., antagonistic and viciously resistant voter registrars, widespread economic reprisals, open violence from police and Klan-types [and with hostile state agents from the NC State Bureau of Investigation and equally hostile FBI finks hovering in the shadows] organizing the grassroots, county by county, and generating extremely capable local leadership. Excellent lawyers [Bill Kunstler, Morty Stavis, Phil Hirschkop] were major and critical assets. As all of this burgeoned along, WRAL-TV and Jesse Helms at Raleigh were among our shrillest and most hostile media critics. And then, at one point, in that Spring of '65, Jesse Helms, in a news cast, levied an especially venomous Red-baiting blast against me and our Blackbelt project: 2 minutes and 18 seconds of it. But, in his fervor, he'd overstepped -- and the upshot was that I got "equal time." Seeing no point in responding to his Red charges, I put together, instead, a necessarily trenchant statement which discussed the hideous nature of the North Carolina Blackbelt setting and its power structure, also attacked the United Klans of America, and called for a strong Federal voting rights act [then in the Congressional hopper.] My statement, which I refined and honed and read to my patient, watch-holding wife at least 15 times, fell neatly into the 2 minutes, 18 seconds context. When the day came, I went to WRAL, on the outskirts of Raleigh. Entering the station, I noted the delegation of several somber-faced white men approaching me -- led by a black-suited entity which I realized was Jesse Helms. We faced each other, staring, for a very long moment indeed. He saw whatever he saw in me -- and I saw a pudgy, rather heavy-faced man, wearing glasses behind which his quite conspicuous eyes blinked rapidly. He was sweating. Then he stuck out his hand, with the coldest formality I've ever encountered, and I took it -- and we, very perfunctorily, shook hands. "Are you ready?" he asked me. "I am," said I. "Quite ready indeed." As though we were en route to the ultimate manifestation of The Code Duello under the Southern pines, we walked, he and I together, and followed by his colleagues, up a stairway, to a broadcasting room. There, with Jesse Helms sweating even more profusely, I took out my written statement. Still staring, he told me, "You have two minutes and eighteen seconds, son." Ignoring that, I nodded. The lights were fixed hard and heatedly upon me and I could sense Jesse Helms' cold and distasteful stare from behind. I read my statement, briskly and clearly, and I got it all in: the awful nature of the Blackbelt and its power structure, the intimidation and violence, the Klan -- and the need for a very strong Federal voting rights act. When it was over, after 2 minutes and 18 seconds, we walked back downstairs -- followed by his colleagues. Obviously angry and with his face still sweating profusely and his eyes big and cold, Jesse Helms looked at me and I at him. Without saying a word, he stuck out his hand again and I took it and we shook -- this time, very very perfunctorily. He and his group turned and stalked away. The next day, back up in the Blackbelt, I was asked by my very good friends and civil rights colleagues, Reed and Willa [Cofield] Johnson of Enfield -- another hate-filled little bastion -- just what it was like to shake hands with Jesse Helms. I thought for a long moment. "It was like shaking hands with a toad's belly," said I. And I still hold, to this very day, to that very accurate descriptive analysis of that absolutely weird and surrealistic experience. Our Northeastern Blackbelt project rolled on to many, many successes. In time, I went on to many other organizing campaigns. And Jesse Helms went to the U.S. Senate where his Never Never Potions and Malevolent Witch-Craft have poured rank poison into our national culture and the long-suffering world scene for a very, very long and tragic time. In the Spring of 1996, I was chairing, as a recently retired University of North Dakota professor, a panel on Native American challenges in education and related dimensions at Indian Time Out Week, held by the Native students at UND. One panel participant, a well-known Native educator and old friend from a bit further west, had just returned to the Northern Plains from a trip to Washington to which he'd gone seeking funds for his Native community college. When he finished his presentation, he said, "Have kind of an interesting story." It developed that our friend and colleague, somewhere along the puddle-jumping plane trip to the Twin Cities, had found himself sitting next to -- Jesse Helms! As he briefly described Helms, black suit and sweat, I remembered my long-ago meeting with the Entity from Monroe. With our naturally uneasy friend, Helms had tried to say how much he admired Indian people but it fell 'way short, tumbling out of sight into a Grand Canyon of obvious,syrupy hypocrisy. They left that plane, Helms following our colleague. "Did he stick out his hand when you parted?" I asked. "He did," said our friend. "And we shook hands, though it seemed strange." "Well," said I, "he does know the amenities." And then, of course, I told the tale that I've just told you-all, the readers. In Solidarity - Hunter Gray [Hunter Bear] HUNTER GRAY [HUNTER BEAR/JOHN R SALTER JR] Mi'kmaq /St. Francis Abenaki/St. Regis Mohawk Protected by Na?shdo?i?ba?i? and Ohkwari' Check out our Hunterbear website Directory http://hunterbear.org/directory.htm [The site is dedicated to our one-half Bobcat, Cloudy Gray: http://hunterbear.org/cloudy_gray.htm See Forces and Faces Along the Activist Trail http://hunterbear.org/forces_and_faces_along_the_trail.htm And see Forest Fires in the West http://hunterbear.org/forest_fires_in_the_west.htm In our Gray Hole, the ghosts often dance in the junipers and sage, on the game trails, in the tributary canyons with the thick red maples, and on the high windy ridges -- and they dance from within the very essence of our own inner being. They do this especially when the bright night moon shines down on the clean white snow that covers the valley and its surroundings. Then it is as bright as day -- but in an always soft and mysterious and remembering way. From cbcox at ilstu.edu Fri Jul 4 10:08:25 2008 From: cbcox at ilstu.edu (Carrol Cox) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 11:08:25 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] =?utf-8?b?VGhlIMOi4oKs4oSiNjBzIEJlZ2luIHRvIEZhZGUgYXMg?= =?utf-8?q?Liberal=09Professors_Retire?= References: <908b689f0807031532t18200254n8a61ee670df43f97@mail.gmail.com> <20080703223925.3EEA41184C@mailbackend.panix.com> Message-ID: <486E4AF9.D5BC96F0@ilstu.edu> Christopher Hutchinson wrote: > > Most of the professors that I have come across who have been politically > active at some point in their lives do not hold principled views. What about the Walmart clerks, accountants, automotive engineers, miners, sytems analysts, line-repair operatives, movie projectinists, stagehands, taxi drivers, firefighters, Molly maids, waitresses, electricians, postal clerks, bricklayers, heavy-equipment operators that you have come across? Why this silly fixation on professors? Just another way of earning aliving. Carrol From lnp3 at panix.com Fri Jul 4 10:19:48 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 12:19:48 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Jesse Helms [of contemporary North Carolina -- and the 19th century] In-Reply-To: <002901c8ddf0$5c47ad70$0400a8c0@computer> References: <002901c8ddf0$5c47ad70$0400a8c0@computer> Message-ID: <20080704161948.CB5591016B@mailbackend.panix.com> >NOTE BY HUNTER BEAR: [July 4 2008] >Among all of his many nefarious deeds, was his unremitting racist >opposition to Federal recognition -- and the important accompanying >Federal Indian services -- for the Lumbee Indian Nation. The Lumbees >are the largest Native nation in North Carolina and one of the >largest in the United States. Their extremely important struggle >continues -- Federal recognition is closer than ever for them -- but >not yet in hand. See our webpage for the Lumbees and their long >campaign for a full measure of social justice: >http://www.hunterbear.org/lumbee_indians_of_north_carolina.htm While it is admittedly a bit of a stretch, the Lumbees are believed to be partially descended from Ottoman Turks enslaved by the Spanish and brought to North Carolina by Sir Francis Drake. I wrote about that here: http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2008/06/25/turks-and-american-indians/ From markalause at gmail.com Fri Jul 4 10:58:32 2008 From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 11:58:32 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] =?windows-1252?q?The_=E2=80=9960s_Begin_to_Fade_as_Libe?= =?windows-1252?q?ral_Professors_Retire?= In-Reply-To: <486E4AF9.D5BC96F0@ilstu.edu> References: <908b689f0807031532t18200254n8a61ee670df43f97@mail.gmail.com> <20080703223925.3EEA41184C@mailbackend.panix.com> <486E4AF9.D5BC96F0@ilstu.edu> Message-ID: On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 11:08 AM, Carrol Cox wrote: > > What about the Walmart clerks, accountants, automotive engineers, > miners, sytems analysts, line-repair operatives, movie projectinists, > stagehands, taxi drivers, firefighters, Molly maids, waitresses, > electricians, postal clerks, bricklayers, heavy-equipment operators that > you have come across? > > Why this silly fixation on professors? Just another way of earning > aliving. > Carrol's right, of course. However, it must be said that It is a very enviable job. lt has nothing like the high status with which it used to be regarded, but it's nothing to sneeze at. From the outside, you get a decent salary for a few hours' work. The reality is much more complex. Tenured professors can do the bare minimum, but many of us work as much or more than most people. I know that I work many more hours now than when I worked in an auto factory. The difference is that most of what I do now--but not all, by a long shot--is much more interesting and less alienating, though research and writing is hardly social labor. The negative side of this is that the work that I find most alienating is much more alienating than the assembly line. There are all sorts of committees, subcommittees, and working groups that see to the implementation of rules, guidelines, etc. There are committees, subcommittees, and working groups to write said rules. And committees, subcommittees, and working groups to write the rules for writing rules. And, if someone in authority decides to make exceptions to any of the rules, you have to listen politely to the rationalizations. But, to get to this spot, you have to crawl through miles of broken beer bottles. There's graduate school, where nothing's straightforward and you have to walk on eggshells about everything. Then, there's getting the job, which usually requires you to get a succession of short-run or part-time crappy jobs, that aren't really much higher up than a graduate student. There is that wonderful sense of being in your forties and earning a salary on which you could barely get by in your twenties. I've resisted addressing the early posts on adjunct jobs, which are and will always be a very long and angry scar across my life. It's rather like any other truly awful and inescapable experience. If you really faced it, you'd rather not deal with it, even in recalling it. So, let's say you're lucky enough to get a crack at a tenure-track job, you are almost certainly wrong. Most of these are basically filled but they're going through the motions for legal reasons and because the professional associations have rules and guidelines. If, by some chance, you are actually applying for a tenure-track job that hasn't been already earmarked, you need to gear the interview for what they want. And you don't know that. They've published criteria for the job but they can change that at any point. In reality, they can change it when you're sitting in front of them at the interview. It's like hitting a moving target in the dark while you're blindfolded. But let's say you get the job, now you need to keep your nose clean and get tenure. Any of the senior inepts that you might inadvertently offend has pretty much open season on you, though--in this essentially feudal system--you should have had found defenders and champions among them. Still, when I was finally coming up for tenure, one of the senior people in a mixed-discipline department wrote an 18-page diatribe against it, basically because the historians in general hadn't treated him with sufficient respect and that someone--he thought me--hadn't erased a blackboard in a classroom before he was using it. (I kid you not.) Surviving all of this is tough enough. If you are coming at it from a blue collar family with no experience in higher education at all, your chances are about as good as being hit by truck. Still, if you make it, you're then going to be denounced as an unprincipled, oversexed, lazy elitist, born with a silver spoon in your mouth. That's all part of the cultural vilification of this kind of labor by people who don't do it, don't appreciate it, and don't understand it. ML From charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us Fri Jul 4 11:08:03 2008 From: charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:08:03 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] work - ability - needs Message-ID: <486E20B4.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> S. Artesian wrote: > Nowhere in my reading of Marx did I find reference to a "to each > according > to his or her work." ^^^^ CB: It is implied that it is in the "lower" phase of communism, when he says "to each according to need" occurs in the "higher" phase of communism. This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com From charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us Fri Jul 4 11:10:34 2008 From: charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:10:34 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] work - ability - needs Message-ID: <486E214B.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> "S. Artesian" wrote: > > I would not agree about Cuba. Stage theory has been obsolete since 1905, at > least. The dynamics are simply that Cuba is, unfortunately, taking steps > backward. ^^^ CB: These sentences contradict each other. The notion of "taking steps backward" contains a stage theory implicitly, a stage/step theory. This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com From sartesian at earthlink.net Fri Jul 4 11:18:31 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 13:18:31 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] work - ability - needs References: <486E214B.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> Message-ID: <01fc01c8ddf9$fbc499e0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Stage theory refers to notion of "progression" of capitalist development into socialist development, where the expansion of the capitalist mode of expropriation is supposed to resolve the problems of economic development, and underdevelopment, and needs to occur prior to the assumption of direct power by the working class. The introduction of piecework rates, individual wage differentials based on "productivity" as a preliminary stage leading to a more developed "egalitarianism" is not going to occur. What will occur is stratification, differentiation, privilege. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Brown" To: Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 1:10 PM Subject: [Marxism] work - ability - needs > > > > "S. Artesian" wrote: >> >> I would not agree about Cuba. Stage theory has been obsolete since > 1905, at >> least. The dynamics are simply that Cuba is, unfortunately, taking > steps >> backward. > > ^^^ > CB: These sentences contradict each other. The notion of "taking steps > backward" contains a stage theory implicitly, a stage/step theory. > > > > > This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. > www.surfcontrol.com > > ________________________________________________ > YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu > Set your options at: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/sartesian%40earthlink.net From walterlx at earthlink.net Fri Jul 4 11:21:22 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 10:21:22 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [Marxism] Zimbabwe - a blockaded country Message-ID: <1498336.1215192082026.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Much agreement with Louis and Sartesian, for a pleasant change. Let's further keep in mind that there is both an economic blockade and a political war going on here against Zimbabwe and against the government of President Mugabe. His forces lost the legislative election, and his mandate in the runoff is hardly anything to speak with pride about. Lacking any serious knowledge about the concrete economic situation in Zimbabwe, I admit that all I know about is the massive inflation about which we've all read. One wonders how anyone can buy a loaf of bread or pay the rent. I suppose a good deal of bartering goes on as well as a great deal of corruption among those with access to the governmental trough in which they can take care of themselves. We can also assume that the armed forces and central government figures are economically secure enough to stay loyal to the administration of President Mugabe. Sartesian asks if imperialist sanctions and CIA money are the only sources of Zimbabwe's troubles. That's not a fair question, since of course they're not the ONLY sources. Mugabe and his government are fully responsible for everything which they do and don't do. But how much room to maneuver do they have? With the blockade on them, there must be some limits to their ability, in addition to whatever their ideological deficiencies. No need to defend Mugabe's behavior. The most important thing we can and should try to do is to understand it. Of course Mugabe and his government are responsible for what they do. No one can reasonably suggest they're not responsible for what they do. Walter Lippmann Seattle, Washington ======================== LOS ANGELES TIMES June 21, 2008 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/message/87021 Harare, Zimbabwe roland is not dead, though some wish for his demise. He's a Zimbabwean profiteer, a billionaire in his nation's nearly worthless money, a man who above all loves the greenback. He had a steady job as a payroll administrator, but he gave it up to trade currency on the black market in this capital. It works like this: Simply by holding on to dollars for a day, you watch the exchange rates change -- once in the morning, once in the afternoon, once in the evening and bingo, the dollar has appreciated and you're $50 billion richer. Zimbabwean dollars, that is. On this day it takes 5.5 billion Zimbabwean dollars to equal one U.S. dollar, but still, that means Roland has cleared about nine U.S. dollars. "If you put your money in U.S. dollars, it will appreciate in value," Roland says, his eyes peeled for cops. "In a week, if the week is good, without any raids, you can make up to $100." The Zimbabwe dollar is so listless that it makes even the diminishing U.S. dollar seem as confident as a John Wayne character. The American currency has swagger here; businessmen have been drawn to it since the collapse of commercial farming in 2000. Landlords and traders have started demanding rent or payments for large items like cars or land in U.S. dollars. Being a multibillionaire in Zimbabwean dollars has its problems, though. There's not much to buy in Harare's shops, so Roland goes to neighboring countries, bringing back electronic goods that, along with his two types of dollars, he sells on the black market. ==================================================================== WALTER CONTINUES: One of the reasons it seems to incongruous to read redbaiting attacks against the views I express is that the Communist Party, USA, share Louis's hostility toward Mugabe and the government of Zimbabwe, just as they share his hostility toward the Islamic Republic of Iran. Well, politics makes strange bedfellows and it is NOT to Louis's discredit that his views are very close to the views of the CPUSA. But please, don't take MY word for it: Here are samples, but there are dozens of others: My Communist Party, USA friends (very hostile to Mugabe) write: http://www.cpusa.org/article/view/959/#Zimbabwe_Labor_Leaders_Arrested Opposition Group in Zimbabwe Demands Right to Demonstrate http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/view/6391/1/178 Zimbabwe?s Very American Election http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/view/900/1/87/ ==================================================================== LOUIS PROYECT wrote: We must oppose sanctions against Zimbabwe, just as Trotsky opposed any attempts to economically destabilize the USSR in the 20s and 30s. But that does not obligate us to become propagandists for ZANU-PF like Stephen Gowans. Our model should be Leon Trotsky when it comes to the question of beleaguered states run by enemies of the working class. SARTESIAN wrote: What should be first is the analysis of the real economic conditions, internal and international, that drive the classes and clashes in Zimbabwe, and that one class, the capitalist class uses, varying at times its tactics and its choice of agents, to prevent and undercut the other classes-- which are the workers and poor. I have not seen one word of concrete analysis of the internal economic structure of Zimbabwe and its relations with global capitalism in all these supposed "anti-imperialist" defenses of Mugabe. Anybody want to talk about the organization of agriculture? Landed property? Wage rates? Does anyone really believe that IMF sanctions and CIA money are the sole sources of the struggle in Zimbabwe? Is there no history of capitalist accommodation by ZANU-PF, adherence to IMF policies, and immiseration of the general population by the Mugabe government? ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us Fri Jul 4 11:30:43 2008 From: charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:30:43 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] work - ability - needs Message-ID: <486E2603.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> In _Capital_, Marx definitely says that different level of skill and training mean that different labors contribute different amounts of value per time. Secondly, _classes_ are not distinguished based on different levels of pay ( income) , but on whether or not one owns or does not own means of production. Charles This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com From nmgoro at gmail.com Fri Jul 4 11:37:35 2008 From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 14:37:35 -0300 Subject: [Marxism] Marxism] Fidel on Marulanda, Ingrid Betancourt, and journalistic tasks In-Reply-To: <000001c8dde7$21942540$6401a8c0@office1pc> References: <000001c8dde7$21942540$6401a8c0@office1pc> Message-ID: <2fa158550807041037o459550e6x639d7ea4c01bd785@mail.gmail.com> I am afraid that the disconnection between the struggle of the FARC and the necessities of the Colombian masses deepens as time passes by. The criminal character of the Colombian oligarchy should not make us forget this. Ch?vez, at least, doesn't, nor, certainly, Fidel. 2008/7/4, Fred Feldman : > Walter submitted and Fidel Castro wrote: > Out of a basically humanist sentiment, we rejoiced at the news that > Ingrid Betancourt, three American citizens ources. > > Fred comments: > This is a classic statement of views that Fidel has stated again and again, > beginning in the armed struggle in Cuba its > > The freedom of these hostages is treated as a positive development > unconditionally, regardless of who freed them or why. And in my view, that > is consistent with the NEED to draw Colombia -- whose masses basically face > the same problems as Venezuela, Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Paraguay -- > into today's struggle and revolutionary process. > -- N?stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a From charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us Fri Jul 4 11:43:17 2008 From: charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:43:17 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] re work-needs, etc Message-ID: <486E28F5.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> michael a. lebowitz Just a quick passing shot: 1. Marx did not distinguish between a socialist society and a communist society; rather, he referred to a single society in the process of 'becoming'-- ^^^^ CB: And as has been said many times, he referred to a "higher phase", thus distinguishing between phases. Giving the phases names is not the critical analytical step. Distinguishing the phases is. ^^^ moving from a point where it relies upon historical premises which it itself has not produced, through a process of 'subordinating all elements of society to itself, or in creating out of it the organs which it still lacks', to the point where it produces its own premises (i.e., rests upon its own foundations). 2. Distribution in accordance with contribution was for Marx the result of a 'defect'-- an inherited historical premise, the continuation of bourgeois right (in this case the treatment of one's own labour-power, 'the personal condition of production', as your property. Nowhere does Marx advocate 'building upon defects' ^^^ CB: That's a lawyerly way to say it. Probably nowhere did Marx advocate "not building upon defects" either. ^^^^ (cf. my note with this title in the October 2007 Science& Society for the barebones argument). In fact, it is essential to struggle to subordinate this defect--- something that Che clearly understood. ^^^^ CB: Although, nowhere did _Marx_ say "it is essential to struggle to subordinate this defect", either. ^^^^ 3. It was Lenin who said there were two 'stages', and that there was the 'socialist principle' of to each according to her contribution. ^^^^^ CB: Where'd he say that ? Of course, Lenin was dealing with socialism in practice, not in theory like Marx. And as Engels said, Marxism is not a dogma , but a guide to action. ^^^^ ^^^^^ Stalin and many others have followed. In fact, my note referred to above was originally presented in May 2006 in Havana at the Marx Conference and was directed (not openly-- but the Cubans all knew what I was talking about) against this very argument already emerging in Cuba (and most explicitly in the December 2005 speech of Soberon, president of the Cuban Central Bank). in solidarity, michael . This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com From charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us Fri Jul 4 12:06:17 2008 From: charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 14:06:17 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] work - ability - needs Message-ID: <486E2E5A.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> Angelus Novus fuerdenkommunismus at -clip- There should be some sort of ban on Marxists using the word "alienated" in this sort of context. The Feuerbachian notion of humanity's "species being" are the basis on which Marx employs the "alienation" term as denoting an "alienation" from this "species being" in the Parisian Manuscripts. But Marx & Engels *broke* with Feuerbachian notions in the German Ideology, and as much as I disagree with Charles that GI constitutes the foundation of a science of "historical materialism", I do agree that it represents a break with the notions of "human nature" found in the Parisian Manuscripts. This *specific* use of the term alienation is not to be found in the critique of political economy, because Marx's entire problematic has changed. ^^^ CB: You seem to reject both the Paris Manuscripts and the German Ideology manuscripts in what you say here. How do you feel about _The Manifesto of the Communist Party_ ? And then you quote _Capital_ only because I like you to. What written by Marx is your source on Marxism ? Anyway, though "The German Ideology" has some weaknesses in its anthropology ( later significantly overcome with Engels' _The Origin of the Family'_) it does articulate the necessary connections which are the basis of the science of historical materialism. That is before anything else, humans must eat, sleep, drink, avoid predators, breath not have your throat cut by a soldier and fulfill all their physiological or biological necessities. Class divided society, the subject of historical materialism, conditions provision of these physiological necessities for exploited classes upon the exploited classes producing surpluses for exploiting classes. Thus, class divided society constitutes a "Realm of Necessity", in Marx and Engels terminology. The manipulation of the provision of physiological necessities, and the struggle against that manipulation drives history. Science, in Marx and Engels' thinking, is the discovery of necessary connections. The connection to physiological necessities is the way of establishing historical science. This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com From charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us Fri Jul 4 12:33:38 2008 From: charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 14:33:38 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Information Re: Cuba to abandon wage caps Message-ID: <486E34C2.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> Angelus: >But when someone speaks of "looking at things >dialectically", I must confess I have no clue what the >speaker/writer is talking about. As far as I can tell, Walter has a "on one hand, on the other hand" understanding of "dialectics" that has more in common with the decisions that go into buying a car. Or deciding who to date. "He is not that great looking, but he does have a good job". I think you get the picture. ^^^^^ CB: Trying substituting the word "contradictions" for "dialectics". Is it that you have never come across any contradictions in life, Angelus ? I guess that's because you are an Angel ? And yes, there are contradictions in such non-philosophical , mundane pursuits as buying a car or dating. There are contradictions in everyday life, the quotidian, dialectics even. This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com From lnp3 at panix.com Fri Jul 4 12:50:33 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 14:50:33 -0400 Subject: Lenin’s “Imperialism” reads like it was written yesterday Message-ID: <20080704185033.5B9FEF9D5@mailbackend.panix.com> When I decided to lead a reading group on the classics of Marxism, I was partly motivated to re-examine some books that I hadn't looked at in over 40 years in some cases. One of them was Lenin's "Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism". As somebody who has adopted a less than worshipful stance toward the Marxist classics in recent years, I was ready to encounter all sorts of indications of how wrong it was to use something written in 1914 as a guide to our current situation. Leaving aside the big question of inter-imperialist wars, which does seem to be a thing of the past on first blush, I was amazed at how many other observations jibe with articles in the business sections of the major newspapers today devoted to the ongoing financial crisis. A number of these observations appear in chapter 3 and 4 of Lenin's book and I expect to run into others as I work my way through it. For those of you who have received a proper training in ruling class ideology in freshman economics or poli sci, you will surely remember how the teacher "proved" that Karl Marx's writings were obsolete on the basis that capitalism has become so democratized that the term "ruling class" has no meaning. This democratization is primarily expressed through pension funds, mutual funds, etc. that put the means of production in the hands of ordinary working people. Back in 1958, when American capitalism enjoyed more of an ideological hegemony than perhaps at any point since WWII, economists and corporate executives spoke about a "people's capitalism" that had nothing to do with the stereotype of fat cats in top hats found in Marxist literature. Economist Marcus Nadler wrote: "The economy of the United States is rapidly assuming the character of what may be termed 'People's Capitalism,' under which the production facilities of the nation?notably manufacturing?have come to be increasingly owned by people in the middle and lower income brackets or indirectly by mutual institutions which manage their savings." Roger Blough, the chairman of U.S. Steel, wrote: ". . . the change that has occurred in the ownership of our larger enterprises. Today fewer businesses?especially our biggest businesses?are owned by a few wealthy individuals or groups, as many were back in the Nineties. They are owned by millions of people in all walks of life. In United States Steel, for example, the owners of our business outnumber the employees by a considerable margin; and no one of them holds as much as three-tenths of one per cent of the outstanding stock." General Electric, whose television show was hosted by Ronald Reagan, ran an full-page advertisement stating: "People's Capitalism: The 376,000 owners with savings invested in General Electric are typical of America, where nearly every citizen is a capitalist." In a pamphlet distributed to its employees, Standard Oil advised them that Karl Marx devised a theory in which "Ownership of the mills, as with ownership of the land, was the key to the future. Ownership should, therefore, be vested not in the hands of the few, but with something he identified as The People." But today, Karl Marx would be surprised to learn the following: "Yes, the people own the tools of production. By his own definition, Karl Marx' prophecy has been realized. . . . How odd to find that it is here, in the capitalism he reviled, that the promise of the tools has been fulfilled." full: http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2008/07/04/lenins-imperialism-reads-like-it-was-written-yesterday/ From charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us Fri Jul 4 13:07:00 2008 From: charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:07:00 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Obama Gates Message-ID: <486E3C94.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> Obama Gates Ruthless Critic of All that Exists What does any of this have to do with Marxism, though? I mean, why are we discussing such issues as Obama's possible choice of Defense Secy, on a Marxism list? ^^^^ CB: Didn't Marx and Engels talk about British cabinets and American cabinets ? Like Lincoln's choice of generals during the Civil War, etc. ? This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com From charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us Fri Jul 4 13:20:19 2008 From: charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:20:19 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] "Hugo Chavez faces political crisis as allies desert him" Message-ID: <486E3FB4.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> When I read this article I counted two former allies who had deserted Chavez. I think they both were generals. Maybe I read it too fast or something. Charles This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com From lnp3 at panix.com Fri Jul 4 13:26:27 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:26:27 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Obama Gates In-Reply-To: <486E3C94.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> References: <486E3C94.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> Message-ID: <20080704192627.37A5911FF8@mailbackend.panix.com> >CB: Didn't Marx and Engels talk about British cabinets and American >cabinets ? Like Lincoln's choice of generals during the Civil War, etc. Lincoln was conducting a revolutionary war against a decadent, feudal-like social system that was an impediment to the full development of capitalism in the U.S. He likewise would have backed Garibaldi against the Italian aristocracy or Bolivar in Latin America. Looked at the question historically, the big bourgeoisie of today--the supporters of Obama (and McCain) like Goldman-Sachs, General Electric--are a reactionary impediment to the kind of democracy which is appropriate to our age, namely one based on the abolition of private property. In 1860, the battle was against chattel slavery. Today it is against wage slavery. If Obama was about to conduct a struggle of Lincolnesque proportions, I would support him myself. For a proper way to historicize the difference between 1860 and 2008, I recommend Lenin's writings on imperialism, where he said: The place of the struggle of a rising capital, striving towards national liberation from feudalism, has been taken by the struggle waged against the new forces by the most reactionary finance capital, the struggle of a force that has exhausted and outlived itself and is heading downward towards decay. The bourgeois-national state framework, which in the first epoch was the mainstay of the development of the productive forces of a humanity that was liberating itself from feudalism, has now, in the third epoch, become a hindrance to the further development of the productive forces. From a rising and progressive class the bourgeoisie has turned into a declining, decadent, and reactionary class. http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1915/mar/x01.htm From walterlx at earthlink.net Fri Jul 4 13:36:28 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 12:36:28 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [Marxism] Two well-argued criticisms of Barack Obama Message-ID: <7930929.1215200188832.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> (Here are two very well-argued criticisms of Obama. The linked one is from the Party of Socialism and Liberation, which is running Gloria LaRiva for President of the United States, and the second is from Cindy Sheehan, independent candidate for the U.S. House seat currently occupied by Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Cindy Sheehan's is from an e-mailing which came earlier today. What I like about them is that they are written in a language which can be clearly understood by people who are supporting Obama. They don't attack Obama personally, they just clearly and succinctly spell out the meaning of his political actions.) ==================================================================== Continuity we can believe in Tuesday, July 1, 2008 PSL Editorial http://www.pslweb.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=9505&news_iv_ctrl=1261 ============================================================================= Ask Not What? Cindy Sheehan There is no challenge greater than the defense of our nation and our values. The men and women of our military --- have signed up at a time when our troops face an ever-increasing load. Fighting a resurgent Taliban. Targeting al Qaeda. Persevering in the deserts and cities of Iraq. Training foreign militaries. Delivering humanitarian relief. In this young century, our military has answered when called, even as that call has come too often. Through their commitment, their capability, and their courage they have done us all proud. But we need to ease the burden on our troops, while meeting the challenges of the 21st century. That's why I will call on a new generation of Americans to join our military, and complete the effort to increase our ground forces by 65,000 soldiers and 27,000 Marines. The above excerpt is from a speech that the "peace" candidate, Barack Obama gave in Colorado on the 2nd of July. To be sure, he also called for other service to our country but I feel these two paragraphs highlight the continuing subservience the so-called public servants of the USA have to War, Inc. The only reason that our military is under such a great "burden" is because politicians like Barack Obama have voted consistently for billions (some award winning economists estimate, trillions) of wasted dollars to continue BushCo's abominable occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. Instead of increasing the Pentagon's already bloated budget, a true peace candidate would be calling for immediate withdrawal of forces from these countries so our military can begin the healing processes that need to occur to rejuvenate our broken military so we can have a true defense force and not an imperialistic ready response team to be on constant alert to storm any country at the whim of the emperor to spread corporate imperialism (what politicians call: Democracy) at the end of an M-16 or bombs bursting in air. President John F. Kennedy, whom Obama is trying to emulate by calling for increased service to the USA, famously said in his first and only inaugural address: Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country. President Kennedy also said, less famously, in that same address: The world is very different now. For man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life. Since President Kennedy uttered those words almost 50 years ago, the USA has become very adept at ending all forms of human life and has also, unfortunately, become experts at increasing human poverty and all this is because we have not heeded Kennedy's predecessor, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower when he warned the nation of the military industrial complex which has expanded over the years into the Military Industrial Congressional Media Complex. I would like to enhance Kennedy's famous words on this 4th of July when the country sets off on another celebration of gross militarism and the deaths of millions of people while we never pay tribute to our First Nation peoples who were exterminated so white Europeans could despoil a beautiful land. My new proposal for the 21st C. is: Ask not what humanity can do for you, but what you can do for humanity. A great beginning for the new surge of taking care of individuals instead of taking care of the pigs of War, Inc, would be to start withdrawing our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and don't forget to pull out the independent contracting companies and oil companies who through their No-bid Dick contracts are raping the region. Since every aspect of humanity is being destroyed by our sometime unconscious and sometimes active denial of War, Inc's profound, multi-tentacled cancer, we need to drastically reduce the size of our military and "defense" budget. Yes, we have a new world, but the response to violence can never be "shocking and awful" more violence, especially since Iraq and Afghanistan were OVER reactions to the filthy imaginations of BushCo. To encourage the reduction of violence and poverty, state education and health care should be free for all of our countrypersons, not just the ones who tragically, and for what ever reason, got sucked into being paid assassins for Uncle War, Inc. The need for the VA system would be eliminated, because a new-improved USA would not be creating damaged vets faster than they could (or even want to) fix them. WE need to open our eyes and not blindly follow politicians because of the letter that goes after their names on the ballot. In almost every case this election season since the presumptive nominees have been declared, it has been very difficult to distinguish the D from the R. WE should be demanding more from politicians and not allow the lowest common denominator to grovel and pander his way into the oval office, again. Haven't we had enough? What WE can do for humanity right now is break our individual ties to War, Inc. WE have to educate our children that politicians like Obama just want them to do the dirty work of War, Inc and have no feelings or compassion for their cannon fodder or the families of the cannon fodder who will be mourning instead of celebrating this weekend. Fireworks are pretty and if you can afford the gas, go see a show. But never allow your mind to wander far from what our Republic has degenerated into over the past 232 years. www.CindyforCongress.org A truly independent voice for humanity! Contribute to Cindy's Campaign San Francisco Residents, Please come to Dolores Park Friday, Saturday or Sunday. Team Cindy will be out gathering signatures to get Cindy on the November ballot. We plan on setting up near the corner of 18th and Churchand will be out daily beginning at 1pm. ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From fuerdenkommunismus at yahoo.com Fri Jul 4 13:37:38 2008 From: fuerdenkommunismus at yahoo.com (Angelus Novus) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 12:37:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Marxism] For the global right to migrate! Solidarity without borders Message-ID: <149084.73616.qm@web50102.mail.re2.yahoo.com> http://www.recht-auf-migration.de.vu/ For the global right to migrate! Solidarity without borders Against racism, social exclusion and the surveillance state A spectre is haunting Europe ? the spectre of migration. Whether they were called, had to flee or simply came, migrants have been living here for years. 1993 the Constitutional Law of the Federal Republic of Germany was changed and the so called "Third Country Regulation" and the concept of ?secure countries? was installed. Now, migrants, who have to travel through other countries to come here, which are declared as `safe ` have to plea for asylum there; and some countries are supposed to be safe in general so the seeking of asylum is not possible at all. With that, one of the most central lessons of German fascism -- the right of political asylum - was abolished! The change of the constitutional law and the special laws for asylum seekers (Asylbewerberleistungsgesetz) were the product of a campaign against an imagined flood of asylum seekers, enforced by politics and the media. This strategy found its terrible climax in pogrom-like excesses against refugees and deadly attacks on migrants who had already been living in the Federal Republic of Germany for a long time. Against this corruption of constitutional und human rights and the threat on the streets to life and physical inviolability, hundreds of thousands of refugees, radical left winged, liberals, members of the green party, unionists and human rights-activists, migrant organisations and individuals and many, many others protested! These open attacks are continued in the batch-wise reduction of human, civil and political rights on many levels. It?s high time to offer united resistance against this development! Europe seals itself off! The factual abolition of the constitutional right of asylum in the Federal Republic of Germany became a corner stone in today?s existing EU border-regime. In the development and enforcement of the rigid closing of the borders of the EU, which was a reaction to the opening of the ?iron curtain? in the beginning of the 1990ties, the Federal Republic of Germany was significantly involved. The dead, drowning in the Oder and Nei?e were displaced by the washed up corpses on the beaches in the Mediterranean and the shot near the Spanish enclaves Ceuta and Melilla. If refugees, against all odds, should actually manage to get to German territory, they are kept in a position without rights (living in camps, Residenzpflicht, no right to work etc.) are and mostly, in the end, deported. At the same time, globalised capitalism on its path to victory cuts through the world, leaving a trail of destruction: throughout the world, natural life resources are destroyed, so that more and more people are exposed to poverty and hunger. And also the ecological consequences have to be coped with particularly by the countries of the South. Aridity and floodings force as many people to flee as fuelled conflicts about the exploitation of reduced resources. For a global right of Migration! Close down all camps and deportation prisons! Migrants: stripped of rights, exploited and socially excluded! Even though the EU is for many a deadly fortress and many are stuck in the camps at the outposts, each year thousands come to Europe. Migrants are well established in the economy of the capitalistic centres and their metropolises; especially in the labour-intensive sectors (agriculture, construction) and the badly paid service sector (home care, childcare and prostitution). And yet the daily life of illegalised persons in the Federal Republic of Germany is determined by their exclusion from rights: they live without primary health care, papers, protection of labour and safety at work, the right to education for them or their children. They are in constant danger of police controls, detention and deportation. Migration is not only the attempted escape from destruction, torture and massacres, it is also the departure in the search for a new and better life and a voting with ones feet against oppressive global circumstances. Migrants without papers cross through the sealed-off borders and they have the potential to challenge the conditions of this world. Even if their struggles and fights are often as unseen as they themselves are, they do happen: against deportations, the forced living in the camps, the Residenzpflicht, non-cash benefits, racist harassment in everyday life and government agencies. The same rights for all of us! Abolish racist laws! Surveillance is expanded! Especially since the 11th of September 2001 the reduction of human and civil rights has increased. Exchangeable threatening scenarios of ?international terrorism? or dangers through a flooding of migrants are used as a basis for an increase of control- and surveillance methods. Within Europe a remodelling of the inner security policy is taking place, while the European outside borders are closed up. Racism, particularly against Islamic communities is used as a justification of military operations from Afghanistan to the Horn of Africa as well as for the enforcement of an authoritarian system of inner security apparatus. Stockpiling data laws, electronically readable passports with digital fingerprints and an automatic facial recognition are the new qualitative advanced stages of the surveillance state. The techniques of control are being enhanced; they are screening and selecting unseen and automatically. Those technologies, which were developed in the quasi-militarised EU - Border-control system, are now being used to hollow out the human and civil rights within the state. Many of those techniques for the collection of data and their electronically cross-linking are tried out on migrants: they are surveyed completely! Against Surveillance and for a self-determined and uncontrolled life! Demonstration Because of all this, the 15th anniversary of the change of the constitutional law is our reason to take our demands to the streets. We are living in the heart of Fortress Europe and it?s not enough anymore to claim back the right of asylum. Everybody must have the possibility to flee from persecution and poverty. Everybody must have the chance to live where and how they want to. With all the rights that go with it! For a global right of Migration ? for freedom of movement and de*fencing the nations! Demonstration on Saturday, 5th July 2008 - at 2 o'clock pm - Schlossplatz (Berlin Mitte) From charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us Fri Jul 4 13:50:41 2008 From: charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:50:41 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] work - ability - needs Message-ID: <486E46D1.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> S. Artesian Stage theory refers to notion of "progression" of capitalist development into socialist development, where the expansion of the capitalist mode of expropriation is supposed to resolve the problems of economic development, and underdevelopment, and needs to occur prior to the assumption of direct power by the working class. ^^^ CB: And even more slave mode stage, then feudal mode of production stage, then capitalist mode of production stage, then the big change from exploitive classes to communist mode of production stage ( with lower and higher phases) ^^^^^ The introduction of piecework rates, individual wage differentials based on "productivity" as a preliminary stage leading to a more developed "egalitarianism" is not going to occur. What will occur is stratification, differentiation, privilege. ^^^^ CB: How do you know this will occur ? Stratification is sociological/archaeological terminology for classes. Classes are differentiated based on private _ownership_ of means of production, or lack thereof, not different incomes. This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com From charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us Fri Jul 4 13:59:13 2008 From: charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:59:13 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] =?utf-8?b?TGVuaW7igJlzIOKAnEltcGVyaWFsaXNt4oCdIHJlYWRz?= =?utf-8?q?_like_it_was_written_yesterday?= Message-ID: <486E48D1.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> Leaving aside the big question of inter-imperialist wars, which does seem to be a thing of the past on first blush, I was amazed at how many other observations jibe with articles in the business sections of the major newspapers today devoted to the ongoing financial crisis. ^^^ Yep. Me too. And inter-imperialist wars are a thing of the past, in significant part because of the necessity for inter-imperialist unity in the face of the existence of the Soviet Union, something that Lenin had something to do with. ( although the unity was not completed until after WWII). The drive to war was then shifted to attacks on former colonial nations, Korea, Vietnam. This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com From charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us Fri Jul 4 14:09:56 2008 From: charlesb at cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us (Charles Brown) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 16:09:56 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Obama Gates Message-ID: <486E4B54.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> I'd have to look, but I believe Marx and Engels discussed the politics of the British government ( and other European governments) that was not involved in a revolutionary activity. CB Louis Proyect Lincoln was conducting a revolutionary war against a decadent, feudal-like social system that was an impediment to the full development of capitalism in the U.S. He likewise would have backed Garibaldi against the Italian aristocracy or Bolivar in Latin America. Looked at the question historically, the big bourgeoisie of today--the supporters of Obama (and McCain) like Goldman-Sachs, General Electric--are a reactionary impediment to the kind of democracy which is appropriate to our age, namely one based on the abolition of private property. In 1860, the battle was against chattel slavery. Today it is against wage slavery. If Obama was about to conduct a struggle of Lincolnesque proportions, I would support him myself This message has been scanned for malware by SurfControl plc. www.surfcontrol.com From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Fri Jul 4 15:05:34 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 17:05:34 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] =?windows-1252?q?The_=E2=80=9960s_Begin_to_Fade_as_Libe?= =?windows-1252?q?ral_Professors_Retire?= In-Reply-To: References: <908b689f0807031532t18200254n8a61ee670df43f97@mail.gmail.com> <20080703223925.3EEA41184C@mailbackend.panix.com> <486E4AF9.D5BC96F0@ilstu.edu> Message-ID: <908b689f0807041405u4116cbeahea977d72f4c244be@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 12:58 PM, Mark Lause wrote: > Surviving all of this is tough enough. If you are coming at it from a > blue collar family with no experience in higher education at all, your > chances are about as good as being hit by truck. Kep in mind, however, that in the natural sciences and engineering, more than 50% of PhDs being granted in the USA go to students from other countries (the largest numbers being from China, S. Korea, Taiwan and India). Faculty in these disciplines are also increasingly non-US citizens -- again, from the said countries. How do these students learn the rules and become faculty? It *can't* possibly be easier for them than for American blue-collar kids. Yet, they are becoming faculty in the natural sciences and engineering, in increasing numbers. How do you explain this? Is something qualitatively different happening in the natural sciences and engineering, that is not happening in other parts of academia? RC From jbustelo at gmail.com Fri Jul 4 15:06:47 2008 From: jbustelo at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Joaqu=C3=ADn_Bustelo?=) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 17:06:47 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] REBELION: The FARC had Already Expressed Willingness to Liberate the Hostages In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Jscotlive has written what I consider basically a disingenuous reply. For example: > Betnacourt's six years of humiliation in comparison to the generations of > humiliation and exploitation and misery suffered by Colombia's poor pales by > comparison. So was it OK to do what was done to Betancourt? To Clara Rojas? To HUNDREDS of others still rotting in FARC concentration camps and jungle cages? The crimes of the Colombian oligarchy, immense as they may be, do not justify the policy the FARC adopted and has stuck fiercely to, despite the most fraternal imaginable efforts of people like Chavez to help the FARC correct its course. > The notion that we should join in the deluge of sympathy and > glorification of this member of a privileged class I personally find nauseating > coming from a self declared proponent of revolutionary politics. The notion that we should turn our back on defense of human dignity and deny our feelings of solidarity to victims of inhuman treatment because the person is "a member of a privileged class" goes against everything I believe in as a revolutionary. Moreover, your accusation that I would have us join "a deluge of sympathy and glorification of this member of a privileged class" is off the wall. What is going on here is that Uribe won a huge political victory, not just against the FARC, but against the Latin American left generally. So much so that much of the left fell into an uncomfortable silence. On a day when every other daily paper in Latin America (and many more throughout the world) gave front-page coverage to the hostages having been freed, Granma buried it on the inside pages, preferring to feature instead a meeting of Cuba's national assembly president with Lula and a 35-year-old July 26 speech by Fidel. In Venezuela, despite Chavez's prominent association with hostage release negotations, it took many hours before an official government statement came out via the foreign ministry. That's why then the next day, the central leaders of those revolutions --Fidel and Hugo Chavez-- prominently took up the question, Fidel in his role as columnist in chief, Chavez through a major address to the nation on radio and television. THAT, IMHO, is not good enough. Working people the world over would have benefited from having a prominent and cogent Cuban and Venezuelan response to the development -- in real time -- especially because both countries have been so prominently involved in trying to promote a peace process in Colombia through political and diplomatic channels. This is a political situation and a political blow. It is you who turn it into an occasion for (frankly) quite unintelligent moralizing by suggesting that expressing sympathy for Ingrid Betancourt and relief that she is now free means engaging in "glorification of this member of a privileged class." It would be suicidal for the left to adopt this sort of "it was just payback to a rich bitch" attitude. > Yes, we may have questions to ask with regard to the trajectory of the Farc, > and yes there is no doubt that they have been backed into a corner, a victim > of their inability to take the struggle forward. But to disengage from > dialectics in favour of moralism in the process is not the way to do it. What Jscotlive is proposing is not dialectics, but "on the one hand on the other" balancing of blame, and dissolving the concrete into abstract mouthings like "a victim of their inability to take the struggle forward." > The adoption of the tactic of hostage taking, > though I still prefer to describe it as placing people under arrest who come > into territory controlled by them, has run its course, there is no doubt. Wider > events that have taken place in the region as a whole -namely the leftward > shift in Latin American politics - have undubtedly overtaken them. This in no > way justifies the calumny being directed at them by people on this list. The "tactic" of "placing people under arrest" has "run its course" because it succeeded in turning the big majority of people in Colombia against the FARC. The tactic wasn't just "placing people under arrest" but kidnapping and holding them for ransom, using them for extortion. The result of the adoption of such tactics is not just loss of popular support, but a tendency towards the political and moral decay of the organisation that adopts it. Not only can you not win a revolutionary war with such tactics, to the extent they become dominant, the war you are waging stops being revolutionary and becomes something else. Such actions are *material facts on the ground* that speak to working people much more loudly than May Day speeches. The political message is that the self-organization of working people isn't where it is at. The Rambo masculinist stunts of an armed band that more and more behaves in a fashion similar to that of traditional criminal gangs are the road to liberation. Moreover, the FARC claims to be a belligerent party in a civil war. Under the laws of war, taking hostages to extort ransom is a war crime. Keeping people under the sorts of conditions the FARC kept Betancourt and is keeping hundreds more is a war crime. And no military necessity or extenuating circumstances defense can some into play here. This isn't a calamitous situation that resulted from force majeure, but rather the conscious, thought-through policy of the group. And it isn't a "calumny" to describe things as they are and call things by their right names. Cutesy evasions like "placing people under arrest who come into territory controlled by them" only discredit those who employ them when those who hear them know that the way some of those people came into the territory was by force, for example hijacking the plane they were on and forcing it to land there. > Being held as a hostage for six years for any individual must be one of the > most traumatic and difficult experiences imaginable. That said, for every > individual the Farc have taken into capitivity, they have liberated thousands of > the poorest and exploited in that wretched country. > Being held as a hostage for six years for any individual must be one of the > most traumatic and difficult experiences imaginable. That said, for every > individual the Farc have taken into capitivity, they have liberated thousands of > the poorest and exploited in that wretched country. Unfortunately, their > constituents are not rich and privileged enough to be the focus of the world's > media and will forever remain faceless and anonymous. I think this captures the underlying differences between us quite well. First, I suspect you know little about Colombia. Because you imply that the FARC has liberated about half the population, a claim that is absurd on its face. The FARC has kidnapped about 7,000 people, and still hold 700. Giving a very low value of 3,000 for your vague expression "thousands" ("for every individual ... they have liberated thousands"), this works out to 21 million, out of a total population of 44 million. But irrespective of the numbers, for you, liberation is something brought by the FARC to the "faceless and anonymous." I would suggest that the the liberation of "the faceless and anonymous" can only be the work of the faceless and anonymous themselves. * * * Finally your defense of Walter is quite touching but unnecessary. I've known Walter for nearly four decades; a few years ago we were thick as thieves, and actually, CubaNews was a project we started together. Unfortunately for some time now Walter has been applying --as best as I understand it from his explanations-- a very peculiar theory, that stuff you do online doesn't have to be done seriously or responsibly, it doesn't "count" as real political activity. I quite thoroughly disagree with this crotchety conceit he has somehow got into his head, and anyways, there is a clear direction to his politics. He is becoming a Marcyite Stalinoid, constantly applying the same kind of double-think and evasions that you deployed in your arguments against me. I mean, I understand why you feel identified with Walter politically, but if you think that's going to stop me from trying to beat some sense into my old friend's head, or at least reawaken the sense he USED to have, you're quite mistaken. Joaquin From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Fri Jul 4 15:09:15 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 17:09:15 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] "Hugo Chavez faces political crisis as allies desert him" In-Reply-To: <486E3FB4.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> References: <486E3FB4.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> Message-ID: <908b689f0807041409l20001bd3gfd9a767bdcfdfe25@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 3:20 PM, Charles Brown wrote: > When I read this article I counted two former allies who had deserted > Chavez. I think they both were generals. Maybe I read it too fast or > something. Yes. But Venezuela's military had/has significant left-wing elements. Chavez himself came from the military (he was a paratrooper). So the question is still important: why are the left-leaning generals like Gen. Baduel and Gen. Salazar deserting Chavez? From markalause at gmail.com Fri Jul 4 15:25:29 2008 From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 16:25:29 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] =?windows-1252?q?The_=E2=80=9960s_Begin_to_Fade_as_Libe?= =?windows-1252?q?ral_Professors_Retire?= In-Reply-To: <908b689f0807041405u4116cbeahea977d72f4c244be@mail.gmail.com> References: <908b689f0807031532t18200254n8a61ee670df43f97@mail.gmail.com> <20080703223925.3EEA41184C@mailbackend.panix.com> <486E4AF9.D5BC96F0@ilstu.edu> <908b689f0807041405u4116cbeahea977d72f4c244be@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Ruthless Critic of All that Exists wrote: > > Kep in mind, however, that in the natural sciences and engineering, > more than 50% of PhDs being granted in the USA go to students from > other countries (the largest numbers being from China, S. Korea, > Taiwan and India). Faculty in these disciplines are also increasingly > non-US citizens -- again, from the said countries. > > How do these students learn the rules and become faculty? It *can't* > possibly be easier for them than for American blue-collar kids. Yet, > they are becoming faculty in the natural sciences and engineering, in > increasing numbers. > > How do you explain this? > There's no reason for assuming that it's harder for people from other countries to learn how to be faculty than for blue collar American kids, unless you believe that the class distinction is greater than national standards in a profession that is, after all, demonstrably international. If, as you say, half of the jobs are filled by people from elsewhere, then those doing the hiring are increasingly going to be like the successful applicants. All professions tend to clone themselves. As in law or medicine, the children of those already in the business have a disproportionately higher chance of success. And the children of the elites, for whom academic jobs are a step down, are always going to find it easier. The difficulties for blue collar kids to enter not just the professoriate but any white collar field are easily ignored. Just consider the necessity of graduate teaching or adjunct work if you're not independently wealthy. A family that understands what you're doing will see it as a kind of initiation and be supportive. If your family is blue collar, they try their best to understand, but ultimately see how little you're earning (and how old you're getting) and view you as an improvident eccentric, at best, or, at worst, a dismal failure, like Uncle Harry who collects beer cans on the highway right-of-way.... :-) ML From lnp3 at panix.com Fri Jul 4 15:51:50 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 17:51:50 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] REBELION: The FARC had Already Expressed Willingness to Liberate the Hostages In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20080704215150.03A0716B52@mailbackend.panix.com> Joaquin wrote: >On a day when every other daily paper in Latin America (and many more >throughout the world) gave front-page coverage to the hostages having >been freed, Granma buried it on the inside pages, preferring to >feature instead a meeting of Cuba's national assembly president with >Lula and a 35-year-old July 26 speech by Fidel. For what it's worth, a couple of members of the Cuban Academy of Sciences were on Marxmail in 1998 when the list began. They held a very dim view of the FARC for the same sorts of reasons alluded to here. This was before we had electronic archives so I can't refer you to their exact words. I was more hopeful about the FARC about that time but not nearly so much now. Basically I have been influenced in my thinking by Anthony from Bogota who is a keen observer of Colombian politics. If you search for "Anthony" and "FARC" at http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/index.htm, this is the sort of thing you will be able to read: http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2005w52/msg00204.htm From dave.walters at comcast.net Fri Jul 4 16:13:23 2008 From: dave.walters at comcast.net (David Walters) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:13:23 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] REBELION: The FARC had Already Expressed Willingness to Liberate the Hostages Message-ID: <486EA083.8010700@comcast.net> I would agree with Louis about reading Anthony's Colombia-first hand experiences. I've always been of the opinion that since there is NO revolution going on, simply put, a 30 year guerrilla struggle does more harm than good. It is of course more complex than just laying downs ones guns and seeping back into society to engage in politics by other means. The FARC actually tried this, or rather, split of sorts tried several times, decades ago, when the UDP, I think it was called, did this. Thousands were murdered as a result. The FARC's successes have usually followed successful support to rural unions in struggle where they can counterbalance the death squad activities of the land owners. There is also very little room for a serious opposition in Colombia for legal left politics, it seems. They always seem to fall victim to gov't death squads. Like El Salvador in the 1980s under the Christian Democrats and ARENA, Colombia politics seem like a death squad democracy with little room to maneuver. The fact is the gov't is popular, the kidnappings were never popular, their on again/off again bombing campaign and 'urban front' activities turned working people and the poor against the FARC. I recently met with Anthony, along with his entourage, and confirmed in not so many words, basically the same thing. In a week or so maybe he will dive back in and give us his thoughts on all this. The FARC did control a lot of empty jungle. They never controlled half of the country. They did give, years ago, the Colombian Army a run for their money on occasion. Not anymore. It's the other way around. It's a tough thing for the FARC now. I don't want to see more of their members killed. I hope they can find a way out. But a way out is what they have to do. David From gary.maclennan at gmail.com Fri Jul 4 16:33:48 2008 From: gary.maclennan at gmail.com (gary.maclennan at gmail.com) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 15:33:48 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] REBELION: The FARC had Already Expressed Willingness to Liberate the Hostages In-Reply-To: <20080704215150.03A0716B52@mailbackend.panix.com> References: <20080704215150.03A0716B52@mailbackend.panix.com> Message-ID: This Betancourt business reminded me first of all of April 1997 & the sight of Fujimori in a flak jacket outside the Japanese embassey "heroically" supervising mopping up operations of the MRTA by Peruvian Special Forces. The militants were summarily executed and the Right wing throughout the world (and the Maoist sectarians) rejoiced. I was sickened by it all and angered by the sheer stupidity of the MRTA. The spectacle of Sarkozy embracing Betancourt has provoked a similar reaction. It also brought to mind one of my favourite letters from Marx to Engels, that of Dec 14 1867 following the disastrous Fenian raid on Clerkenwell prison that left 12 people dead and 120 injured. Marx wrote: Dear Fred The last exploit of the Fenians in Clerkenwell was a very stupid thing. The London masses, who have shown great sympathy for Ireland, will be made wild by it and driven into the arms of the government party. One cannot expect the London proletarians to allow themselves to be blown up in honour of the Fenian emissaries. There is always a kind of fatality about such a secret, melodramatic sort of conspiracy. I will not quote from Engels' reply except tosay that he endorsed fully Marx's reaction to "such stupidities". As for FARC their apparent refusal to listen to Chavez placed them outside a movement which is the best hope for Latin America and possibly the world. They seem now have little to offer but a string of opportunities for the Right to stage more "fetes dans les rues". regards Gary From gary.maclennan at gmail.com Fri Jul 4 16:52:44 2008 From: gary.maclennan at gmail.com (gary.maclennan at gmail.com) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 15:52:44 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] REBELION: The FARC had Already Expressed Willingness to Liberate the Hostages In-Reply-To: <486EA083.8010700@comcast.net> References: <486EA083.8010700@comcast.net> Message-ID: Reading back over my own comment on this, I have to say that David's position is much better than mine in that it expresses clearly that although we may disagree with the FARC, and I certainly do, that disagreement comes within the context of a recognition of the political conjuncture that gave birth to their movement. regards Gary From fuerdenkommunismus at yahoo.com Fri Jul 4 17:10:32 2008 From: fuerdenkommunismus at yahoo.com (Angelus Novus) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 16:10:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Marxism] Fake Anti-Racists Message-ID: <461589.95960.qm@web50109.mail.re2.yahoo.com> http://negativepotential.blogsport.de/2008/07/05/fake-anti-racists/ Fake Anti-Racists Germany?s Left Party issues a call to protest asylum policies that their own chairman Oskar Lafontaine supports. By Markus Str?hlein The disinterested have to be mobilized for action. On the occasion of the 15th anniversary of the effective abolition of the fundamental right to asylum, the executive committee of the Left Party issued a ?call to action?. Members were urged ?within the bounds of possibility? to ?support? the demonstrations on the 5th of July in Berlin. As a reason for the call, the executive committee of Die Linke mentions that in May of 1993, members of parliament from the CDU and CSU, the SPD and FDP resolved to effectively abolish the fundamental right to asylum. But the prehistory has been left out: it was thanks to the tireless propaganda work of the then-minister president of Saarland, Oskar Lafontaine, that the federal states governed by the SPD approved the measure in the Bundesrat (Germany?s upper parliamentary house). Already as mayor of Saarbr?cken, Lafontaine advocated detention camps and non-cash benefits for refugees. In 1990, when a pogrom mood arose in the town of Lebach in light of the presence of 1,400 Roma who had fled Romania, Lafontaine, as SPD candidate for chancellor, advocated a tougher course of action against ?fake asylum seekers? and for a change in the asylum laws. His wish was granted in 1993. That was a long time ago. Lafontaine can look back with satisfaction at the beginnings of a policy towards refugees to which he has remained committed. After ?asylum seekers? had become almost numerically insignificant opponents, Lafontaine, in a March 2002 column for the tabloid Bild, demanded immigration limits for ethnic German repatriates. In the same column in the year 2004, he defended the proposal of then-interior minister for the SPD, Otto Schilly, to erect detention camps for refugees in North Africa. What?s the reason for all that? ?We cannot allow that many people become unemployed due to the problem of the immigration of foreign manpower being unregulated?, Lafontaine stated in an interview after his ?Fremdarbeiter? speech in 2005. The national answer to the social question ? this atavism is familiar in Germany. Lafontaine has internalized it, not only in regard to asylum policies. The anti-racism of the Left Party, as manifested in the call to protest against asylum policies that the party chairman advocates and which are tolerated, accepted and supported by the party, stands revealed as a folkloristic declaration, recited for the sake of publicity. That certainly doesn?t really help the small number of refugees who still manage to make it into Germany despite the efforts of Lafontaine and others. From glparramatta at greenleft.org.au Fri Jul 4 18:24:13 2008 From: glparramatta at greenleft.org.au (glparramatta) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 10:24:13 +1000 Subject: [Marxism] The company `anti-imperialist' Mugabe keeps Message-ID: <486EBF2D.8060307@greenleft.org.au> Two items that shed some light on the reality of Mugabe's ``land reforms'' and the true extent of ``sanctions'' on his authoritarian capitalist regime ... Norm ************* From News24 (SA), 2 July SA expat in bid for Zim land Julian Rademeyer, Beeld Johannesburg - A South African expatriate has paid millions of dollars to a former Israeli gun-runner with links to Robert Mugabe in a bid to secure 99-year leases on farmland seized by the Zimbabwean government as part of its land-reform programme. Paul Calder le Roux, 35, hired Ari Ben-Menashe, a self-proclaimed former Mossad spy who famously tried to discredit Zimbabwean opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai by implicating him in a plot to assassinate Mugabe, to facilitate the land deal. According to documents filed with the United States Justice Department, Le Roux - who now lives in the Philippines - transferred at least $12m (nearly R94m) to Ben-Menashe's Canadian consultancy, Dickens & Madson, between March 2007 and February this year. Beeld managed to track Le Roux to Manila and contacted him by phone and e-mail. "Thank you for your e-mail. However, I have no comment," was all he would say. In an interview with Colin Freeze of the Globe and Mail, Ben-Menashe said: "Those deals are just land in Zimbabwe, that's all ...This is not money that has come into our (Dickens & Madson's) pockets." He added that his relationship with the Mugabe regime had been "helpful" in facilitating the deals. "Now, the government is willing to lease all kinds of land to all kinds of people. Things are cheap there... The owners and masters of the land are the black government." He refused to comment on his dealings with Le Roux. "It's private... I don't want to get into details." But Le Roux's involvement with Ben-Menashe - the self-described "man of infamy" who set up Tsvangirai - raises serious questions. In February 2002, Tsvangirai was charged with treason in Harare after Ben-Menashe leaked grainy videotapes of talks with the MDC leader in Montreal in which he appeared to be asking for Dickens & Madson's help in "eliminating" Mugabe. Tsvangirai denied the allegation. He admitted attending the meeting with what he thought were political consultants, and said he left the room when those present began talking about killing Mugabe. Ben-Menashe was the Zimbabwean government's star witness, but the judge eventually threw out the case, describing Ben-Menashe as a "rude, unreliable and contemptuous" witness. He found that "nowhere" in the tape was there a "direct request made by the accused... to assassinate the president". Ben-Menashe later went on to do public relations work for his "old friend, Bob" Mugabe. Beeld has seen a copy of an agreement between Le Roux and Ben-Menashe, which was signed on April 2 2007 in Montreal. The vaguely-worded document makes no mention of Zimbabwe and states that Le Roux has retained Ben-Menashe's firm to "lobby the executive and/or legislative branches of the government of the United States of America and of any other mutually agreed upon country" on his behalf. It states that Dickens & Madson will "provide other confidential services to assist Mr Le Roux in achieving his goals". According to the document, Le Roux had to pay $1.2m for Ben-Menashe's "services" on signing the contract. Submissions made to the US Justice Department by Ben-Menashe in terms of the US Foreign Agents Registration Act stated that Le Roux "intends to become involved in the leasing of real estate for farming and other purposes in Zimbabwe". A document dated April 6 last year goes further, stating that Dickens and Madson Canada Inc "will attempt to arrange meetings with representatives of the executive and legislative branches of the US government in order to attempt to generate policies favourable to the business activities of (Le Roux), in particular, but without limitation, (his) efforts to lease farmland from the government of Zimbabwe". Le Roux is described as a businessman who "deals in internet commerce and in the installation of call centres in southeast Asia, Costa Rica and Israel". By his own account, he was born in what was then Rhodesia and wants to "set down roots" in Zimbabwe. He remains something of an enigma. He lived in Krugersdorp. In 2002, he registered a company called Planetsolar. Then he emigrated. He lives in Manila in the Philippines in an exclusive, high-security suburb, Dasmari'as Village, which is home to politicians, businessmen and more than a dozen foreign embassies. *********** www.forbes.com Anglo American Defiant On Zimbabwe Lionel Laurent, 06.25.08, 9:50 AM ET LONDON - Zimbabwe may not be top of anyone's list for best places to invest, given the tense political climate and despotic rule of president Robert Mugabe, but Anglo-South African miner Anglo American is defending its controversial plans to develop a platinum mine in the country. "The responsible development of the Unki mine will create a long-term viable business which will be important to the economic future of Zimbabwe for years to come," Anglo American (nasdaq: AAUK - news - people ) said in a press release on Wednesday ... Although Anglo American said it was monitoring the situation in Zimbabwe "very closely," and that it was reviewing "all options" surrounding the project, the firm made it clear that withdrawing from Zimbabwe would jeopardize the livelihood of its 650 employees and contractors. The British mining firm was responding to press reports citing widespread condemnation of Anglo American's decision to invest in Zimbabwe, at a time when most other firms are freezing or scaling back operations. The London Times cited Rio Tinto, Barclays (nyse: BCS - news - people ) and British American Tobacco (nyse: BTI - news - people ) as firms that had refused to expand operations until Mugabe had left power. A spokesman for Anglo American was unavailable for comment. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From shmage at pipeline.com Fri Jul 4 19:27:53 2008 From: shmage at pipeline.com (Shane Mage) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 21:27:53 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Patriotic Ballad Uncut and Wet In-Reply-To: <20080704185033.5B9FEF9D5@mailbackend.panix.com> References: <20080704185033.5B9FEF9D5@mailbackend.panix.com> Message-ID: When, 232 years ago today, the North American colonizers declared their independence they had to confront a serious problem: the New Nation had no National Anthem. So, one steamy Philadelphia evening, three of their best minds--Sam Adams, Tom Paine, and Ben Arnold--sat down over a large demijon of Sam's best to make up for this lack. Recognizing that the public was very familiar with the existing Anthem--a good tune but with very unsuitable lyrics--they decided to set a suitably Revolutionary text to that melody. This is what they came up with: God damn our stupid king God damn our crazy king God damn the king. King George is spurious Bald fat and furious* No more we'll let him shit on us God damn the king. God damn our drunken king God damn our German king God damn the king. Let him be ostracized Stripped flogged and sodomized At Bedlam they've a cell his size God damn the king. God damn our thieving king God damn our lying king God damn the king. Send him to Coventry Then back to Germany Without him we'll have Liberty God damn the king. * At the time "furious" had the sense of "madness" (cf. "Orlando Furioso") Alas, this splendid effort got a frigid reception. The Continental Communications Commission decreed that its language made it unsuitable for performance with children present; Conservatives objected to its disrespect for the venerable Institution of Monarchy; and Liberals objected that the vehemence of its sentiments would help Loyalist propagandists to attack the colonizers as "leftist radicals." Therefore the Continental Congress by an overwhelming majority settled on "Yankee Doodle," whose tune and lyrics perfectly reflected their own level of musical and literary taste. It remained the National Anthem until an even stupider text set to an even sillier melody was found. pcc. le petit po?te ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk From markalause at gmail.com Fri Jul 4 21:09:33 2008 From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 22:09:33 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] Patriotic Ballad Uncut and Wet In-Reply-To: References: <20080704185033.5B9FEF9D5@mailbackend.panix.com> Message-ID: Actually, the story behind the "Star-Spangled Banner" (originally "the Defense of Fort McHenry") is amazing and interesting enough. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Star-Spangled_Banner The War of 1812 started as an attempt by the politicians and expansionists to seize new territory while England was busy fighting Napoleon. In short order, Napoleon was out of the picture and the wrath of the most powerful empire in history (to that point) turned on the United States, which realized at about that time that it had this massive coastline that simply couldn't be defended and a war that the population in much of the country had really not been behind. Americans responded with a popular effort to do what they could. In New York, hundreds volunteered, trade by trade, to put makeshift fortifications into place. The famous poet (and union printer) Samuel Woodward celebrated the work of "Plumbers, founders, dyers, tinmen, turners shavers, Sweepers, clerks and criers, jewelers and engravers. Clothiers, drapers, players, cartmen, hatters, tailors Gaugers, sealers, weighers, carpenters and sailors!" All laboring as "The Patriotic Diggers." http://sniff.numachi.com/pages/tiPATRDIGG;ttPATRDIGG.html Once the British were focused, they found that they could land their well-trained veteran troops almost anywhere and move pretty much with impunity through the American countryside. Most famously, on August 24, 1814, they entered and burned much of Washington, DC, before there was really that much there, of course. The British moved on Baltimore September 12-15, and the population mobilized to defend their city. Trade unionists and African-Americans took up arms to protect their homes, alongside the property owners. When the British landed 5,000 men at North Point to march on the city from the rear, some of the militia ventured out from their works to meet them in a sharp engagement that resulted in the death of the British commander and the blunting of their attack. On September 13-14, the British fleet tried from the other direction, using mortar boats and their new Congreve rockets in an attempt to take Fort McHenry. It was this overnight bombardment that inspired Francis Scott Key, watching from a British ship, to write the poem. The interesting aftermath was that when Key went into Baltimore to find a printer to put his poem into circulation, he couldn't find anyone available. (He eventually found a young apprentice who did the work. All the journeymen from the Typographical Union were out on the barricades ready to meet the British if they made another attempt. Finally, another endearing aspect of the national anthem is that it was put to a drinking tune. For an entertaining presentation of the original (probably as a school project) on YouTube, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5JZXTb5ABg&feature=related ML From stevehouston3000 at yahoo.com Fri Jul 4 21:17:43 2008 From: stevehouston3000 at yahoo.com (steve houston) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 20:17:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Marxism] Joaquin Bustelo on FARC In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <553548.87404.qm@web63515.mail.re1.yahoo.com> The trouble I have with this list, and why I rarely comment,?is?two-fold.??One?is?a?philosophical?vulgarization?that?leads?to?discussions?about?whether?the?Big?Bang?model constitutes?a?dialectical?explanation?of?the?Universe.??That?part?I?could?live?with?however?frustrating?because?it?doesn't?matter?much?anyway.??The?other?problem?is?more?serious?and?almost?makes?the?list?DOA?for?me:?sectarianism?of?the?worst?type,?so?much?as?to?be?comical?and,?frankly,?unbelievable. Everytime I turn around its "Stalinist" this, "revisionist" that or 1000 other such ideological assaults. ?Its to the point that headway is made only if one ignores every adjective or descriptor in the writings of many subscribers to this list. ?It is not only a case of comrades living in the past (say 1930) either. ?Its time to cut the shit and grow the hell up. ? Jaoquin "feels" for Betancourt out of humanitarianism but claims it isn't high-handed moralizing. ?Jaoquin advances the line that there are "rules" of warfare?that?should?be?honored?above?all and bases his analysis in large part on this observation. I invite him to explain John Brown, Fra Dolcino, or Nat Turner using the above as a guideline. ?Incidentally I do NOT invite him to rattle off how these individuals were Stalinoid or any such inanities. Here's the deal and the only one who has come close to saying this is Jscotlive. ?I could give a shit about Ingrid Betancourt. ?If holding her hostage is a tactical liability, then release her. ?If the?tactical?move?was?to?execute?her,?are?you?going?to?apologize?for?it?out?of?"sympathy"? There ain't no such thing as morality Jaoquin and even if there is it has shit to do with us. ?There ain't no "rules of warfare" either, because what you call warfare is terrorism of civilians and nothing else. Jaoquin has taken "correctness" to such an extreme (and he's not alone on this list) that any perceived deviation means the group in question should simply give up. ?David Walters touched on this with FARC and why it is not so easy. ? Here's the thing: one of the very first rules is **we don't fucking give up**. ?Its the reason why every critique of "Stalinism" promulgated on this list ever is complete bullshit. ?What did you want the Soviet Union to do? ?Disband in the wake of the German Revolution being crushed because "socialism in one country" was theoretically incorrect? ?? Or maybe ?Proyect wanted the?USSR to simply surrender to fascism since the Popular Front was clearly not worthy of support compared to something ultra-left nothing group of Trotskyites in Spain. Comrades, many of you have lost your minds and I have no illusions that my admonition will make even a dent in your ideological armour. ?But if I read the term "Stalinite" one more time I'm going to fucking puke. Jaoquin offers intelligent commentary when?he?is?not?blathering??away?reciting?the?catechism?of?liberal?"democracy"?or?the?Litany?of?Piety?of?"freedom",?"justice",?"humanitarianism",?"peace",?etc Surely everyone on this list knows better. ?We are not fighting to fighting to make the world a better place in the abstract. ?We're not fighting because capitalism is a moral abomination. ?We're not fighting FOR ideas or a "cause".??We're?not?fighting?to?cultural?progression. ?It has everything to do with Nat Turner.??Like?John?Brown?later?and?Fra?Dolcino?before?him,?on?the?surface?one?could?conclude?he?was?a?lunatic.??And?it?doesn't?matter?a?bit?if?he?was.??He?fought?because?he?had to,?that's?revolutionary?necessity. ?What was his alternative? ?Give up? ?No doubt Joaquin would've chided all three men at the time for being too "brutal" or "alienating the masses" or a hundred other sins that simply supercede the significance of their struggle. Time to cut the shit Jscotlive has written what I consider basically a disingenuous reply. For example: > Betnacourt's six years of humiliation in comparison to the generations of > humiliation and exploitation and misery suffered by Colombia's poor pales by > comparison. So was it OK to do what was done to Betancourt? To Clara Rojas? To HUNDREDS of others still rotting in FARC concentration camps and jungle cages? The crimes of the Colombian oligarchy, immense as they may be, do not justify the policy the FARC adopted and has stuck fiercely to, despite the most fraternal imaginable efforts of people like Chavez to help the FARC correct its course. > The notion that we should join in the deluge of sympathy and > glorification of this member of a privileged class I personally find nauseating > coming from a self declared proponent of revolutionary politics. The notion that we should turn our back on defense of human dignity and deny our feelings of solidarity to victims of inhuman treatment because the person is "a member of a privileged class" goes against everything I believe in as a revolutionary. Moreover, your accusation that I would have us join "a deluge of sympathy and glorification of this member of a privileged class" is off the wall. What is going on here is that Uribe won a huge political victory, not just against the FARC, but against the Latin American left generally. So much so that much of the left fell into an uncomfortable silence. On a day when every other daily paper in Latin America (and many more throughout the world) gave front-page coverage to the hostages having been freed, Granma buried it on the inside pages, preferring to feature instead a meeting of Cuba's national assembly president with Lula and a 35-year-old July 26 speech by Fidel. In Venezuela, despite Chavez's prominent association with hostage release negotations, it took many hours before an official government statement came out via the foreign ministry. That's why then the next day, the central leaders of those revolutions --Fidel and Hugo Chavez-- prominently took up the question, Fidel in his role as columnist in chief, Chavez through a major address to the nation on radio and television. THAT, IMHO, is not good enough. Working people the world over would have benefited from having a prominent and cogent Cuban and Venezuelan response to the development -- in real time -- especially because both countries have been so prominently involved in trying to promote a peace process in Colombia through political and diplomatic channels. This is a political situation and a political blow. It is you who turn it into an occasion for (frankly) quite unintelligent moralizing by suggesting that expressing sympathy for Ingrid Betancourt and relief that she is now free means engaging in "glorification of this member of a privileged class." It would be suicidal for the left to adopt this sort of "it was just payback to a rich bitch" attitude. > Yes, we may have questions to ask with regard to the trajectory of the Farc, > and yes there is no doubt that they have been backed into a corner, a victim > of their inability to take the struggle forward. But to disengage from > dialectics in favour of moralism in the process is not the way to do it. What Jscotlive is proposing is not dialectics, but "on the one hand on the other" balancing of blame, and dissolving the concrete into abstract mouthings like "a victim of their inability to take the struggle forward." > The adoption of the tactic of hostage taking, > though I still prefer to describe it as placing people under arrest who come > into territory controlled by them, has run its course, there is no doubt. Wider > events that have taken place in the region as a whole -namely the leftward > shift in Latin American politics - have undubtedly overtaken them. This in no > way justifies the calumny being directed at them by people on this list. The "tactic" of "placing people under arrest" has "run its course" because it succeeded in turning the big majority of people in Colombia against the FARC. The tactic wasn't just "placing people under arrest" but kidnapping and holding them for ransom, using them for extortion. The result of the adoption of such tactics is not just loss of popular support, but a tendency towards the political and moral decay of the organisation that adopts it. Not only can you not win a revolutionary war with such tactics, to the extent they become dominant, the war you are waging stops being revolutionary and becomes something else. Such actions are *material facts on the ground* that speak to working people much more loudly than May Day speeches. The political message is that the self-organization of working people isn't where it is at. The Rambo masculinist stunts of an armed band that more and more behaves in a fashion similar to that of traditional criminal gangs are the road to liberation. Moreover, the FARC claims to be a belligerent party in a civil war. Under the laws of war, taking hostages to extort ransom is a war crime. Keeping people under the sorts of conditions the FARC kept Betancourt and is keeping hundreds more is a war crime. And no military necessity or extenuating circumstances defense can some into play here. This isn't a calamitous situation that resulted from force majeure, but rather the conscious, thought-through policy of the group. And it isn't a "calumny" to describe things as they are and call things by their right names. Cutesy evasions like "placing people under arrest who come into territory controlled by them" only discredit those who employ them when those who hear them know that the way some of those people came into the territory was by force, for example hijacking the plane they were on and forcing it to land there. > Being held as a hostage for six years for any individual must be one of the > most traumatic and difficult experiences imaginable. That said, for every > individual the Farc have taken into capitivity, they have liberated thousands of > the poorest and exploited in that wretched country. > Being held as a hostage for six years for any individual must be one of the > most traumatic and difficult experiences imaginable. That said, for every > individual the Farc have taken into capitivity, they have liberated thousands of > the poorest and exploited in that wretched country. Unfortunately, their > constituents are not rich and privileged enough to be the focus of the world's > media and will forever remain faceless and anonymous. I think this captures the underlying differences between us quite well. First, I suspect you know little about Colombia. Because you imply that the FARC has liberated about half the population, a claim that is absurd on its face. The FARC has kidnapped about 7,000 people, and still hold 700. Giving a very low value of 3,000 for your vague expression "thousands" ("for every individual ... they have liberated thousands"), this works out to 21 million, out of a total population of 44 million. But irrespective of the numbers, for you, liberation is something brought by the FARC to the "faceless and anonymous." I would suggest that the the liberation of "the faceless and anonymous" can only be the work of the faceless and anonymous themselves. * * * Finally your defense of Walter is quite touching but unnecessary. I've known Walter for nearly four decades; a few years ago we were thick as thieves, and actually, CubaNews was a project we started together. Unfortunately for some time now Walter has been applying --as best as I understand it from his explanations-- a very peculiar theory, that stuff you do online doesn't have to be done seriously or responsibly, it doesn't "count" as real political activity. I quite thoroughly disagree with this crotchety conceit he has somehow got into his head, and anyways, there is a clear direction to his politics. He is becoming a Marcyite Stalinoid, constantly applying the same kind of double-think and evasions that you deployed in your arguments against me. I mean, I understand why you feel identified with Walter politically, but if you think that's going to stop me from trying to beat some sense into my old friend's head, or at least reawaken the sense he USED to have, you're quite mistaken. Joaquin From Dbachmozart at aol.com Fri Jul 4 21:21:34 2008 From: Dbachmozart at aol.com (Dbachmozart at aol.com) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 23:21:34 EDT Subject: [Marxism] WIDESPREAD ISRAELI BRUTALITY AGAINST PRISONERS REVEALED Message-ID: PAJU (Palestinian and Jewish Unity) #386 July 4, 2008 THE "MOST MORAL ARMY"? The Israeli Public Committee Against Torture has released a damning report on Israeli army brutality. It charges that Israeli soldiers abuse Palestinian detainees who have been handcuffed and pose no threat. The abuse continues from the time of arrest until the prisoners arrive at an interrogation facility. The report, entitled "Manifestly Illegal," was based on 90 testimonies from detainees and soldiers who witnessed abuse from June 2006 to October 2007. "The arrests go on all year and are carried out by many IDF combat units," read the report. "The cases referred to here are just the tip of the iceberg. The phenomenon is much wider, common and ongoing. It has become especially severe over the past eight years." The report also accuses the army of failing to punish the abusers, even though their conduct violates Article 65 of the Military Justice Law, which mandates prison sentences of three to seven years for such crimes. The 48-page document is packed with testimony such as that of Abdel Amariya , who told the committee, "My hands were cuffed behind my back and my eyes were covered with a white tape. They dragged me so that I would get off the truck when I couldn't see anything and they didn't warn me that the truck was high off the ground and that I was approaching the edge. I fell to the ground on my face and knees and they started kicking me in my back, stomach and legs and punched me in the face." According to the report, soldiers sometimes use attack dogs to frighten the detainees. They also abuse minors even though there are special protections in Israeli and international law for those under 18 or, in some cases, 16. According to the report, this type of abuse has been going on for many years and the army has done little to stop it. The Israeli human rights organization B'Tselem conducted a similar study for 2005-2008. It said 49 percent of detainees are abused between their arrest and transfer to an interrogation facility. Most such crimes go unpunished. The widespread abuse of prisoners is just one part of Israel?s larger crime ? its 40 year long, illegal occupation and theft of Palestinian land. Amazingly, Israel often boasts that its army is "the most moral in the world". Adapted from "NGO: Army still allowing abuse of handcuffed Palestinians" by Dan Izenberg, published in the Jerusalem Post on June 22, 2008. For full text, see: _http://www.jpost.com:80/servlet/Satellite?cid=1213794295230&pagename=JPost%2F JPArticle%2FShowFull_ (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1213794295230&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull) Distributed by PAJU (Palestinian and Jewish Unity). _WWW.PAJUMONTREAL.ORG_ (http://www.pajumontreal.org/) "The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein **************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars. (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007) From Dbachmozart at aol.com Fri Jul 4 22:00:34 2008 From: Dbachmozart at aol.com (Dbachmozart at aol.com) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 00:00:34 EDT Subject: [Marxism] Bush, McCain, Obama Draw a Blood-Red Line on Iran Message-ID: clip -- Thursday, 03 July 2008 The development of a nuclear weapon by Iran is the great, glowing, neon "red line" of American politics today, one that every single major player in the American power structure says cannot be crossed. An ironclad bipartisan consensus has formed on the issue: Iran will not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon. Period. End of discussion. "All options are on the table" to prevent this from happening, George Bush has repeatedly declared, with John McCain singing along. Meanwhile, Barack Obama has hammered home the point _even more forcefully_ (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080604/pl_nm/usa_politics_obama_iran_dc) : "I will do everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, everything in my power to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon -- everything." "Everything" in a president's power includes the largest military machine in human history and the largest nuclear arsenal on earth, so this is not exactly an idle boast. In fact, the American bipartisan political consensus on Iran amounts to precisely this: putting a gun to someone's head and saying, "If you don't do what I want, I'm going to blow your goddamn brains out." This Bush-McCain-Obama line was underscored this week by one of Obama's top foreign policy advisers, Anthony Lake, who said "the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran is the biggest threat facing the world," the _Financial Times reports_ (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/039d5b8a-47b2-11dd-93ca-000077b07658.html) . Think of that: the biggest threat facing the world. Bigger than global climate change. Bigger than poverty and disease. Bigger than growing conflicts over shrinking resources. Bigger than terrorism (which was the last greatest biggest threat facing the world). Bigger than organized crime. Bigger than the Terror War operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and Somalia, which continue to spawn so much death, ruin, extremism and economic turmoil. Bigger than all of these -- and all other threats facing the world -- is the prospect that Iran might, in Lake's words, "get on the edge of developing a nuclear weapon." full -- _http://www.chris-floyd.com/content/view/1555/135/_ (http://www.chris-floyd.com/content/view/1555/135/) **************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars. (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007) From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Fri Jul 4 22:42:55 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 00:42:55 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Joaquin Bustelo on FARC In-Reply-To: <553548.87404.qm@web63515.mail.re1.yahoo.com> References: <553548.87404.qm@web63515.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <908b689f0807042142v260aa9c3r633278564d2e7e9a@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 11:17 PM, steve houston wrote: > I invite him to explain John Brown, Fra Dolcino, or Nat Turner using the above as a guideline. Incidentally I do NOT invite him to rattle off how these individuals were Stalinoid or any such inanities. "But the reader might wonder why Brown attracted so few black men to his Harpers Ferry raid and, devastatingly enough, failed to give the local slaves a heads-up in the weeks before. [...] His credentials as a feminist are undermined by the fact that he inflicted 20 births on two sequential wives, the first of whom was mentally unstable. There is disappointingly little here about Mary Brown, the stolid second wife who ran the farm and raised the children while her husband raided Kansas and swanned around New England's abolitionist circles. Did she get to travel to the suffrage lectures with him? I tend to doubt it. " -- From walterlx at earthlink.net Fri Jul 4 22:51:12 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 00:51:12 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Marxism] UK Ministers accused over return of refugees to Zimbabwe Message-ID: <13770979.1215233472414.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> (London and Washington are making their contributions toward ridding Zimbabwe of the Mugabe government as we see here, where they are doing their best to add an additional destabilizing element to the country at this conjuncture. It's sort of like the wet-foot, dry-foot policy Washington applies to Cubans caught at sea. They are sent back to Cuba in hopes that in their frustrated dissatisfaction, they will add to the number of discouraged, demoralized elements who don't work at jobs and who complain all of the time. It would be interesting to know if any of the leftist opponents of Mugabe have supported these protests. (Take the Current Green Left Weekly, one of many campaigners against the Zimbabwean government, and which has quite a few articles on Zimbabwe posted. None about the imperialist pressure on Zimbabwe: http://www.greenleft.org.au/2008/756/39062 ) ======================================================== Ministers accused over return of refugees to Zimbabwe By Ben Russell and Nigel Morris Saturday, 28 June 2008 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ministers-accused-over-return-of-refugees-to-zimbabwe-856070.html Ministers were accused of "breathtaking double standards" for attempting to send thousands of failed asylum-seekers back to Zimbabwe, despite the government-sponsored violence there. Campaigners expressed horror that the Home Office is pressing ahead with a High Court battle to deport up to 13,000 Zimbabweans despite warnings they face persecution if they are returned to their homeland because they have sought asylum in Britain. Refugee groups will stage a final attempt on Wednesday to appeal against a ruling that could allow ministers to begin deportations. Earlier this week, Gordon Brown denounced Robert Mugabe's regime as a "criminal cabal", while the Foreign Office warned against all travel to Zimbabwe. But No 10 yesterday told campaigners they "expect shortly to be in a position to enforce the return of those unsuccessful Zimbabwean asylum-seekers who have been found not to need the protection of the UK yet refuse to leave voluntarily". Kate Allen, director of Amnesty International UK, said: "Gordon Brown has said 'Britain will not shirk our responsibilities to the people of Zimbabwe' and that includes those who have come here seeking our protection. No one should be sent back to Zimbabwe at the moment." The Home Office has been battling in court for almost three years to win the right to deport failed Zimbabwean asylum-seekers. Next week's hearing in the Court of Appeal centres on a woman known only as HS ? her identity is protected by an anonymity order. A doctor, she faces removal even though her brother has been allowed to settle in the UK because of his involvement with the opposition MDC. Sarah Harland, co-ordinator of the Zimbabwe Association in Britain, said: "I think the double standards are breathtaking. It would be insane to send people back at this time." A government source said there were no "immediate" plans to enforce returns to Zimbabwe. A spokeswoman for the UK Border Agency said: "We have made clear our grave concerns about the appalling human rights situation in Zimbabwe, and continue to press for an end to abuses. We will continue to provide protection for any asylum-seekers that we or an independent judge deems in need of protection. That's a proud tradition in our country and we intend to honour it." ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Fri Jul 4 22:55:11 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 00:55:11 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] XXXX YYYY on FARC Message-ID: <908b689f0807042155m390a0361n6994b8b0d23603b7@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 11:17 PM, steve houston wrote: [...] Steve, You must NOT use people's name in the subject line of messages you post. It's against the rules of this mailing list.... From markalause at gmail.com Fri Jul 4 22:56:48 2008 From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause) Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2008 23:56:48 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] Joaquin Bustelo on FARC In-Reply-To: <908b689f0807042142v260aa9c3r633278564d2e7e9a@mail.gmail.com> References: <553548.87404.qm@web63515.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <908b689f0807042142v260aa9c3r633278564d2e7e9a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Like most recent black scholars, I think that John Brown clearly did attract slaves to his raid. After its collapse, they survived by claiming to have been hostages and none of the raiders were going to contradict that and get them executed. The idea that blacks did not join Brown flattered the happy slave image the South wanted to conjure. Btw, I have a book on the way to press with the University of Illinois Press touching on this subject. RACE AND RADICALISM IN THE UNION ARMY essentially gives a new view of John Brown and his men, the subject here being those who remained in the West and, with the Civil War, built a tri-racial army of Indians, blacks and whites. I'll pass on the information when it's ready. ML From pbond at mail.ngo.za Fri Jul 4 22:57:06 2008 From: pbond at mail.ngo.za (Patrick Bond) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 06:57:06 +0200 Subject: [Marxism] Zimbabwe - a blockaded country In-Reply-To: <1498336.1215192082026.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <1498336.1215192082026.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <486EFF22.3040209@mail.ngo.za> Yikes, I said I'd ignore this man's posts on Africa, but these are just the first howlers: Walter Lippmann wrote: > ... there is both an economic blockade > What?! You can buy any luxury good you want in the Harare suburbs of Chisipite, Avondale or Borrowdale (where Mugabe built his retirement mansion). The roads are overpopulated by new, luxury 4x4s imported by Mugabe's cronies. You can get trade finance from ABSA Bank, and Barclays is doing good business. Angloplats (formerly Joburg based now with financial hq in London) just announced a $400 million investment. Mugabe spent $205 million in scarce hard currency in 2005-06 paying off IMF arrears because he anticipated it would open up new Bretton Woods and African Development Bank credit lines (he was wrong, but obviously felt the gamble was worth taking). The notion that Zim's economy is suffering primarily because of trade or investment sanctions is insane. It distracts from the much deeper economic crisis - long-term overaccumulation of capital with very few displacement options aside from hard currency, real estate and Zimbabwe Stock Exchange shares (the highest-appreciating in the world) - at a time of political impasse: exhausted nationalism (Mugabe's ZanuPF) facing off against looming neoliberalism (the opposition MDC economic ideology), with the future to be determined, I hope, by potentially radical civil society in unions and social movements. > and a political war going on here against Zimbabwe What? Zimbabwe's witnessing a political war not primarily "against" but within: a classic African nationalist dictatorship and its rural support base lined up against the urban poor, workers and middle-class, with the bourgeoisie split between patronage-based pro-Mugabe elements, and the weakened international and national capitalists who support the opposition party. Imperialism has so far been absent in all but rhetoric (where its importance and Mugabe's countervailing anti-imperialist rhetoric are way overblown), while subimperialism next door has kept Mugabe in power far longer than we had anticipated would be feasible. If you think about it, having a Mugabe to bash - but not actually remove - is delightful for the State Department and the likes of The Economist magazine. Rice seems to love seeing her Pretoria allies squirm amidst rancid political smells emanating from the ANC government's twisted efforts to retain regional hegemony and nationalist power. This nuance is what the likes of Daly and Gowans simply don't have the experience to comprehend. Off to a Zim solidarity march here in Durban. By the way, the anti-Mugabe sanctions worth supporting are what our comrades in the SA Transport and Allied Workers Union did down at the Durban docks a few months ago: prevent a Chinese ship from unloading three million bullets destined for the backs of their Zimbabwean sisters and brothers. From pbond at mail.ngo.za Fri Jul 4 23:20:33 2008 From: pbond at mail.ngo.za (Patrick Bond) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 07:20:33 +0200 Subject: [Marxism] UK Ministers accused over return of refugees to Zimbabwe In-Reply-To: <13770979.1215233472414.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <13770979.1215233472414.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <486F04A1.7090202@mail.ngo.za> Walter Lippmann wrote: > (London and Washington are making their contributions > toward ridding Zimbabwe of the Mugabe government as > we see here, where they are doing their best to add > an additional destabilizing element to the country at > this conjuncture. > You just don't have a clue, do you. From jeremy at infowells.com Fri Jul 4 23:48:20 2008 From: jeremy at infowells.com (Jerry Wells) Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 22:48:20 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] WSWS: A socialist answer to the global rise in gas prices Message-ID: <1215236901.5582.27.camel@pool-96-251-57-246.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net> FYI: From the WSWS socialist perspective, these two critical articles on economic crises facing U.S. and global capitalism. A socialist answer to the global rise in gas prices By the Editorial Board of WSWS 5 July 2008 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/jul2008/gasp-j05.shtml US: The Federal Reserve?s dilemma By Andre Damon 4 July 2008 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/jul2008/fed-j04.shtml From pbond at mail.ngo.za Fri Jul 4 23:57:34 2008 From: pbond at mail.ngo.za (Patrick Bond) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 07:57:34 +0200 Subject: [Marxism] [A-List] Violence in Zimbabwe, and the MDC and its Social Imperialist Supporters In-Reply-To: <5073883D33FE4AAC9D329CFB5C98DC2D@home9sg93n9r5y> References: <5073883D33FE4AAC9D329CFB5C98DC2D@home9sg93n9r5y> Message-ID: <486F0D4E.7030808@mail.ngo.za> james daly wrote: > Violence in Zimbabwe, and the MDC and its Social Imperialist Supporters > By Stephen Gowans > Wednesday, June 25, 2008 > It was MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai who said to Mugabe, "If you don't want > to go peacefully, we will remove you violently." [1] > -- -- [ Louis Proyect "discredits" this on the grounds that it was said 10 > years ago and Tsvangirai apologised the next day. If Obama said it to George > W. Bush a belated apology would hardly suffice, and the incident would be > remembered for more than 10 years. -- J. D.] -- -- -- > James, you and Gowans don't give a damn about genuine power relations, do you. Here's what's going on: * imperialism is not really concerned with what happens in Zim because very little is at stake, and there is no initiative to take Zimbabwe over by military force, and there are no real sanctions aside from loans - but even without sanctions Mugabe's huge arrears on long-term debt prevent him from borrowing from formal financial institutions in any case; * subimperialism (the South African government) keeps Mugabe in power, partly (as Mbeki's brother argues) because a trade union catalysed opposition party - even the neoliberal MDC - is the last thing Mbeki's wing of the ANC wants to see emerge next door; * the progressive mass-based organisations in Zim - the People's Convention (see below), the Zim Congress of Trade Unions, the Zim National Students Union, Women of Zimbabwe Arise, the Combined Harare Residents Association, the National Constitutional Assembly, etc - are calling for both democracy and social justice; * Mugabe and his paramilitaries have killed nearly 100 opposition activists since he lost the March 29 election, and tortured thousands, and displaced an estimated 200 000 - amongst whom are a good many excellent grassroots activists; * the MDC has until now offered a few words of militant opposition (like those Gowans is frightened by), but in reality they have rolled over and done absolutely nothing in terms of mass action the past few years, and are notoriously reluctant to consider a "Plan B", even involving economic sanctions (which they do not support); * meanwhile, Mugabe and his cronies live high on the hog, printing money for illicit dealmaking, running a classical patronage regime, importing apparently unlimited luxury goods for personal consumption, and engaging in widespread corruption; * the ideal of transformation from semi-feudal rural social relations to a system of redistributive rural justice supported by an agriculturalist state *didn't happen* aside from displacement of a few thousand white farmers who have increasingly been replaced by a few thousand Mugabe cronies on the best farms, who in turn have allowed production to drop so far that Zim - formerly a food exporter - is in constand need of food aid; * Mugabe has learned the art of talk left walk right better than anyone, so that only the Dalys and Gowans of the world are still confused. *** THE ZIMBABWE PEOPLES? CHARTER Adopted at the Peoples? Convention, Harare, on the 9th of February 2008 We, the People of Zimbabwe, After deliberations amongst ourselves and with the full knowledge of the work done by civic society organizations and social movements; With an understanding that our struggle for emancipation has been drawn-out and is in need of a people-driven solution; Hereby declare for all to know that: - 1. Political Environment In the knowledge that our political environment since colonialism and after our national independence in 1980 has remained characterised by: a) A lack of respect for the rule of law; b) Political violence, most notably that which occurred in the early to late 1980s in the provinces of Midlands and Matabeleland, and that which occurred in the years from 1997 to present day, where lives were lost as a result of government actions undertaken with impunity; c) A lack of fundamental rights and freedoms, including freedom of expression and information, association and assembly, all characterised by the militarization of arms of the state and government. The People shall have a political environment in which: - ? All people in Zimbabwe, including children, are guaranteed without discrimination the rights to freedom of expression and information, association and assembly, and all other fundamental rights and freedoms as provided under international law to which the state has bound itself voluntarily. ? All people in Zimbabwe live in a society characterised by tolerance of divergent views, cultures or religions, honesty, integrity and common concern for the welfare of all. ? All people in Zimbabwe are guaranteed safety and security, and a lawful environment free from human rights violations and impunity. ? All national institutions including the judiciary, law enforcement agencies, state security agencies, electoral, media and human rights commissions, are independent and impartial and serve all the people of Zimbabwe without fear or favour. ? There exists a free and vibrant media, which places emphasis on freedom of expression and information and a government, which guarantees independent public media as well as a vibrant and independent private media. ? All people in Zimbabwe live in a society, which is the embodiment of transparency, with an efficient public service and a belief in a legitimate, people-centred state. And hereby further declare that never again shall we let lives be lost, maimed, tortured or traumatised by the dehumanising experiences of political intolerance, violence and lack of democratic government. 2. Elections Fully believing that all elections in Zimbabwe remain illegitimate and without merit until undertaken under a new democratic and people-driven constitution, The People shall have all elections under a new people-driven constitutional dispensation characterised by: - ? Equal access to the media. ? One independent, impartial, accountable and well-resourced electoral management body. ? A process of delimitation, which is free from political control, which is accurate, fair, transparent and undertaken with full public participation. ? A continually updated and accurate voters? roll, which is open and accessible to all. ? Transparent and neutral location of polling stations, agreed to through a national consultative process devoid of undue ruling or opposition party and government influence, which are accessible to all including those with special needs. ? Voter education with the full participation of civic society that is both expansive and well-timed in order to allow citizens to exercise their democratic right to choose leaders of their choice to the full. ? International, Regional and Local Observers and Monitors being permitted access to everyone involved in the electoral process. ? An Electoral Court, which is independent and impartial, well-staffed and wellresourced to address all issues relating to electoral processes, conduct, conflicts and results in a timely manner. 3. Constitutional Reform Holding in relation to constitutional reform that a new constitution of Zimbabwe must be produced by a people-driven, participatory process and must in it guarantee: - a) That the Republic of Zimbabwe shall be a democracy, with separation of powers, a justiciable Bill of Rights that recognises civil, political, social, economic, cultural and environmental rights; b) Devolution of government authority to provinces and to local government level; c) A multi-party system of democratic government based on universal suffrage and regular free and fair elections and the right to recall public officials; d) The right to citizenship for any person born in Zimbabwe. Birth certificates, national identity documents and passports shall be easily available for all citizens; e) A credible and fair election management body and process; f) An independent, impartial and competent judiciary; g) The protection of labour rights and the right to informal trade; h) The protection and promotion of the rights of people living with disabilities; i) Independent and impartial commissions which deal with gender equality, land, elections, human rights and social justice; j) An impartial state security apparatus; The People shall have a constitutional reform process, which is characterised by the following: - ? Comprehensive consultation with the people of Zimbabwe wherein they are guaranteed freedom of expression and information, association and assembly. ? The collection of the views of the people and their compilation into a draft constitution that shall be undertaken by an All-Stakeholders? Commission composed of representatives of government, parliament, political parties, civil society, labour, business and the church with a gender and minority balance. ? A transparent process of the appointment of the All-Stakeholders? Commission members as well as their terms of reference. ? The holding of a national referendum on any draft constitution. 4. National Economy and Social Welfare Holding in relation to the national economy and social welfare that because the colonial and post colonial periods resulted in massive growth in social inequality and marginalisation of women, youths, peasants, informal traders, workers, the disabled, professionals and the ordinary people in general, we hereby make it known that our national economy belongs to the people of Zimbabwe and must serve as a mechanism through which everyone shall be equally guaranteed the rights to dignity, economic and social justice which shall be guided by the following principles: ? People-centered economic planning and budgets at national and local government levels that guarantee social and economic rights ? The obligation on the state, provincial and local authorities to initiate public programmes to build schools, hospitals, houses, dams and roads and create jobs. ? Equitable access to and distribution of national resources for the benefit of all people of Zimbabwe. ? A transparent process of ownership and equitable, open and fair redistribution of land from the few to the many. ? The right of the people of Zimbabwe to refuse repayment of any odious debt accrued by a dictatorial government. ? Protection of our environment from exploitation and misuse, whether by individuals or companies. ? Social and Economic justice as a fundamental principle that guides a new people driven constitution and in particular the specification of the people?s social-economic rights in the Bill of Rights. And in particular, we hold that the national economy shall ensure: ? Free and quality public health care including free drugs, treatment, care and support for those living with HIV and AIDS. ? A living pension and social security allowances for all retirees, elderly, disabled, orphans, unemployed and ex-combatants and ex-detainees. ? Decent work, employment and the right to earn a living. ? Affordable, quality and decent public funded transport. ? Food security and the availability of basic commodities at affordable prices, where necessary, to ensure universal access. ? Free and quality public education from cr?che to college and university levels. ? Decent and affordable public funded housing. ? Fair labour standards including: o A tax-free minimum wage linked to inflation and the poverty datum line and pay equity for women, youth and casual workers. o Safe working places and adequate state and employer funded compensation for injury or death from accidents at work. o Protection from unfair dismissal. o Measures to ensure gender equity in the workplace, including equal pay for work of equal worth, full and paid maternity and paternity leave. ? Access to trade within and without the national borders and removal of all obstacles on the right of small traders, small scale producers and vendors to trade and earn a living. 5. National Value System Believing that we must commit ourselves to a national value system that recognises the humanity of every single individual in our society which we shall call ubuntu, hunhu, The People shall commit to: - ? Provide solidarity wherever needed to those that are less privileged in our society as individuals or in any other capacity. ? Equally respect people of all ages. ? Challenging intolerance by learning and respecting all languages and cultures. ? An inclusive national process of truth, justice, reconciliation and healing. ? Recognising all people involved in the liberation struggle. And that this be done with an emphasis that ubuntu/hunhu is passed on from one generation to the next at national and community level. 6. Gender Holding in relation to gender that all human beings are created equal, must live and be respected equally with equitable access to all resources that our society offers regardless of their gender, and that gender equality is the responsibility of women and men equally, we recognise the role that our mothers and sisters played in the liberation of our country from colonialism and their subsequent leading role in all struggles for democracy and social justice. The People state that these fundamental principles must be observed and upheld at all levels of the Peoples? Charter, both on paper and in practice, where decisions are made about the following: - ? Our national budget and economy. ? Our legislative and government processes in order to allow representative quota systems. ? Provision by the state of all health care and all sanitary requirements of women. ? An understanding that women bear the brunt of any decline in social welfare security, economic and political systems. 7. Youth Believing that at all given times the youth, both female and male, represent the present and the future of our country and that all those in positions of leadership nationally and locally must remain true to the fact that our country shall be passed on from one generation to the next, The People state that, in order for each generation to bequeath to the next a country that remains the epitome of hope, democracy and sustainable livelihoods, the following principles for the youth must be adhered to and respected: - ? The youth shall be guaranteed the right to education at all levels until they acquire their first tertiary qualification. ? The youth shall be guaranteed an equal voice in decision-making processes that not only affect them but the country as a whole in all spheres of politics, the national economy and social welfare. ? The youth shall be guaranteed access to the right to health. ? The youth shall not be subject to political abuse through training regimes that connote political violence or any semblance of propaganda that will compromise their right to determine their future as both individuals and as a collective. ? The youth have the right to associate and assemble and express themselves freely of their own prerogative. *ADOPTED BY: - Achieve Your Goal Trust Bulawayo Agenda Bulawayo Progressive Residents? Association Christian Alliance Combined Harare Residents? Association Chitungwiza Residents and Ratepayers Association Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition International Socialist Organisation Matabeleland Aids Council MESA Media Alliance of Zimbabwe Media Institute of Southern Africa ? Zimbabwe Chapter 8 Media Monitoring Project of Zimbabwe National Association of Non-Governmental Organisations NASCOH National Constitutional Assembly Progressive Teachers? Union of Zimbabwe Restoration of Human Rights Students? Christian Movement of Zimbabwe Students? Solidarity Trust Transparency International Zimbabwe Women of Zimbabwe Arise, Men of Zimbabwe Arise Women?s Coalition YIDEZ Zimbabwe Association of Doctors for Human Rights Zimbabwe Catholic Bishops? Conference Zimbabwe Coalition on Debt and Development Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions Zimbabwe Cross-Border Traders Association Zimbabwe Election Support Network Zimbabwe Human Rights Association Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum ZISAP Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights Zimbabwe National Pastors Conference Zimbabwe National Students Union Zimbabwe Social Forum ZYCS Zimbabwe Youth Movement Zimbabwe Labour Centre. From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Sat Jul 5 00:52:28 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 02:52:28 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Google is becoming "just another company" as fast as Obama is becoming "just another candidate" Message-ID: <908b689f0807042352y73953a34o49ba4d62b3e7f040@mail.gmail.com> "Google may be providing the greatest day care ever, but so what? It doesn't matter how good the day care is if only its wealthiest employees can afford to use it. If Google had really wanted to do something path-breaking about its day care crisis, it would have spent less time creating elitist day care centers and more time figuring out how to "scale" day care for everybody no matter what their salaries. Instead, Google has shown that it thinks about day care the same way every other company does ? as a luxury, not a benefit. Judging by what's transpired, that's what Google is fast becoming: just another company." The underlying truth (which is now coming to the fore) may be the same in both cases: in capitalism, you cannot be a "different, better kind of company", not for long anyway, just as you cannot be a "different, better kind of candidate". Structural constraints rule it out, even if you want to. From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Sat Jul 5 01:01:03 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 03:01:03 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] [A-List] Violence in Zimbabwe, and the MDC and its Social Imperialist Supporters In-Reply-To: <486F0D4E.7030808@mail.ngo.za> References: <5073883D33FE4AAC9D329CFB5C98DC2D@home9sg93n9r5y> <486F0D4E.7030808@mail.ngo.za> Message-ID: <908b689f0807050001u6a764a3duf476e51cc8c7c1b6@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 1:57 AM, Patrick Bond wrote: > * the ideal of transformation from semi-feudal rural social relations to > a system of redistributive rural justice supported by an agriculturalist > state *didn't happen* aside from displacement of a few thousand white > farmers who have increasingly been replaced by a few thousand Mugabe > cronies on the best farms, who in turn have allowed production to drop > so far that Zim - formerly a food exporter - is in constand need of food > aid; This suggests, in fact, that Louis is incorrect to blame Zimbabwe's problems merely on "capitalism". It is not just "capitalism", but corrupt cronyism of a specific comprador kind, which seems largely to blame for Zimbabwe's extreme problems. From lueko.willms at t-online.de Sat Jul 5 02:17:39 2008 From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?L=FCko_Willms?=) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 10:17:39 +0200 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <486CCAF9.9030000@panix.com> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> <2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com> <20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> <537005349.20080703113537@t-online.de> <486CCAF9.9030000@panix.com> Message-ID: <107160231.20080705101739@t-online.de> Guten Tag Louis Proyect, am Donnerstag, 3. Juli 2008 um 14:50 schrieben Sie: > L?ko Willms wrote: >> The real conflict here is between the people of Zimbabwe -- the >> whole nation, all classes -- and Imperialism which tries to put the >> African nations again under its heel. > Such an approach would have led to blind support for the Spanish Popular > Front government against the "splitters and wreckers" of the POUM and > the even more truculent Trotskyist movement. > Odd that Luko and Nestor, two comrades who had some connections with > Leon Trotsky's ideas at some point in their lives, seen intent on > excavating the corpse of the Stalintern at this point in history and > applying rouge to its rotting face. If it weren't you who wrote that, the moderator of this mailing list would seriously slap your fingers, maybe even unsubb you. One could read your above statement as an adoption of the stalinist slanders against the POUM et al. in the Spanish civil war. But to the difference to Morgan Tsvangirai, the POUM has not called on the Franco Fascists to enter in negotiations with selected forces of the republican camp, and take a decisive influence on who should lead the republican government. George Orwell has disected and done away with completely with all those slanders in a full chapter of his "Homage to Catalunya" (which is the real reason why the stalinists hate Orwell, not his later bestsellers and personal failings). The revolutionary opposition to the Republican government in the Spanish Civil War (I don't speak for the POUM, but for my thinking), as to Saddam Hussein, as to the Argentine bloody Junta would be to denounce their failings in fighting the imperialist resp. fascist enemy. In Spain, one of the first measures to take would have been the immediate and unconditional renounciation of any power of the Spanish colonies (remember: Franco started his struggle from Morocco), and to implement other measures which enable a larger mobilisation for the war effort and which increase the identification with the republic, like a land reform, workers control in the factories etc. Remember that Trotsky said that the civil war defending the Russian Revolution was largely won by political means, which allowed the peasants to make their own experiences with the Bloshevik-led "Red" revolution protecting the peasants hold on their plot of land, and the "White" counterrevolution handing the land back to the large landowners. In Zimbabwe the question is not Mugabe or the ZANU-PF, but defending the country against imperialist intervention. The stand on allowing the former colonial masters (and their competitors) to take a decisive say over the country is the litmus test for revolutionaries. Mit freundlichen Gr??en L?ko Willms mailto:lueko.willms at t-online.de From lueko.willms at t-online.de Sat Jul 5 01:54:36 2008 From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (=?iso-8859-15?Q?L=FCko_Willms?=) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 09:54:36 +0200 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <000001c8dd15$b00c58b0$6401a8c0@office1pc> References: <000001c8dd15$b00c58b0$6401a8c0@office1pc> Message-ID: <396511364.20080705095436@t-online.de> Guten Tag Fred Feldman, am Donnerstag, 3. Juli 2008 um 16:04 schrieben Sie: > I think it is a big mistake to prettify the electoral process that went down > here, regardless of the role of imperialism which can be condemned and > opposed regardless. Frankly, I don't think Tsvangirai can be condemned from > outside for pulling out of the election. OK. I condemned him for calling outside forces, which includes the imperialist nations, to negotiate the new government of Zimbabwe. Will the elected majority of MDC parliamentarians take their seats and assume their responsabilities? Until now, nobody has yet questioned the legitimacy of the MDC majority which came out of the elections to the parliament. Mit freundlichen Gr??en L?ko Willms mailto:lueko.willms at t-online.de From lueko.willms at t-online.de Sat Jul 5 03:00:46 2008 From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (=?utf-8?Q?L=C3=BCko_Willms?=) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 11:00:46 +0200 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <486CE7BC.20108@panix.com> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> <2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com> <20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> <537005349.20080703113537@t-online.de> <486CCAF9.9030000@panix.com> <2fa158550807030647g11b48d21h748d0ef7cd7d82d2@mail.gmail.com> <486CDCB1.80108@panix.com> <2fa158550807030732j43d6e320i79b775ef477851b2@mail.gmail.com> <486CE7BC.20108@panix.com> Message-ID: <1917369713.20080705110046@t-online.de> Guten Tag Louis Proyect, am Donnerstag, 3. Juli 2008 um 16:52 schrieben Sie: > If I come across anybody who is siding with imperialism against Mugabe, > I will be sure to beat him or her around the head and shoulders. So do that to Morgan Tsvangirai. Saying that the real issue for Zimbabwe is not defending the nation's sovereignty against foreign intervention, but the conflict between the various political currents in that country, and that the call to imperialism to intervene in that struggle, imposing a government to their former colony, opens the slippery slope of siding with imperialism against not Mugabe, but against the whole nation and its independence. I cited the examples of those "internationalists" like Joschka Fischer and Bernard Kouchner. Hasn't your preferred enemy, Christopher Hitchens, gone the same way? From "acting on behalf" of the downtrodden in the colonies against their richer and more powerful co-nationals, to the league with the imperialist powers who have the real power to intervene and impose their "humanitarian wars" on the unwashed masses of this earth. Yugoslavia, Iraq, Somalia, and Afghanistan ... Mit freundlichen Gr??en L?ko Willms mailto:lueko.willms at t-online.de From lancemurdoch at gmail.com Sat Jul 5 04:46:55 2008 From: lancemurdoch at gmail.com (Lance Murdoch) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 06:46:55 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] =?windows-1252?q?The_=E2=80=9960s_Begin_to_Fade_as_Libe?= =?windows-1252?q?ral_Professors_Retire?= In-Reply-To: <908b689f0807041405u4116cbeahea977d72f4c244be@mail.gmail.com> References: <908b689f0807031532t18200254n8a61ee670df43f97@mail.gmail.com> <20080703223925.3EEA41184C@mailbackend.panix.com> <486E4AF9.D5BC96F0@ilstu.edu> <908b689f0807041405u4116cbeahea977d72f4c244be@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6d53f4100807050346w7605ddd4wcf878f65fa82dd3a@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 5:05 PM, Ruthless Critic of All that Exists wrote: > > Kep in mind, however, that in the natural sciences and engineering, > more than 50% of PhDs being granted in the USA go to students from > other countries (the largest numbers being from China, S. Korea, > Taiwan and India). Faculty in these disciplines are also increasingly > non-US citizens -- again, from the said countries. > > How do these students learn the rules and become faculty? It *can't* > possibly be easier for them than for American blue-collar kids. Yet, > they are becoming faculty in the natural sciences and engineering, in > increasing numbers. > > How do you explain this? Is something qualitatively different > happening in the natural sciences and engineering, that is not > happening in other parts of academia? I think it's fairly obvious. All jobs have two components - the social factor, dealing with people, and the knowledge factor, how well do you know how to do the job. In some jobs the social factor is important - sales, politics, and for the most part, finance. In some jobs, the knowledge is what is important - natural sciences and engineering. In my short time at a decent university, most of the white men with professional parents I knew were majoring in economics or pre-law courses like political science. Most of the South (and East) Asians, with relatives back home connected enough to get their sons in these schools, were in Electrical Engineering, Computer Science, Physics and the like. Just to give you an example that springs to mind since he has been in the industry chatter of late - Dare Obasanjo is the son of former Nigerian dictator Olusegun Obasanjo. That was good enough to get him into the US News and World Report 35th top university in the US - Georgia Tech. So where is he now - Wall Street? New York law firm? K Street? No, he works for Microsoft. And is one of the most vociferous defenders of Microsoft from within that company - almost too much. Although after six years of working there, he is still a program manager - pretty low on the organization chart. From sabocat59 at mac.com Sat Jul 5 05:29:12 2008 From: sabocat59 at mac.com (Greg McDonald) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 07:29:12 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] XXX YYY on FARC Message-ID: <6D8DCC51-78A7-446D-9DE1-EB179CA0A56F@mac.com> Joaquin doesn't need others like myself to defend his position, but I would like to point out that he is in pretty good company here. Fidel, Chavez, and Correa have all publicly congratulated Colombia on the release of the hostages, and Fidel chided the FARC for its long- term policy of kidnapping hostages, especially civilians. Steve Houston may not believe in morality, but suffice to say that any revolutionary army worth its salt has a revolutionary ethic with a humanitarian basis, otherwise it would not have mass support. THAT is the most important strategic and tactical consideration. Witness the FARC's total lack of support among the civilian population and do the math. Mr. Houston has obviously never personally been involved in a revolutionary situation. Even the FMLN, which some on this list have regarded as fairly retrograde due to fatal internal power struggles, released prisoners directly to the Red Cross. They never took hostages. Greg McDonald From sartesian at earthlink.net Sat Jul 5 06:17:46 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 08:17:46 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Joaquin Bustelo on FARC References: <553548.87404.qm@web63515.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <027801c8de99$224ca4f0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Stalinite. One more time. Go ahead and puke. ----- Original Message ----- From: "steve houston" To: Sent: Friday, July 04, 2008 11:17 PM Subject: [Marxism] Joaquin Bustelo on FARC From walterlx at earthlink.net Sat Jul 5 06:43:44 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 05:43:44 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Celia Hart: Has the left's writing ink gone dry? Message-ID: <001f01c8de9c$c82547d0$4300a8c0@new1501> (Though the rejected Daniel Ortega's campaign for the presidency of Nicaragua, she here rejects the international petition campaign in support of the Sandinista Renovation Movement [MRS] and agrees with the comments of Toni Solo which sharply criticized that effort. The full essay is too long to post to Marxmail. ==================================================================== KAOS EN LA RED Has the left's writing ink gone dry? There's something wrong with the so-called left-wing intelligentsia. By Celia Hart Santamaria [28.06.2008 - 19:03] A CubaNews translation. Edited by Walter Lippmann. Something weird is happening to the so-called left-wing intelligentsia. This new fashion of putting their signature to support anyone anywhere in our exhausted world who no longer knows where to turn has become an ill-fated habit. Intellectuals who learned how to love above all else are once again giving their precious vote to projects of a questionable neoliberal nature. And that's what's going on in Nicaragua, where it seems the world is shedding its tears today. As you all know, I have no love lost for Danielismo! That's why I won't change one word of my article "Nicaragua's pink election" (1), where I expressed my reservations about the differences I found between the Sandinista revolution won by force of arms and this. I don't know if I should call it a Sandinista thing, but certainly not a revolution, barely won at the polls. However, my doubts came from just the opposite direction. I had condemned precisely the fact that they made a deal with the oligarchy, the Church and all those sectors we know only too well to expect a victory that belonged to the people, who for 16 years lived under the neoliberal yoke, not only through hunger and grief but also the most devastating political and moral limbo. I'm all the way for Toni Solo's words (2) about the present reality in our dearest Nicaragua: "The FSLN government is in some ways a quixotic attempt to manage seemingly irreconcilable contradictions. The Sandinista bourgeoisie rode to power in 2006 on the overwhelming popularity of Daniel Ortega. Their contribution was to fund the campaign and bring on board Nicaragua's politically open-minded business classes. The popular base in the urban barrios, in rural areas, in the cooperatives and labor unions mobilised electoral support. These two main components of the FSLN's political viability enjoy an equivocal relationship which tends to be reflected in government policy. The MRS acts constantly to upset that equivocal balance and fulcrum to deepen FSLN's internal contradictions, so far without notable success". The truth is, convenient though it may sound, a government can't just side with the Indians and the cowboys, especially if there's no need for such alliances. One way or another, the red and black Nicaraguan people would have achieved victory without the ambiguity of a bourgeois election or being forced to make the regrettable concessions to Nicaragua's rancid right-wing we all know about. It's already in black and white, and I'm not smudging any more sheets of paper today. because in addition to that, like Che said, I would smear them with my most sorrowful tears. FULL: http://www.walterlippmann.com/ch-06-28-2008.html ======================================== WALTER LIPPMANN, CubaNews Los Angeles, California http://www.walterlippmann.com http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Paraiso bajo el bloqueo" ======================================== From lnp3 at panix.com Sat Jul 5 07:02:07 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 09:02:07 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] MDC weaknesses In-Reply-To: <107160231.20080705101739@t-online.de> References: <52AFD069E09A487A81046AF2C5A793DB@home9sg93n9r5y> <486B7824.9000102@panix.com> <14910619766.20080703002645@t-online.de> <2fa158550807021537o3e89ec22o3b089ec6f3a5541a@mail.gmail.com> <20080702225124.F346FF853@mailbackend.panix.com> <537005349.20080703113537@t-online.de> <486CCAF9.9030000@panix.com> <107160231.20080705101739@t-online.de> Message-ID: <20080705130206.DFE89E30A@mailbackend.panix.com> Lueko wrote: > One could read your above statement as an adoption of the stalinist > slanders against the POUM et al. in the Spanish civil war. But to > the difference to Morgan Tsvangirai, the POUM has not called on the > Franco Fascists to enter in negotiations with selected forces of the > republican camp, and take a decisive influence on who should lead > the republican government. I was not comparing the MDC to the POUM, but the ISO and the militant grass-roots organizations and trade unions that Patrick alluded to. Gowans hates these leftists for "splitting" and "wrecking". From lnp3 at panix.com Sat Jul 5 07:16:05 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 09:16:05 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Inside Mugabe's crackdown Message-ID: <20080705131605.4D4B018E88@mailbackend.panix.com> Inside Mugabe's Violent Crackdown Notes, Witnesses Detail How Campaign Was Conceived and Executed by Leader, Aides By Craig Timberg Washington Post Foreign Service Saturday, July 5, 2008; A01 HARARE, Zimbabwe -- President Robert Mugabe summoned his top security officials to a government training center near his rural home in central Zimbabwe on the afternoon of March 30. In a voice barely audible at first, he informed the leaders of the state security apparatus that had enforced his rule for 28 years that he had lost the presidential vote held the previous day. Then Mugabe told the gathering he planned to give up power in a televised speech to the nation the next day, according to the written notes of one participant that were corroborated by two other people with direct knowledge of the meeting. But Zimbabwe's military chief, Gen. Constantine Chiwenga, responded that the choice was not Mugabe's alone to make. According to two firsthand accounts of the meeting, Chiwenga told Mugabe his military would take control of the country to keep him in office or the president could contest a runoff election, directed in the field by senior army officers supervising a military-style campaign against the opposition. Mugabe, the only leader this country has known since its break from white rule nearly three decades ago, agreed to remain in the race and rely on the army to ensure his victory. During an April 8 military planning meeting, according to written notes and the accounts of participants, the plan was given a code name: CIBD. The acronym, which proved apt in the fevered campaign that unfolded over the following weeks, stood for: Coercion. Intimidation. Beating. Displacement. In the three months between the March 29 vote and the June 27 runoff election, ruling-party militias under the guidance of 200 senior army officers battered the Movement for Democratic Change, bringing the opposition party's network of activists to the verge of oblivion. By election day, more than 80 opposition supporters were dead, hundreds were missing, thousands were injured and hundreds of thousands were homeless. Morgan Tsvangirai, the party's leader, dropped out of the contest and took refuge in the Dutch Embassy. This account reveals previously undisclosed details of the strategy behind the campaign as it was conceived and executed by Mugabe and his top advisers, who from that first meeting through the final vote appeared to hold decisive influence over the president. The Washington Post was given access to the written record by a participant of several private meetings attended by Mugabe in the period between the first round of voting and the runoff election. The notes were corroborated by witnesses to the internal debates. Many of the people interviewed, including members of Mugabe's inner circle, spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of government retribution. Much of the reporting for this article was conducted by a Zimbabwean reporter for The Post whose name is being withheld for security reasons. What emerges from these accounts is a ruling inner circle that debated only in passing the consequences of the political violence on the country and on international opinion. Mugabe and his advisers also showed little concern in these meetings for the most basic rules of democracy that have taken hold in some other African nations born from anti-colonial independence movements. Mugabe's party, the Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front, took power in 1980 after a protracted guerrilla war. The notes and interviews make clear that its military supporters, who stood to lose wealth and influence if Mugabe bowed out, were not prepared to relinquish their authority simply because voters checked Tsvangirai's name on the ballots. "The small piece of paper cannot take the country," Solomon Mujuru, the former guerrilla commander who once headed Zimbabwe's military, told the party's ruling politburo on April 4, according to notes of the meeting and interviews with some of those who attended. 'Professional Killers' The plan's first phase unfolded the week after the high-level meeting, as Mugabe supporters began erecting 2,000 party compounds across the country that would serve as bases for the party militias. At first, the beatings with whips, striking with sticks, torture and other forms of intimidation appeared consistent with the country's past political violence. Little of it was fatal. That changed May 5 in the remote farming village of Chaona, located 65 miles north of the capital, Harare. The village of dirt streets had voted for Tsvangirai in the election's first round after decades of supporting Mugabe. On the evening of May 5 -- three days after Mugabe's government finally released the official results of the March 29 election -- 200 Mugabe supporters rampaged through its streets. By the time the militia finished, seven people were dead and the injured bore the hallmarks of a new kind of political violence. Women were stripped and beaten so viciously that whole sections of flesh fell away from their buttocks. Many had to lie facedown in hospital beds during weeks of recovery. Men's genitals became targets. The official postmortem report on Chaona opposition activist Aleck Chiriseri listed crushed genitals among the causes of death. Other men died the same way. At the funerals for Chiriseri and the others, opposition activists noted the gruesome condition of the corpses. Some in the crowds believed soldiers trained in torture were behind the killings, not the more improvisational ruling-party youth or liberation war veterans who traditionally served as Mugabe's enforcers. "This is what alerted me that now we are dealing with professional killers," said Shepherd Mushonga, a top opposition leader for Mashonaland Central province, which includes Chaona. Mushonga, a lawyer whose unlined face makes him look much younger than his 48 years, won a seat in parliament in the March vote on the strength of a village-by-village organization that Tsvangirai's party had worked hard to assemble in rural Mashonaland. After Chaona, Mushonga turned that organization into a defense force for his own village, Kodzwa. Three dozen opposition activists, mostly men in their 20s and 30s, took shifts patrolling the village at night. The men armed themselves with sticks, shovels and axes small enough to slip into their pants pockets, Mushonga said. The same militias that attacked Chaona worked their way gradually south through the rural district of Chiweshe, hitting Jingamvura, Bobo and, in the predawn hours of May 28, Kodzwa, where about 200 families live between two rivers. When about 25 ruling-party militia members attempted to enter the village along its two dirt roads, Mushonga said, his patrols blew whistles, a prearranged signal for women, children and the elderly to flee south across one of the rivers to the relative safety of a neighboring village. Over the next few hours, the two rival groups moved through Kodzwa's dark streets. Shortly after dawn, Mushonga's 46-year-old brother, Leonard, and about 10 other opposition activists cornered five of the ruling-party militia members. One of the militia members was armed with a bayonet, another a traditional club known as a knobkerrie. In the scuffle, Leonard Mushonga and his group prevailed, beating the five intruders severely. But he said that this small, rare victory revealed evidence that elements of the army had been deployed against them. One of the ruling-party men, Leonard Mushonga said, carried a military identification badge. In a police report on the incident, which led to the arrest of 26 opposition activists, the soldier was identified as Zacks Kanhukamwe, 47, a member of the Zimbabwe National Army. A second man, Petros Nyguwa, 45, was listed as a sergeant in the army. He was also listed as a member of Mugabe's presidential guard. Terror Brings Results The death toll mounted through May, and almost all of the fatalities were opposition activists. Tsvangirai's personal advance man, Tonderai Ndira, 32, was abducted and killed. Police in riot gear raided opposition headquarters in Harare, arresting hundreds of families that had taken refuge there. Even some of Mugabe's stalwarts grew uneasy, records of the meetings show. Vice President Joice Mujuru, wife of former guerrilla commander Solomon Mujuru and a woman whose ferocity during the guerrilla war of the 1970s earned her the nickname Spill Blood, warned the ruling party's politburo in a May 14 meeting that the violence might backfire. Notes from that and other meetings, as well as interviews with participants, make clear that she was overruled repeatedly by Chiwenga, the military head, and by former security chief Emerson Mnangagwa. Mnangagwa, 61, earned his nickname in the mid-1980s overseeing the so-called Gukurahundi, when a North Korea-trained army brigade slaughtered thousands of people in a southwestern region where Mugabe was unpopular. From then on, Mnangagwa was known as the Butcher of Matabeleland. The ruling party turned to Mnangagwa to manage Mugabe's runoff campaign after first-round results, delayed for five weeks, showed Tsvangirai winning but not with the majority needed to avoid a second round. The opposition, however, had won a clear parliamentary majority. In private briefings to Mugabe's politburo, Mnangagwa expressed growing confidence that the violence was doing its job, according to records of the meetings. After Joice Mujuru raised concerns about the brutality in the May 14 meeting, Mnangagwa said only, "Next agenda item," according to written notes and a party official who witnessed the exchange. At a June 12 politburo meeting at party headquarters, Mnangagwa delivered another upbeat report. According to one participant, he told the group that growing numbers of opposition activists in Mashonaland Central, Matabeleland North and parts of Masvingo province had been coerced into publicly renouncing their ties with Tsvangirai. Such events were usually held in the middle of the night, and featured the burning of opposition party cards and other regalia. Talk within the ruling party began predicting a landslide victory in the runoff vote, less than three weeks away. Mugabe's demeanor also brightened, said some of those who attended the meeting. Before it began, he joked with both Mnangagwa and Joice Mujuru. It was the first time since the March vote, one party official recalled, that Mugabe laughed in public. 'Nothing to Go Back To' The opposition's resistance in Chiweshe gradually withered under intensifying attacks by ruling-party militias. After the stalemate in Kodzwa, the militias continued moving south in June, finally reaching Manomano in the region's southwestern corner. The opposition leader in Manomano was Gibbs Chironga, 44, who had won a seat in the local council as part of Tsvangirai's first-round landslide in the area. The Chirongas were shopkeepers with a busy store in Manomano. To defend that store, they kept a pair of shotguns on hand. On June 20, a week before the runoff election, Mugabe's militias arrived in Manomano with an arsenal that had grown increasingly advanced as the vote approached. Some carried AK-47 assault rifles, which are standard issue for Zimbabwe's army. For the attack on Manomano, witnesses counted six of the weapons. About 150 militia members, some carrying the rifles, circled the Chironga family home. Gibbs Chironga fired warning shots from his shotgun, relatives and other witnesses recalled. Yet the militiamen kept coming. They broke open the ceiling with a barrage of rocks, then used hammers to batter down the walls. When Gibbs Chironga emerged, a militia member shot him with an AK-47, said Hilton Chironga, his 41-year-old brother, who was wounded by gunfire. Gibbs died soon after. His brother, sister and mother were beaten, then handcuffed and forced to drink a herbicide that burned their mouths and faces, relatives said. Both Hilton Chironga and his 76-year-old mother, Nelia Chironga, were taken to the hospital in Harare, barely able to eat or speak. The whereabouts of Gibbs Chironga's sister remain unknown. The family home was burned to the ground. "There's nothing to go back to at home," Hilton Chironga said softly, a bandage covering the wounds on his face and a pair of feeding tubes snaking into his nostrils. "Even if I go back, they'll finish me off. That is what they want," he said. Two days later, as Mugabe's militias intensified their attacks, Tsvangirai dropped out of the race. Groups of ruling-party youths took over a field on the western edge of downtown Harare where he was attempting to have a rally, and soon after, he announced that the government's campaign of violence had made it impossible for him to continue. Privately, opposition officials said the party organization had been so damaged that they had no hope of winning the runoff vote. On election day, Mugabe's militias drove voters to the polls and tracked through ballot serial numbers those who refused to vote or who cast ballots for Tsvangirai despite his boycott. The 84-year-old leader took the oath of office two days later, for a sixth time. He waved a Bible in the air and exchanged congratulatory handshakes with Chiwenga, whose reelection plan he had adopted more than two months before, and the rest of his military leaders. About the same time, a 29-year-old survivor of the first assault in Chaona, Patrick Mapondera, emerged from the hospital. His wife, who had also been badly beaten, was recovering from skin grafts to her buttocks. She could sit again. Mapondera had been the opposition chairman for Chaona and several surrounding villages. If and when the couple returns home, he said, he does not expect to take up his job again. "They've destroyed everything," he said. From lnp3 at panix.com Sat Jul 5 07:29:02 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 09:29:02 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Anti-Empire Report, July 4, 2008 Message-ID: <20080705132901.C064511E2F@mailbackend.panix.com> Anti-Empire Report, July 4, 2008 http://killinghope.org/aer59.htm From nmgoro at gmail.com Sat Jul 5 07:31:42 2008 From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 10:31:42 -0300 Subject: [Marxism] =?utf-8?q?=28Spanish=29_Andr=C3=A9s_Soliz_Rada_on_the_B?= =?utf-8?q?olivian_situation?= Message-ID: <2fa158550807050631x3f22045en1cdac93e04889a71@mail.gmail.com> [Sorry. No time to translate. As short as enlightening] BOLIVIA: REAGRUPAR AL MOVIMIENTO PATRIOTICO Por: Andr?s Soliz Rada El Decreto de Nacionalizaci?n de los Hidrocarburos (1-05-06), que tuvo el 95 % de aprobaci?n ciudadana, fue el cenit del gobierno de Evo Morales. Ahora acaba de perder, por estrecho margen, aunque de manera legal, la Prefectura de Chuquisaca, con lo que los refer?ndum que aprobaron estatutos auton?micos de Santa Cruz, Tarija, Beni y Pando camuflaron su ilegalidad. Cabe recordar que en pol?tica, si se quiere avanzar, m?s importante que criticar los errores ajenos, es criticar los propios errores. Los intentos separatistas en Bolivia se han incrementado en progresi?n geom?trica desde la arbitraria elecci?n de "gobernadores", la instalaci?n abusiva de un virtual parlamento, que aprueba "leyes" en Santa Cruz (publicadas en su "gaceta judicial") hasta la imposibilidad del Presidente de visitar dependencias oficiales controladas por la oposici?n, en tanto FFAA y la Polic?a no pueden contener un intermitente y progresivo golpe de Estado, mediante autonom?as regionales disgregadoras. Infelizmente, el MAS, con financiamiento de ONG, gener? los pretextos que necesitaban sus adversarios. S?lo una miop?a (o mala fe) absoluta explica que el oficialismo recibiera complacido la propuesta de Rom?n Loayza, Jefe de Bancada de sus Constituyentes, de cambiar el nombre a Bolivia por el de Tawantinsuyo y el de la Plaza "Murillo", de La Paz, por el de "Tupaj Katari". El canciller Choquehuanca dio similar paso al advertir que las empleadas dom?sticas, aymaras y quechuas, podr?an envenenar a sus empleadoras, adversarias del r?gimen. Los atropellos f?sicos cometidos por grupos irregulares contra parlamentarios, periodistas y prefectos opositores (a quienes se puso sus nombres en perros degollados en Achacachi) explican las dificultades presentes. De esta manera, se encubri? la crueldad del racismo olig?rquico, que apale?, en varias oportunidades, a quechuaymaras en Santa Cruz y desnud? a campesinos en la puerta de la "Casa de la Libertad" de Sucre. En s?ntesis, el MAS, en lugar fortalecer la alianza de ind?genas y mestizos contra oligarcas, a?sl? a los ind?genas al querer enfrentarlos con mestizos y agentes del imperialismo. El gobierno, al abandonar el cauce legal y tolerar la corrupci?n (no se juzgan, por ejemplo, graves estafas en la construcci?n de carreteras), tuvo que someterse a las ilegalidades de la oposici?n, en tanto aprobaba un atolondrado proyecto de Constituci?n Pol?tica que, al reconocer a 36 naciones ind?genas, divorci? a Evo de las capas medias. El prestar dinero de las reservas monetarias al 2 %, para recibir cr?ditos, de los mismo Bancos y entidades beneficiadas al 8 %, demostr? la fragilidad de sus convicciones antineoliberales. As? mismo, al enviar tropas a Hait? pone en duda su pr?dica antiimperialista. Sin embargo, el vicepresidente Alvaro Garc?a Linera, (quien inspir? las torpezas de Loayza y Choquehuanca), tuvo en los ?ltimos d?as el acierto de replantear el programa de gobierno del MAS, en el que el capitalismo de Estado retoma su condici?n de locomotora de la econom?a del pa?s, en reemplazo de la inviable dispersi?n ?tnica. Sobre la base de este programa, que es la expresi?n del capitalismo de Estado, el gobierno debe acabar con las lacras de la exclusi?n ind?gena y la corrupci?n que a?n subsisten y dar vigencia a autonom?as regionales que cohesionen al pa?s. La aplicaci?n coherente de este programa permitir? evitar el desmembramiento de Bolivia. De esta manera, Evo podr?a enfrentar en mejores condiciones el refer?ndum revocatorio del 10 de agosto y, si este no se realiza, las elecciones adelantadas que demandan sus opositores. Andr?s Soliz Rada La Paz - Bolivia -- N?stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a -- N?stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a From walterlx at earthlink.net Sat Jul 5 07:53:57 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 09:53:57 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Marxism] Double standards on Zimbabwe (excerpt) Message-ID: <3815962.1215266037672.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> (The Canadian blogger here isn't for Mugabe or Tsvengarai.) =================================================================== While Britain's Conservative government had provided some funds as noted for a "willing seller, willing buyer" approach to land redistribution, it wasn't enough to change the balance of ownership in Zimbabwe. In 1992, the Land Acquisition Act was passed to permit forced sales, but there was little money available to makes those purchases. Then Tony Blair's Labour government unilaterally withdrew from the Lancaster House assurances in 1997. Blair's Secretary of State for International Development, Clare Short, made at that time an infamous statement in a letter to Zimbabwe's then-Minister of Land: "[W]e do not accept that Britain has a special responsibility to meet the costs of land purchase in Zimbabwe. We are a new government from diverse backgrounds, without links to former colonial interests. My own origins are Irish and, as you know, we were colonised, not colonisers." Three years after that slap in the face, Mugabe's attempt to change the constitution to permit confiscation of white-owned land was defeated in a referendum. Violent expropriations by "war veterans" began shortly afterwards. At that point (2000), two-thirds of the best agricultural land remained in the hands of a small white minority--twenty years after independence. Much of what redistribution there was, however, from 1992 onwards, turned out to be a distribution of land to Mugabe's cronies, who, by neglect, took much of it out of production. Once an African breadbasket, Zimbabwe gradually became an agricultural basket case. Refugees streamed into South Africa. And Mugabe himself became increasingly erratic, dispossessing 700,000 people in Harare by demolishing their homes, and denouncing homosexuality in a manner that would make Fred Phelps proud. Land reform, then, was going nowhere fast. But if that weren't enough, the other prong of the neocolonialist fork, an economic structural adjustment program, was imposed by the IMF in 1991, and it hit ordinary Zimbabweans fast and hard. It crippled what had up to that point been a growing economy (an average of 4% real growth per annum since independence), and plunged the country into poverty and deindustrialization. Mugabe ended this disastrous experiment in 2001. The IMF and the West swiftly retaliated with various economic sanctions. For example, George W. Bush signed into law the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001, which had been sponsored by an old ally of Rhodesia's racist Prime Minister Ian Smith, Senator Jesse Helms. The Act instructed American officials in international financial institutions to "oppose and vote against any extension by the respective institution of any loan, credit, or guarantee to the government of Zimbabwe," and oppose any relief of "indebtedness owed by the government of Zimbabwe." There is an excellent overview of the subsequent developments here, in an article by progressive journalist Gregory Elich. Now, obviously it's time for the ageing dotard to go, along with his "securocrats" who are actually running the country. But that's no more than a pious prayer. Restoration of democracy in Zimbabwe is inextricably tied to the renewal of outside assistance to proceed with genuine land reform. Yet the latter is probably a pipedream at this point. The opposition Movement for Democratic Change is seen by the West as the only alternative, but the likely success at some point in the future of Morgan Tsvangirai and his MDC, a party bankrolled by the white farmers and supportive of a return to structural adjustment and privatization, may simply deliver Zimbabwe out of the frying pan into the fire. Tsvangirai reminds me quite a bit, in fact, of Mangosuthu Buthelezi, that Great White Hope (pun intentional) of the likes of Conrad Black and other dispassionate observers of the African scene. But Buthelezi was simply outclassed by Nelson Mandela, and became a footnote in the history of post-apartheid South Africa. There is, however, no Nelson Mandela figure waiting in the wings in Zimbabwe. On the one hand, there's Robert Mugabe. And on the other, Morgan Tsvangirai, who has chosen his advisors from the conservative Cato Institute and the International Republican Institute. For ordinary Zimbabweans, traumatized by war, poverty and increasing lawlessness, it's a classic Hobson's choice. And our lack of mobilization in North America , pace Jonathan Zimmerman, reflects precisely that. http://drdawgsblawg.blogspot.com/2008/06/double-standards-on-zimbabwe.html Dr.Dawg Location: Ottawa, Canada I'm a progressive immigrant with annoying views. I have a trade-union background, and an academic one too. I have published a lot of poetry, three books, and numerous articles. My interest in blogging came out of the blue. Well, not entirely. I came across so much right-wing nonsense in the blogosphere that I thought I could add some left-wing ...wisdom. I have a good sense of humour and a short fuse. But I have sworn to myself that I will avoid Usenet and its low-level babble, and get into the substance of things here. So if people want to mix it up, I'll try (and maybe fail) to take the high road. You have been warned. :) http://www.blogger.com/profile/00416571487451925246 ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From walterlx at earthlink.net Sat Jul 5 08:31:24 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 10:31:24 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Marxism] THE REAL NEWS: Forest Hylton on the Ingrid Betancourt hostage release Message-ID: <22287784.1215268284918.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Is Betancourt release the end of FARC? Plan Colombia weakens FARC but cocaine production up at record levels http://therealnews.com/t/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=1832 ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From walterlx at earthlink.net Sat Jul 5 08:43:34 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 10:43:34 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Marxism] Crossing the divide: Cooking with the enemy Message-ID: <17667768.1215269014021.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> (This director made a stunning 1984 feature film called BEYOND THE WALLS in which Israeli common criminals are compelled by circumstances to find common ground with Palestinian political prisoners when an Israeli man is put in among them after he committed the then-heinous crime of meeting with the Palestine Liberation Organization. I hope it gets a broader international release. It's unlikely to get more than that, but if it's half the result BEYOND THE WALLS was, it will be worth your time. (I'm not at all unaware of the fact that producing and distributing materials like this are used by Israel to present an image of a society with less violent intolerance toward Palestinians than their actual practice in the occupied territories really is, but in the context of racist dehumanization of Palestinians, in Israel and beyond, films like this can open the minds of some people. There's a series on Canadian TV called LITTLE MOSQUE ON THE PRAIRIE which tries to humanize public images of Islam in that country, perhaps in a similar manner as this. (I suppose Yossi will have criticisms of this show. Go ahead, Yossi, I'm all ears. Lack of proletarian perspective of whatever...) ====================================================== Crossing the divide: Cooking with the enemy http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/crossing-the-divide-cooking-with-the-enemy-860009.html Take two chefs, one Israeli and one Palestinian, and you have the recipe for a groundbreaking TV drama that is helping to break down barriers in the Middle East. Donald Macintyre reports Friday, 4 July 2008 There's a moment when one of the two strong women at the centre of Good Intentions, a ground-breaking television drama series showing at prime-time on Israel's Channel Two, leaves a voicemail for the other, who is preparing to drop her son off at the induction camp for the first day of his compulsory army service. "I only wanted to wish you good luck for your son," she says. "I hope he will be safe." That would be unremarkable. Except that the woman making the call is Amal, a Palestinian from Ramallah whose brother is paralysed from the waist down after being shot by an Israeli army patrol; has just passed through a hated military checkpoint on her way home from work; and is struggling to protect her own daughter from the perils and pressures of life under Israeli occupation. Both women are chefs recruited for the series' show within a show, a TV cookery programme with the ? in the sceptical eyes of the unnamed channel's bosses ? outlandish idea of being co-presented by an Israeli and Palestinian. The developing bond between them is strengthened by the implacable opposition each faces from among her nationalistic friends and family. Tami's husband, who once shot an unarmed Palestinian during his army service, is angry and embarrassed at her cooking in public with the enemy; the woman she runs a restaurant with, whose husband was killed on military service, leaves for a rival concern in protest at her doing the show; and her son says that by working with a Palestinian she "weakens me as a soldier". Across in the West Bank, Amal is facing problems as daunting and as intimately portrayed. Her embittered brother regards his sister as a collaborator for working with the enemy even though she has taken the job to help provide for him. "Is it co-existence food?" he dismissively asks her as he angrily refuses a meal she has prepared for him. Her 12-year-old daughter is beaten up by her classmates. "They said mother was co-operating with the Israelis and they have to kill her," she tells her grandfather. Mainly in Hebrew and Arabic ? with subtitles in both ? Good Intentions is what director Uri Barabash, the Oscar-nominated Israeli movie-maker who trained at the London Film School under Mike Leigh in the 1970s, justly calls a "breakthrough" for peak-time Israeli TV. Although the popular Arab Work programme was recently aired on Channel Two, it was a sitcom in which the Arabs are Israeli citizens and the Israel-Palestinian conflict is wholly absent. In Good Intentions it is omnipresent. And with a steadily darkening storyline, scripted by the Israeli writer Ronit Weiss-Berkovich, this is no comedy. But, says Barabash: "What is really important is that the most mainstream Israeli channel you can think of is showing at prime time once a week a drama series in which half the action is set in Ramallah, in Arabic and about a Palestinian family. I'm very happy and proud about it." As with the fictional cookery show, the channel's network company Reshet took some persuading to run Good Intentions. The inspiration for it came from the Parents Circle-Families' Forum (PCFF), a joint grassroots organisation of Israeli and Palestinian families bereaved by the conflict. One of its most prominent members is Robi Damelin, whose 28-year-old army reservist son, David, was killed by a Palestinian sniper in 2002. Ms Damelin, who believes "the occupation is killing the moral fibre of Israel" has for several years travelled widely at home and abroad presenting the PCFF's message of mutual understanding in partnership with Ali Abu Awwad, a jailed Palestinian veteran of the first intifada, whose brother, Yousef, was shot dead by an Israeli soldier at a checkpoint and is now an advocate of non-violent resistance. She regards Good Intentions as "a very unusual opportunity for Israelis to get a glimpse of the other side and vice versa, to see the human side of the so-called enemy". At one point the circle dashed off a proposal to USAID for a grant towards making a drama series. "You can imagine how surprised we were when they said yes," she says. But while the US development aid contribution of about $750,000 (?380,000) ? between a third and half of the show's total budget ? certainly helped Reshet's decision, Ms Damelin still believes it was "incredibly brave" of the network to air the show. The PCFF also brought the cast to a meeting at which eight bereaved Palestinians and eight Israelis told their stories. For Clara Khoury, the rising 31-year-old Arab Israeli actress who co-stars as Amal, this was "really touching and powerful". She was especially affected by a young Palestinian woman from the West Bank, Shireen, whose civilian brother was shot and killed by Israeli forces. "This person, so strong, gave me this encouraging power to get into this character," she says, adding that even before that "I loved the idea of this series. I accepted without reading it". The secret has been to set what producer Haim Sharir calls a "trap" for Israeli viewers who would normally switch off anything conflict-related ? by making the story so emotionally involving that they are drawn into "understanding the other side". But while he and Barabash are irritated that putting it up against Euro 2008 kept the audience for the first five episodes down to around 600,000, it has stuck by the eminently exportable series. On the question of how far it can also penetrate the Palestinian audience, Khoury says the feedback she has had has been positive ? including from friends in Ramallah. And Al Jazeera has now expressed interest in airing the show ? which would create a huge potential audience for it in the Arab world. Sharir believes the story is one that the satellite channel "could live with if they are willing to show the other side just as we are". . ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From lnp3 at panix.com Sat Jul 5 09:19:11 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 11:19:11 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Kabluey Message-ID: <20080705151910.7DE5616DDC@mailbackend.panix.com> For people who have been following my movie reviews over the years, you will be aware that I have little patience for shitty films. In a number of instances, I will write reviews based on the ten minutes I was able to bear of nonsense such as "Little Miss Sunshine" or "Knocked Up". I would of course be walking out of many more movies if I did this for a living. Unlike my professional colleagues in New York Film Critics Online, I am not forced to sit through "The Love Guru", "Don't Mess with the Zohan" or any other big-budget crapola that an editor would assign me to watch, a fate that for me approximates Christopher Hitchen's 11 second experiment in water-boarding. That being said, I have to admit that "Kabluey", a small-budget premier undertaking by Writer/Director/Lead Actor Scott Prendergast, passed muster since I watched the DVD screener to its conclusion. It passed the ten minute test with flying colors. full: http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2008/07/05/kabluey/ From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Sat Jul 5 09:58:28 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 11:58:28 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] =?windows-1252?q?The_=E2=80=9960s_Begin_to_Fade_as_Libe?= =?windows-1252?q?ral_Professors_Retire?= In-Reply-To: <6d53f4100807050346w7605ddd4wcf878f65fa82dd3a@mail.gmail.com> References: <908b689f0807031532t18200254n8a61ee670df43f97@mail.gmail.com> <20080703223925.3EEA41184C@mailbackend.panix.com> <486E4AF9.D5BC96F0@ilstu.edu> <908b689f0807041405u4116cbeahea977d72f4c244be@mail.gmail.com> <6d53f4100807050346w7605ddd4wcf878f65fa82dd3a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <908b689f0807050858t214c21b6s158dcf11d13bee7b@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 6:46 AM, Lance Murdoch wrote: > Most of the South (and > East) Asians, with relatives back home connected enough to get their > sons in these schools, were in Electrical Engineering, Computer > Science, Physics and the like. > > Just to give you an example that springs to mind since he has been in > the industry chatter of late - Dare Obasanjo is the son of former > Nigerian dictator Olusegun Obasanjo. That was good enough to get him > into the US News and World Report 35th top university in the US - > Georgia Tech. It is calumnious to suggest that the South and East Asians who get admitted to PhD programs in US universities in natural sciences or engineering, do so mostly because of "relatives back home connected enough to get their sons in these schools". I think Lause's explanantion is much more on the mark. These disciplines are simply more international in character, where local knowledge / social capital matters less. From nmgoro at gmail.com Sat Jul 5 10:06:09 2008 From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 13:06:09 -0300 Subject: [Marxism] =?utf-8?b?TGVuaW7igJlzIOKAnEltcGVyaWFsaXNt4oCdIHJlYWRz?= =?utf-8?q?_like_it_was_written_yesterday?= In-Reply-To: <20080704185033.5B9FEF9D5@mailbackend.panix.com> References: <20080704185033.5B9FEF9D5@mailbackend.panix.com> Message-ID: <2fa158550807050906y833b87eo7ee19c46282bf00b@mail.gmail.com> Thank you, Louis, will try to read the full article tomorrow. As for the first paragraphs, they have traversed their own ten minutes in flying colors, as you wrote about that film today... Best, and as always send my regards... 2008/7/4, Louis Proyect : > When I decided to lead > a reading group on the > classics of Marxism, I was partly motivated to re-examine some books > that I hadn't looked at in over 40 years in some cases. One of them > was Lenin's "Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism". As > somebody who has adopted a less than worshipful stance toward the > Marxist classics in recent years, I was ready to encounter all sorts > of indications of how wrong it was to use something written in 1914 > as a guide to our current situation. Leaving aside the big question > of inter-imperialist wars, which does seem to be a thing of the past > on first blush, I was amazed at how many other observations jibe with > articles in the business sections of the major newspapers today > devoted to the ongoing financial crisis. > > A number of these observations appear in chapter 3 and 4 of Lenin's > book and I expect to run into others as I work my way through it. > > For those of you who have received a proper training in ruling class > ideology in freshman economics or poli sci, you will surely remember > how the teacher "proved" that Karl Marx's writings were obsolete on > the basis that capitalism has become so democratized that the term > "ruling class" has no meaning. This democratization is primarily > expressed through pension funds, mutual funds, etc. that put the > means of production in the hands of ordinary working people. > > Back in 1958, when American capitalism enjoyed more of an ideological > hegemony than perhaps at any point since WWII, economists and > corporate executives spoke about a "people's capitalism" that had > nothing to do with the stereotype of fat cats in top hats found in > Marxist literature. > > Economist Marcus Nadler wrote: > > "The economy of the United States is rapidly assuming the character > of what may be termed 'People's Capitalism,' under which the > production facilities of the nation?notably manufacturing?have come > to be increasingly owned by people in the middle and lower income > brackets or indirectly by mutual institutions which manage their savings." > > Roger Blough, the chairman of U.S. Steel, wrote: > > ". . . the change that has occurred in the ownership of our larger > enterprises. Today fewer businesses?especially our biggest > businesses?are owned by a few wealthy individuals or groups, as many > were back in the Nineties. They are owned by millions of people in > all walks of life. In United States Steel, for example, the owners of > our business outnumber the employees by a considerable margin; and no > one of them holds as much as three-tenths of one per cent of the > outstanding stock." > > General Electric, whose television show was hosted by Ronald Reagan, > ran an full-page advertisement stating: > > "People's Capitalism: The 376,000 owners with savings invested in > General Electric are typical of America, where nearly every citizen > is a capitalist." > > In a pamphlet distributed to its employees, Standard Oil advised them > that Karl Marx devised a theory in which "Ownership of the mills, as > with ownership of the land, was the key to the future. Ownership > should, therefore, be vested not in the hands of the few, but with > something he identified as The People." But today, Karl Marx would be > surprised to learn the following: > > "Yes, the people own the tools of production. ? By his own > definition, Karl Marx' prophecy has been realized. . . . How odd to > find that it is here, in the capitalism he reviled, that the promise > of the tools has been fulfilled." > > full: > http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2008/07/04/lenins-imperialism-reads-like-it-was-written-yesterday/ > > > ________________________________________________ > YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > Send list submissions to: Marxism en lists.econ.utah.edu > Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/nmgoro%40gmail.com > -- N?stor Gorojovsky El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a From Dbachmozart at aol.com Sat Jul 5 10:24:51 2008 From: Dbachmozart at aol.com (Dbachmozart at aol.com) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 12:24:51 EDT Subject: [Marxism] neoslavery and the Obama-mania era Message-ID: <_http://www.blackcommentator.com/284/284_ror_slavery_by_another_name_obama_ma nia.html_ (http://www.blackcommentator.com/284/284_ror_slavery_by_another_name_obama_mania.html) > **************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars. (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007) From elishastephens at hotmail.com Sat Jul 5 11:29:57 2008 From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 10:29:57 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Tom Hayden on Obama Message-ID: Fairly interesting reading: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-hayden/no-retreat-if-you-want-to_b_110916.html Excerpts: Call him slippery or nuanced, Barack Obama's core position on Iraq has always been more ambiguous than audacious. But that pledge [to end the war] also has been laced with loopholes all along, caveats that the mainstream media and his opponents [excepting Bill Richardson] have ignored or avoided until now. As I pointed out in Ending the War in Iraq [2007], Obama's 2002 speech opposed the coming war with Iraq as "dumb", while avoiding what position he would take once the war was underway. Then he wrote of almost changing his position from anti- to pro-war after a trip to Iraq. He never took as forthright a position as Senator Russ Feingold, among others. Then he adopted the safe, nonpartisan formula of the Baker-Hamilton Study Group, which advocated the withdrawal of combat troops while leaving thousands of American counter-terrorism units, advisers and trainers behind. Here's Hayden's first "demand" of Obama: - A demand that Obama talk to legitimate representatives of the peace movement, not simply hawkish national security advisers. I wonder who those "legitimate representatives" might be (and, in contrast, who would be an "illegitimate representative"). Could it be...Tom Hayden? By the way, speaking for myself, for the upteenth time (e.g., http://lefti.blogspot.com/2006_01_01_archive.html#113822646887158035 or http://lefti.blogspot.com/2006_04_01_archive.html#114453825328766665) I am not part of any "peace movement." I'm part of the "antiwar movement." _________________________________________________________________ Making the world a better place one message at a time. http://www.imtalkathon.com/?source=EML_WLH_Talkathon_BetterPlace From Jscotlive at aol.com Sat Jul 5 11:37:22 2008 From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 13:37:22 EDT Subject: [Marxism] REBELION: The FARC had Already Expressed Willingness to Liberate the Hostages Message-ID: Steve Houston has written what I consider to be an excellent riposte toe Joaquin, but there are a few things that I would like to add. Joaquin in his contributions on this particular thread has unwittingly substituted bourgeois moralism for any Marxism that I am familiar with, or for that matter would ever want to be associated with. I don't say this lightly, and I certainly do not accuse Joaquin of being a bourgeois moralist, but I do think he has lapsed into thinking through the prism of the dominant ideology's morality on this particular issue. Interestingly enough, I'm presently working my way through a compendium of some of Trotsky's writings, and in his essay 'Their Morals And Ours' he writes: 'A revolutionary Marxist cannot begin to approach his historical mission without having broken morally from bourgeois public opinion and its agencies in the proletariat'. Further on, he writes: 'Their identification of bourgeois morals with morals in general can best of all, perhaps, be verified at the extreme left wing of the petty bourgeoisie...They recognize the proletarian revolution as the Kantians recognized the categorical imperative, that is, as a holy principle, but one not applicable to daily life'. Marxism, if it is anything, is human liberation, both internal and external. It is absolutely vital in order to achieve this liberation that we break completely with the received truths of the dominant ideology that are instilled and inculcated in us from the day we are born. Tariq Ali, writing on the problem the left has had in offering solidarity with the Iraqi resistance, said the following: 'If occupation is brutal and ugly, how we can we expect resistance to it to be anything less?' The taking of hostages, or prisoners of war, depending on your interpretation, is a brutal tactic. It reflects the brutality, however, of the struggle being waged by the Farc, of the conditions which gave rise to that struggle in the first place. Joaquin mentions my statement re the Farc being responsible for liberating thousands of the poorest peasants in the territory they control. He offers a classic 'revolution from below' critique in order to try and discredit this statement. I simply ask him this: who does he think have filled the ranks of the Farc for the past 30 years? What, does he think the 5-20,000 Farc fighters (according to various estimates) were flown in to the region from elsewhere? At its peak the Farc were the people and the people were the Farc. They are a risen people and as such deserving of our political support and solidarity - both in victory and defeat! During the Russian Civil War the Bolsheviks took hostages. In fact in 1919 Trotsky signed a decree ordering this tactic. In 'Their Morals And Ours', answering criticism of this decree, he writes: 'Thus or otherwise I carry full responsibility for the Decree of 1919. It was a necessary measure in the struggle against the oppressors. Only in the historical content of the struggle lies the justification of the decree as in general justification for the whole civil war which, too, can be called, not without foundation, 'disgusting barbarism'. The point is this: the justification of any measure or action taken in the course of a revolutionary struggle is governed by one criteria and one only: absolute necessity. Therein lies its justification. Now we can debate the efficacy of such a tactic or measure, even its necessity, but only ever in terms of its success in taking the struggle forward, never in terms of the morality of such an act. Indeed, the oppressed, as pointed out by Steve Houston, should and must never be bound by any moral straitjacket when engaged in a life and death struggle against their oppressors, for their very struggle is dictated by necessity and to deny themselves the use of any tactic in accordance with this necessity is in itself immoral. In this regard, Steve's his historic references to John Brown and Nat Turner are well made and germaine to the discussion. Betancourt, in her press conference, stated that she still had aspirations to be President of Colombia. This positively and inarguably, in my view, reduced her words to nothing more than a campaign speech. She is the privileged member of a ruling class dripping from head to foot in blood in Colombia and throughout the developing world. Through their control of the mass media they saturate us with images of their humanity, of their lives as constituting great importance. The millions of faceless - yes, faceless - victims of their economic system, of their moral code, their legal code, of their democracy, mean nothing to them - nothing at all. This is why, despite their recent reverses, despite the calumny they have been subjected to from every quarter, I continue to offer my solidarity with the Farc and their struggle. Chavez and Castro have a right to express their opinions on the matter, and it is right that all socialists and Marxists should listen carefully to what they have to say. It doesn't mean we always slavishly agree with them. During the Cuban Revolution there were instances of cruelty, the execution of prisoners during the revolution followed by the show trials and execution of dozens of Batista henchman and official after the revolution had succeeded in taking power. It met with huge criticism from the left, who up to that point had preferred to categorise Che and Fidel, and the Cuban Revolution they epitomised, as a kind of romantic adventure in the sun. The mass trials and execution of prisoners provided the international left with a brutal awakening as to the very barbaric nature of any revolutionary upheaval. During their armed struggle, the IRA were calumnied for some of their operations, involving the loss of innocent life, and today Hamas and the Palestinian resistance are likewise demonised for the same reasons. However, the simple truth of the matter is that 'their violence' and 'their oppression' is far more barbaric and leaves infinitely more victims than that of those struggling against oppression. Indeed, there can be no moral equivalence between the violence of the oppressed and the violence of the oppressor. The Farc have their backs to the wall. However, it is vital they are not defeated militarily, for that would constitute a reverse in the global struggle against US imperialism and its allies. Let's not forget what happened in the 1980s when the Patriotic Union attempted to contest municipal elections and thousands of their members were assassinated by government backed right wing death squads. Rotting and suffering in Colombian gulags at present are thousands of men and women whose faces we will never see, whose names we will never know, but they exist and they have given their liberty in resistance to slavery and oppression. The Farc are not defeated, however they are wounded. Their struggle is at a standstill, of that there seems little doubt, but the justification for that struggle remains. From mlebowit at sfu.ca Sat Jul 5 12:26:06 2008 From: mlebowit at sfu.ca (michael a. lebowitz) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 13:56:06 -0430 Subject: [Marxism] re work-needs Message-ID: <486FBCBE.9070100@sfu.ca> Charles Brown asked in response to my comment that "It was Lenin who said there were two 'stages', and that there was the 'socialist principle' of to each according to her contribution.": > CB: Where'd he say that ? Of course, Lenin was dealing with socialism > in practice, not in theory like Marx. And as Engels said, Marxism is > not a dogma , but a guide to action. Take a look at 'State and Revolution'--written before the Revolution. Yes, unfortunately some [no names] people do treat Marxism as a dogma. He also said in response to my comment that "Marx did not distinguish between a socialist society and a communist society; rather, he referred to a single society in the process of 'becoming': ^^^^ > CB: And as has been said many times, he referred to a "higher phase", > thus distinguishing between phases. Giving the phases names is not the > critical analytical step. Distinguishing the phases is. It isn't an issue of 'names' at all. Rather, it is one of understanding the [yes] dialectical process of the becoming of an organic system set out clearly by Marx in the Grundrisse and then illustrated in Vol. I of Capital. If you think systems develop in phases/stages, why not illustrate that by reference to those in capitalism? And not by reference to to the development of a mode of production adequate to the nature of capitalist relations; rather, with separate 'principles' that apply to each. In response to my comment about the 'defect' that Marx explicitly identified in communism as it first emerges infected by capitalism that 'In fact, it is essential to struggle to subordinate this defect--- something that Che clearly understood', Charles stated: > ^^^^ > CB: Although, nowhere did _Marx_ say "it is essential to struggle to > subordinate this defect", either. Boy, you got me there!! michael > -- Michael A. Lebowitz Professor Emeritus Economics Department Simon Fraser University Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5A 1S6 Director, Programme in 'Transformative Practice and Human Development' Centro Internacional Miranda, P.H. Residencias Anauco Suites, Parque Central, final Av. Bolivar Caracas, Venezuela fax: 0212 5768274/0212 5777231 http//:centrointernacionalmiranda.gob.ve mlebowit at sfu.ca From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Sat Jul 5 13:09:31 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 15:09:31 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] work - ability - needs In-Reply-To: <486E20B4.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> References: <486E20B4.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> Message-ID: <908b689f0807051209g296a0a8bn29106b0fb3db9a01@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 1:08 PM, Charles Brown wrote: > S. Artesian wrote: > >> Nowhere in my reading of Marx did I find reference to a "to each >> according >> to his or her work." In the Grundrisse, Marx emphasizes that "the creation of real wealth ... is itself out of all proportion to the direct labor time spent on their production". (This is part of the famous passage about "The General Intellect" in the Grundrisse.) So if wages are to be a reward for creating "real wealth", then it does not make sense to pay the same wage for every unit of labor-time, but rather, pay according to the real wealth being created per unit of labor time. From lancemurdoch at gmail.com Sat Jul 5 13:10:42 2008 From: lancemurdoch at gmail.com (Lance Murdoch) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 15:10:42 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] =?windows-1252?q?The_=E2=80=9960s_Begin_to_Fade_as_Libe?= =?windows-1252?q?ral_Professors_Retire?= In-Reply-To: <908b689f0807050858t214c21b6s158dcf11d13bee7b@mail.gmail.com> References: <908b689f0807031532t18200254n8a61ee670df43f97@mail.gmail.com> <20080703223925.3EEA41184C@mailbackend.panix.com> <486E4AF9.D5BC96F0@ilstu.edu> <908b689f0807041405u4116cbeahea977d72f4c244be@mail.gmail.com> <6d53f4100807050346w7605ddd4wcf878f65fa82dd3a@mail.gmail.com> <908b689f0807050858t214c21b6s158dcf11d13bee7b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6d53f4100807051210y48fc094bwf5807eabfe3d3502@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Ruthless Critic of All that Exists wrote: > It is calumnious to suggest that the South and East Asians who get > admitted to PhD programs in US universities in natural sciences or > engineering, do so mostly because of "relatives back home connected > enough to get their sons in these schools". I didn't say "PhD programs in US universities", I said "a decent university...[like] the US News and World Report 35th top university in the US". In the top 35 US universities there is a limited number of slots for foreign students - Yale has a total of about 1700 foreign students overall, Princeton 850, Harvard 3500, MIT 2000. Most of the Asian students I knew at a university of this type had relatives in the top tier of their country, often very near the top. I don't see this as controversial at all. Of the 6,300,000,000 people in the world outside the US, who do you think is getting into those slots - the son of a miner in China, the daughter of a farmer in rural India? That hasn't been my experience at all. Are you suggesting your Marxist view is these countries are meritocracies, and the US is a meritocracy, and that the brightest most hard-working students are the ones who get a chance to go to the top US schools? > I think Lause's > explanantion is much more on the mark. These disciplines are simply > more international in character, where local knowledge / social > capital matters less. Which is the exact same thing I said regarding those disciplines, so how is Lause's explanation much more on the mark? Lause and I said more or less the same thing about why Americans and foreigners pick different majors. Lause didn't say anything about your capitalist meritocracy argument, which is a different subject entirely - who gets into these schools, not which major they pick once they're already in. From shmage at pipeline.com Sat Jul 5 13:27:57 2008 From: shmage at pipeline.com (Shane Mage) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 15:27:57 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] re work-needs In-Reply-To: <486FBCBE.9070100@sfu.ca> References: <486FBCBE.9070100@sfu.ca> Message-ID: On Jul 5, 2008, at 2:26 PM, michael a. lebowitz wrote: > Charles Brown asked in response to my comment that "It was Lenin who > said there were two 'stages', and that there was > the 'socialist principle' of to each according to her contribution.": >> CB: Where'd he say that ? Of course, Lenin was dealing with socialism >> in practice, not in theory like Marx. And as Engels said, Marxism is >> not a dogma , but a guide to action. > Take a look at 'State and Revolution'--written before the Revolution. Citation, please, in full. From jbustelo at gmail.com Sat Jul 5 13:39:14 2008 From: jbustelo at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Joaqu=C3=ADn_Bustelo?=) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 15:39:14 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] REBELION: The FARC had Already Expressed Willingness to Liberate the Hostages In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I knew if this discussion kept on, we'd soon get to the point where Jscotlive would be dragging in the experiences of the Russian Civil War to justify the FARC's tactics. "The point is this: the justification of any measure or action taken in the course of a revolutionary struggle is governed by one criteria and one only: absolute necessity." Fine: just what is the "absolute necessity" of the FARC kidnapping 7000 people over the years and releasing most of them upon monetary payments? What was the "absolute necessity" of kidnapping Ingrid Betancourt? Guaranteeing American sock-puppet Uribe's election? Joaquin From sartesian at earthlink.net Sat Jul 5 13:44:01 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 15:44:01 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] work - ability - needs References: <486E20B4.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> <908b689f0807051209g296a0a8bn29106b0fb3db9a01@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <05e101c8ded7$79599cb0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> But that's the whole point: wages are not and can't be based on creating "real wealth." Wages are based on exchange value and that's not "real wealth," that's a class-specific wealth. You cannot have communism, where wealth is directly social, determined by social consciousness, and wage-labor. You can have wage-labor as a revolution consolidates itself; you can have wages as an interim measure. But you cannot have a wage system creating "real wealth," when in fact, "real wealth" will be determined in and by the world markets. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ruthless Critic of All that Exists" To: Cc: Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2008 3:09 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism] work - ability - needs > On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 1:08 PM, Charles Brown > wrote: > >> S. Artesian wrote: >> >>> Nowhere in my reading of Marx did I find reference to a "to each >>> according >>> to his or her work." > > In the Grundrisse, Marx emphasizes that "the creation of real wealth > ... is itself out of all proportion to the direct labor time spent on > their production". (This is part of the famous passage about "The > General Intellect" in the Grundrisse.) > > So if wages are to be a reward for creating "real wealth", then it > does not make sense to pay the same wage for every unit of labor-time, > but rather, pay according to the real wealth being created per unit of > labor time. > > ________________________________________________ > YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu > Set your options at: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/sartesian%40earthlink.net From shmage at pipeline.com Sat Jul 5 14:24:41 2008 From: shmage at pipeline.com (Shane Mage) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 16:24:41 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] work - ability - needs In-Reply-To: <908b689f0807051209g296a0a8bn29106b0fb3db9a01@mail.gmail.com> References: <486E20B4.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> <908b689f0807051209g296a0a8bn29106b0fb3db9a01@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <010EE223-E93B-43A0-A667-6CCC0AA24291@pipeline.com> On Jul 5, 2008, at 3:09 PM, Ruthless Critic of All that Exists wrote: > > In the Grundrisse, Marx emphasizes that "the creation of real wealth > ... is itself out of all proportion to the direct labor time spent on > their production". (This is part of the famous passage about "The > General Intellect" in the Grundrisse.) > Why all the quoting of the preliminary notebooks for Das Kapital? and why is it always cited by the first word of its heading instead of the fully descriptive *last* word--Rohentwurf (rough draft)? > So if wages are to be a reward for creating "real wealth", then it > does not make sense to pay the same wage for every unit of labor-time, > but rather, pay according to the real wealth being created per unit of > labor time. That is, pay according to piecework--which Marx in Capital (Kerr edition, pp. 607-608) he wrote that piecework-wages are "the form of wages most in harmony with the capitalist mode of production" because "the mass of surplus value supplied by each particular laborer corresponds with the wage received by him." Shane Mage "Thunderbolt steers all things...it consents and does not consent to be called Zeus." Herakleitos of Ephesos From jbustelo at gmail.com Sat Jul 5 14:27:26 2008 From: jbustelo at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Joaqu=C3=ADn_Bustelo?=) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 16:27:26 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Joaquin Bustelo on FARC In-Reply-To: <553548.87404.qm@web63515.mail.re1.yahoo.com> References: <553548.87404.qm@web63515.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Steve Houston writes: "Here's the deal and the only one who has come close to saying this is Jscotlive. I could give a shit about Ingrid Betancourt. If holding her hostage is a tactical liability, then release her. If the tactical move was to execute her, are you going to apologize for it out of "sympathy"? "There ain't no such thing as morality Jaoquin and even if there is it has shit to do with us. There ain't no "rules of warfare" either, because what you call warfare is terrorism of civilians and nothing else." * * * "That is the worst case of testosterone poisoning I've seen in a long time." --Cmdr. Susan Ivanova Joaquin On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 11:17 PM, steve houston wrote: > > The trouble I have with this list, and why I rarely comment, is two-fold. One is a philosophical vulgarization that leads to discussions about whether the Big Bang model constitutes a dialectical explanation of the Universe. That part I could live with however frustrating because it doesn't matter much anyway. The other problem is more serious and almost makes the list DOA for me: sectarianism of the worst type, so much as to be comical and, frankly, unbelievable. > > Everytime I turn around its "Stalinist" this, "revisionist" that or 1000 other such ideological assaults. Its to the point that headway is made only if one ignores every adjective or descriptor in the writings of many subscribers to this list. It is not only a case of comrades living in the past (say 1930) either. Its time to cut the shit and grow the hell up. > > Jaoquin "feels" for Betancourt out of humanitarianism but claims it isn't high-handed moralizing. Jaoquin advances the line that there are "rules" of warfare that should be honored above all and bases his analysis in large part on this observation. > > I invite him to explain John Brown, Fra Dolcino, or Nat Turner using the above as a guideline. Incidentally I do NOT invite him to rattle off how these individuals were Stalinoid or any such inanities. > > Here's the deal and the only one who has come close to saying this is Jscotlive. I could give a shit about Ingrid Betancourt. If holding her hostage is a tactical liability, then release her. If the tactical move was to execute her, are you going to apologize for it out of "sympathy"? > > There ain't no such thing as morality Jaoquin and even if there is it has shit to do with us. There ain't no "rules of warfare" either, because what you call warfare is terrorism of civilians and nothing else. > > Jaoquin has taken "correctness" to such an extreme (and he's not alone on this list) that any perceived deviation means the group in question should simply give up. David Walters touched on this with FARC and why it is not so easy. > > Here's the thing: one of the very first rules is **we don't fucking give up**. Its the reason why every critique of "Stalinism" promulgated on this list ever is complete bullshit. What did you want the Soviet Union to do? Disband in the wake of the German Revolution being crushed because "socialism in one country" was theoretically incorrect? > > Or maybe Proyect wanted the USSR to simply surrender to fascism since the Popular Front was clearly not worthy of support compared to something ultra-left nothing group of Trotskyites in Spain. > > Comrades, many of you have lost your minds and I have no illusions that my admonition will make even a dent in your ideological armour. But if I read the term "Stalinite" one more time I'm going to fucking puke. > > Jaoquin offers intelligent commentary when he is not blathering away reciting the catechism of liberal "democracy" or the Litany of Piety of "freedom", "justice", "humanitarianism", "peace", etc > > Surely everyone on this list knows better. We are not fighting to fighting to make the world a better place in the abstract. We're not fighting because capitalism is a moral abomination. We're not fighting FOR ideas or a "cause". We're not fighting to cultural progression. It has everything to do with Nat Turner. Like John Brown later and Fra Dolcino before him, on the surface one could conclude he was a lunatic. And it doesn't matter a bit if he was. He fought because he had to, that's revolutionary necessity. What was his alternative? Give up? No doubt Joaquin would've chided all three men at the time for being too "brutal" or "alienating the masses" or a hundred other sins that simply supercede the significance of their struggle. > > Time to cut the shit > > > Jscotlive has written what I consider basically a disingenuous reply. > > For example: > >> Betnacourt's six years of humiliation in comparison to the generations of >> humiliation and exploitation and misery suffered by Colombia's poor pales by >> comparison. > > So was it OK to do what was done to Betancourt? To Clara Rojas? To > HUNDREDS of others still rotting in FARC concentration camps and > jungle cages? The crimes of the Colombian oligarchy, immense as they > may be, do not justify the policy the FARC adopted and has stuck > fiercely to, despite the most fraternal imaginable efforts of people > like Chavez to help the FARC correct its course. > > >> The notion that we should join in the deluge of sympathy and >> glorification of this member of a privileged class I personally find nauseating >> coming from a self declared proponent of revolutionary politics. > > The notion that we should turn our back on defense of human dignity > and deny our feelings of solidarity to victims of inhuman treatment > because the person is "a member of a privileged class" goes against > everything I believe in as a revolutionary. > > Moreover, your accusation that I would have us join "a deluge of > sympathy and glorification of this member of a privileged class" is > off the wall. What is going on here is that Uribe won a huge political > victory, not just against the FARC, but against the Latin American > left generally. So much so that much of the left fell into an > uncomfortable silence. > > On a day when every other daily paper in Latin America (and many more > throughout the world) gave front-page coverage to the hostages having > been freed, Granma buried it on the inside pages, preferring to > feature instead a meeting of Cuba's national assembly president with > Lula and a 35-year-old July 26 speech by Fidel. In Venezuela, despite > Chavez's prominent association with hostage release negotations, it > took many hours before an official government statement came out via > the foreign ministry. That's why then the next day, the central > leaders of those revolutions --Fidel and Hugo Chavez-- prominently > took up the question, Fidel in his role as columnist in chief, Chavez > through a major address to the nation on radio and television. > > THAT, IMHO, is not good enough. Working people the world over would > have benefited from having a prominent and cogent Cuban and Venezuelan > response to the development -- in real time -- especially because both > countries have been so prominently involved in trying to promote a > peace process in Colombia through political and diplomatic channels. > > This is a political situation and a political blow. It is you who turn > it into an occasion for (frankly) quite unintelligent moralizing by > suggesting that expressing sympathy for Ingrid Betancourt and relief > that she is now free means engaging in "glorification of this member > of a privileged class." > > It would be suicidal for the left to adopt this sort of "it was just > payback to a rich bitch" attitude. > >> Yes, we may have questions to ask with regard to the trajectory of the Farc, >> and yes there is no doubt that they have been backed into a corner, a victim >> of their inability to take the struggle forward. But to disengage from >> dialectics in favour of moralism in the process is not the way to do it. > > What Jscotlive is proposing is not dialectics, but "on the one hand on > the other" balancing of blame, and dissolving the concrete into > abstract mouthings like "a victim of their inability to take the > struggle forward." > >> The adoption of the tactic of hostage taking, >> though I still prefer to describe it as placing people under arrest who come >> into territory controlled by them, has run its course, there is no doubt. Wider >> events that have taken place in the region as a whole -namely the leftward >> shift in Latin American politics - have undubtedly overtaken them. This in no >> way justifies the calumny being directed at them by people on this list. > > The "tactic" of "placing people under arrest" has "run its course" > because it succeeded in turning the big majority of people in Colombia > against the FARC. The tactic wasn't just "placing people under arrest" > but kidnapping and holding them for ransom, using them for extortion. > The result of the adoption of such tactics is not just loss of popular > support, but a tendency towards the political and moral decay of the > organisation that adopts it. > > Not only can you not win a revolutionary war with such tactics, to the > extent they become dominant, the war you are waging stops being > revolutionary and becomes something else. Such actions are *material > facts on the ground* that speak to working people much more loudly > than May Day speeches. > > The political message is that the self-organization of working people > isn't where it is at. The Rambo masculinist stunts of an armed band > that more and more behaves in a fashion similar to that of traditional > criminal gangs are the road to liberation. > > Moreover, the FARC claims to be a belligerent party in a civil war. > Under the laws of war, taking hostages to extort ransom is a war > crime. Keeping people under the sorts of conditions the FARC kept > Betancourt and is keeping hundreds more is a war crime. And no > military necessity or extenuating circumstances defense can some into > play here. This isn't a calamitous situation that resulted from force > majeure, but rather the conscious, thought-through policy of the > group. > > And it isn't a "calumny" to describe things as they are and call > things by their right names. > > Cutesy evasions like "placing people under arrest who come into > territory controlled by them" only discredit those who employ them > when those who hear them know that the way some of those people came > into the territory was by force, for example hijacking the plane they > were on and forcing it to land there. > >> Being held as a hostage for six years for any individual must be one of the >> most traumatic and difficult experiences imaginable. That said, for every >> individual the Farc have taken into capitivity, they have liberated thousands of >> the poorest and exploited in that wretched country. > >> Being held as a hostage for six years for any individual must be one of the >> most traumatic and difficult experiences imaginable. That said, for every >> individual the Farc have taken into capitivity, they have liberated thousands of >> the poorest and exploited in that wretched country. Unfortunately, their >> constituents are not rich and privileged enough to be the focus of the world's >> media and will forever remain faceless and anonymous. > > I think this captures the underlying differences between us quite well. > > First, I suspect you know little about Colombia. Because you imply > that the FARC has liberated about half the population, a claim that is > absurd on its face. The FARC has kidnapped about 7,000 people, and > still hold 700. Giving a very low value of 3,000 for your vague > expression "thousands" ("for every individual ... they have liberated > thousands"), this works out to 21 million, out of a total population > of 44 million. > > But irrespective of the numbers, for you, liberation is something > brought by the FARC to the "faceless and anonymous." I would suggest > that the the liberation of "the faceless and anonymous" can only be > the work of the faceless and anonymous themselves. > > * * * > > Finally your defense of Walter is quite touching but unnecessary. I've > known Walter for nearly four decades; a few years ago we were thick as > thieves, and actually, CubaNews was a project we started together. > Unfortunately for some time now Walter has been applying --as best as > I understand it from his explanations-- a very peculiar theory, that > stuff you do online doesn't have to be done seriously or responsibly, > it doesn't "count" as real political activity. > > I quite thoroughly disagree with this crotchety conceit he has somehow > got into his head, and anyways, there is a clear direction to his > politics. He is becoming a Marcyite Stalinoid, constantly applying the > same kind of double-think and evasions that you deployed in your > arguments against me. > > I mean, I understand why you feel identified with Walter politically, > but if you think that's going to stop me from trying to beat some > sense into my old friend's head, or at least reawaken the sense he > USED to have, you're quite mistaken. > > Joaquin > > > > > > ________________________________________________ > YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu > Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/jbustelo%40gmail.com > From craig at red-bean.com Sat Jul 5 14:43:31 2008 From: craig at red-bean.com (Craig Brozefsky) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 15:43:31 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] Tom Hayden on Obama In-Reply-To: (Eli Stephens's message of "Sat\, 5 Jul 2008 10\:29\:57 -0700") References: Message-ID: Eli Stephens writes: > Fairly interesting reading: > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-hayden/no-retreat-if-you-want-to_b_110916.ht I wrote the following to this post on a local anti-war organizing list: Tom Hayden wrote in his "Barack At Risk" post: > Grass-roots people power is the only force that can keep alive the astute > sense of pragmatism that led Obama to criticize the coming war in 2002. The > stakes are higher now, and the enemies far more shrewd, wishing to rip > asunder the Obama coalition. What bargaining power does a grass-roots movement have when it has pledged itself and its votes to Obama and its leadership is seeking to demobilize its mass demonstrations during the election year? None of consequence. When we have no bargaining power, we are begging. I appreciate the voter-registration and education work that is being carried out by Peace and Justice Voters. However, you can't organize voters for peace and justice, when you have no peace and justice candidate on the ballot, or when there is one, you shun them as "unelectable". Any threat to withold votes or support from a campaign is undermined if we don't have another candidate, another choice, a champion of our demands. This is especially so, when the leadership of your organization is also leading a group explicitely supporting a candidate who you are trying to bargain with. We should not be putting off a national demonstration until 2009. The anti-war movement needs to attack the "things are going better" myth that has been cultivated by the media. This myth enables Obama to back away from withdrawal demands, by legitimizing the continuation of the occupation. If our grass-roots movement is to make demands upon power, then it needs to develop the levers it has: our votes, our organizing, and our ability to get people into the streets and express mass support for withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan. From sartesian at earthlink.net Sat Jul 5 15:00:59 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 17:00:59 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Joaquin Bustelo on FARC References: <553548.87404.qm@web63515.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <05fc01c8dee2$3a1db620$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Let me see if I have this right: Joaquin argues, 3 weeks ago, that all natural imbalances could be put right if we just got rid of all the white people by dropping nukes on the USA, Europe, and Japan [sic!], and/or by developing or finding some plague that only targets whites and setting it loose on the melanin-deprived/challenged of the species... ...And now we are supposed to believe, accept, concur with his humanitarian feelings toward Ingrid Bentacourt and his oppositon to the inhumane behavior of the FARC??? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joaqu?n Bustelo" To: Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2008 4:27 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Joaquin Bustelo on FARC From mlebowit at sfu.ca Sat Jul 5 15:03:35 2008 From: mlebowit at sfu.ca (michael a. lebowitz) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 16:33:35 -0430 Subject: [Marxism] work-needs Message-ID: <486FE1A7.2060901@sfu.ca> Shane Mage's response to my answer to charles brown that lenin's statements on stages and on a specific 'socialist principle' could be found in State and Revolution was: > Citation, please, in full. Is this a trick question? You can find the work in question in your own library or on-line. michael -- Michael A. Lebowitz Professor Emeritus Economics Department Simon Fraser University Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5A 1S6 Director, Programme in 'Transformative Practice and Human Development' Centro Internacional Miranda, P.H. Residencias Anauco Suites, Parque Central, final Av. Bolivar Caracas, Venezuela fax: 0212 5768274/0212 5777231 http//:centrointernacionalmiranda.gob.ve mlebowit at sfu.ca From shmage at pipeline.com Sat Jul 5 15:14:54 2008 From: shmage at pipeline.com (Shane Mage) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 17:14:54 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] work-needs In-Reply-To: <486FE1A7.2060901@sfu.ca> References: <486FE1A7.2060901@sfu.ca> Message-ID: <90FBA161-8289-4141-B51B-41EE080652C3@pipeline.com> On Jul 5, 2008, at 5:03 PM, michael a. lebowitz wrote: > Shane Mage's response to my answer to charles brown that lenin's > statements on stages and on a specific 'socialist principle' > could be found in State and Revolution was: >> Citation, please, in full. > > Is this a trick question? You can find the work in question in your > own library or on-line. > michael No trick. You said " my comment that...there was the 'socialist principle' of to each according to her contribution.": The question is--very specifically--where did Lenin, in State and Revolution, refer to piecework wages as a "socialist principle?" Shane Mage "Thunderbolt steers all things...it consents and does not consent to be called Zeus." Herakleitos of Ephesos From sartesian at earthlink.net Sat Jul 5 15:21:53 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 17:21:53 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] work-needs References: <486FE1A7.2060901@sfu.ca> Message-ID: <060601c8dee5$255a6fa0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> International Publishers, 1932/43 edition pages 76/77. I think my interpretation is a bit different than Michael's, but maybe not, because I think Lenin is showing that the inequality is NOT in everybody receiving the same share based on TIME, no matter how "valuable," sophisticalted, life-critical his or her work is-- the inequality is not based on an egalitarian dismissal of "level of effort" --but that the equal distribution does not account for the individual needs of each member of society, that some have greater needs than others for the means of subsistence and the means of development. Consequently, this formal equality is in fact unequal, and for equality to be realized, distribution, "reward" must be based on need and formal equality must be superceded. Marx nowhere speaks of socialism rewarding individual workers demonstrating higher "levels of effort" with greater access to wealth. ----- Original Message ----- From: "michael a. lebowitz" > > Is this a trick question? You can find the work in question in your own > library or on-line. > michael From pieinsky at igc.org Sat Jul 5 15:37:44 2008 From: pieinsky at igc.org (Jay Moore) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 17:37:44 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] REBELION: The FARC had Already Expressed Willingness to Liberate the Hostages In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <486FE9A8.9020807@igc.org> Without taking a position one way or another, "Monthly Review" had a recent interview (probably available online) with one of the main FARC spokespersons in which he was asked about the whole kidnapping business -- asked rather critically although the interview was generally sympathetic. The spokesperson had an interesting frank response, basically justifying it in terms of a "revolutionary tax" on the bourgeoisie, whom he claimed anyhow were the targets, not ordinary Colombian people. He said, in effect, that if the Revolution were in power these people (many of whom evade taxes as it is) would have to pay something similar or face legal sanctions. jay jaysleftist.info Joaqu?n Bustelo wrote: > > Fine: just what is the "absolute necessity" of the FARC kidnapping > 7000 people over the years and releasing most of them upon monetary > payments? What was the "absolute necessity" of kidnapping Ingrid > Betancourt? Guaranteeing American sock-puppet Uribe's election? > > Joaquin > From jbustelo at gmail.com Sat Jul 5 15:39:41 2008 From: jbustelo at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Joaqu=C3=ADn_Bustelo?=) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 17:39:41 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Machatera responds to Joaquin Bustelo In-Reply-To: <14003996.1215177219116.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <14003996.1215177219116.JavaMail.root@mswamui-backed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: Machetera writes (via Walter): > I think Joaquin misinterpreted a number of things because the point > I was trying to make is one that Machetera's readers will be familiar > with...the Cubans made a point of NOT mistreating their captives, > even when they'd done horrible things, because as Fidel has said very > clearly, they could never have gained such widespread support if they > hadn't. Apologies to Machetera for misunderstanding her intent. My misapprehension had at its root my impresion that all revolutionaries would now see the clear and immediate danger these events have presented, and the need therefore to speak with the utmost clarity on what previously many of us preferred, at most, to suggest between the lines -- that the FARC's policy (for in their case it's more than a tactic, but a central strategic line of activity) threatens to bring not only ruin for them but a grave setback for the Left, especially in Latin America. Thus I took her indirectness for evasions. And perhaps part of my mistake has to do with my feeling about my old friend Walter and how I perceive his evolution over the past couple of years. So I owe him an apology as well. Although based on misunderstanding, the discussion it started hasn't been fruitless. As the replies from Jscotlive and others make clear, there is a current --I think it was Fidel that once named them the Pol Pot left (la izquierda polpotiana)-- that insists that there is simply no relationship between the character of the tactics and the character of the movement. Immediate exediency is the only consideration. That current is wrong because, at bottom, it is the masses that make revolutions, and however materially grounded, true revolutions are always made, not to improve the conditions of life, but to transform them, and when the masses go into motion there is one sentiment that overwhelms all others: SOLIDARITY. You cannot win the masses of people to a blood-stained banner that proclaims its complete, sovereign indifference to human suffering, enslavement and even life itself. At the risk of skating close to areas Louis has placed off-bounds, I'd like to point out that this idea that "anything goes" is part of the heritage of Stalinism in the popular movements and revolutionary left, an essentially bourgeois corruption of what had always been the moral ethos of the Marxist movement. Since someone here suggested that it was a matter of indifference whether FARC released or executed Ingrid Betancourt, I want to offer some evidence of what the true attitude of genuine revolutionary socialists has always been. This is Rosa Luxemburg, writing days after being freed from imprisonment in November, 1918. * * * The history of the world is not made without grandeur of spirit, without lofty morale, without noble gestures. Liebknecht and I, on leaving the hospitable halls which we recently inhabited ? he, among his pale companions in the penitentiary, I with my dear, poor thieves and women of the streets, with whom I have passed, under the same roof, three years and a half of my life ?we took this oath as they followed us with their sad eyes: "We shall not forget you!" We demand of the executive committee of the Council of Workers and Soldiers an immediate amelioration of the lot of all the prisoners in the German jails! We demand the excision of capital punishment from the German penal code! During the four years of this slaughter of the peoples, blood has flowed in torrents. Today, each drop of that precious fluid ought to be preserved devotedly in crystal urns. Revolutionary activity and profound humanitarianism?they alone are the true breath of socialism. A world must be turned upside down. But each tear that flows, when it could have been spared, is an accusation, and he commits a crime who with brutal inadvertency crushes a poor earthworm. Rosa Luxemburg, Against Capital Punishment Joaquin From mlebowit at sfu.ca Sat Jul 5 15:40:53 2008 From: mlebowit at sfu.ca (michael a. lebowitz) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 17:10:53 -0430 Subject: [Marxism] re work-needs In-Reply-To: <000001c8dedc$889e0d50$12e9fea9@office1pc> References: <000001c8dedc$889e0d50$12e9fea9@office1pc> Message-ID: <486FEA65.4000903@sfu.ca> Dear Fred, Firstly, let me suggest that if you feel that important points that you've made are going unmentioned on Marxmail, you should indicate specifically what they are; a long response to a foolish ephemeral piece in Counterpunch has probably introduced many questions that are seen as digressions to the central discussion about Cuba's current patterns. As for your suggestion that I've talked about the power of a Chinese current in Cuba which wants, among other things, to subordinate education and healthcare to capitalism, that is a blatant distortion of what I've said. On the contrary, I have talked about a tendency which seeks the solution to current problems by turning to the market and abandoning measures such as the 'libretto' and subsidised distribution of electricity. etc. once seen as great victories. That tendency precedes the new announcements on wages and it continues to strengthen. As for the subjective intentions of those who propose such solutions, I am certain that they are just problem-solving; however, as with their predecessors in the USSR, Eastern Europe and China, movement in this direction (rather than moving toward worker and community democracy) develops its own dynamic in which capitalist-type solutions appear more and more rational--- a point that I think Che grasped very well. In a passage from my article in the current issue of TEMAS, the Cuban journal (which I think is proof positive that I by no means that written off the possibility that this tendency can be reversed), I wrote: > > Clearly, worker-management and conscious cooperation in > the process of production have enormous potential for building rich > human beings, for ensuring the 'all-round development of the > individual, and [that] all the springs of co-operative wealth flow > more abundantly'. The outcome in Yugoslavia, though, was anticipated > by Che in his /Man and Socialism in Cuba/: > > > > The pipe dream that socialism can be achieved with the help of the > dull instruments left to us by capitalism (the commodity as the > economic cell, individual material interest as the lever, etc.) can > lead into a blind alley. And you wind up there after having travelled > a long distance with many crossroads, and it is hard to figure out > just where you took the wrong turn (Tablada, 1989: 92). > > > > Worker-management took the wrong turn in Yugoslavia > because an overwhelming emphasis upon self-interest not only works > against the development and deepening of solidarity and against a > focus upon the needs of people within society. It also tends toward > the disintegration of the common ownership of the means of production > and to the undermining of worker-management itself.[1] <#_ftn1> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > [1] <#_ftnref1> Thus, it infects all three sides of what Venezuela's > President Hugo Chavez ('Alo Presidente' #264, 28 January 2007) has > called the 'elementary triangle' of socialism: (1)social property with > (2) social production for (3) social needs. See the discussion in > Michael A. Lebowitz, /El Socialismo no cae //del// cielo: un nuevo > comienzo/ (Caracas: Monte Avila, 2007): 7-15. > best wishes, michael ps. you really should visit Cuba. On 05/07/2008 3:50 PM, Fred Feldman wrote: > > Dear Michael, > > I think if the debate on the Cuba wage incentive, and its > relationship, or lack of same, to the restoration of capitalism there, > really should take account, be it with respect or contempt, agreement > or disagreement, of this article which I submitted to the list more > than a week ago. > > > > I am attaching it for your and everybody else's convenience. > > > > It has been published by LINKS but, of course, not by Counterpunch, > which is basically a radical bourgeois magazine, good for what its > good for but that's all. Nor has MRZine touched it. And although the > list is still debating the wage incentive, the points I make go > unmentioned. > > > > But such is life. > > > > At any rate, if you comment on this, I hope you will include whatever > new evidence you have found about the power of the "Chinese Current" > in Cuba, who supposedly advocate generalized privatization of industry > and agriculture (that includes making land and housing into markets) > and the subordination of education and medical care, China-style, to > capital accumulation. > > > > I am seriously, sincerely interested in knowing whether the Cuban CP > contains, or the clear domination of, a powerful "Chinese current" > which is responsible for current policies. I would not hesitate to > join with you in opposing such a perspective, short of anything that > threatened, on whatever grounds, the hard-won independence of the > Cuban state. > > > > Soldarity! > > > > Fred Feldman > -- Michael A. Lebowitz Professor Emeritus Economics Department Simon Fraser University Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5A 1S6 Director, Programme in 'Transformative Practice and Human Development' Centro Internacional Miranda, P.H. Residencias Anauco Suites, Parque Central, final Av. Bolivar Caracas, Venezuela fax: 0212 5768274/0212 5777231 http//:centrointernacionalmiranda.gob.ve mlebowit at sfu.ca From mlebowit at sfu.ca Sat Jul 5 15:53:04 2008 From: mlebowit at sfu.ca (michael a. lebowitz) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 17:23:04 -0430 Subject: [Marxism] wok-needs Message-ID: <486FED40.2030506@sfu.ca> Shane wrote: > No trick. You said " my comment that...there was > the 'socialist principle' of to each according to her contribution.": > > The question is--very specifically--where did Lenin, in State and > Revolution, refer to piecework wages as a "socialist principle?" > > Sorry, seems like I've walked into the middle of a movie. Did I say anything about piecework wages? I haven't followed a thread discussing this. michael ps. Lenin certainly did refer to 'the other socialist principle, "An equal amount of products for an equal amount of labor"'. -- Michael A. Lebowitz Professor Emeritus Economics Department Simon Fraser University Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5A 1S6 Director, Programme in 'Transformative Practice and Human Development' Centro Internacional Miranda, P.H. Residencias Anauco Suites, Parque Central, final Av. Bolivar Caracas, Venezuela fax: 0212 5768274/0212 5777231 http//:centrointernacionalmiranda.gob.ve mlebowit at sfu.ca From jbustelo at gmail.com Sat Jul 5 16:03:09 2008 From: jbustelo at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Joaqu=C3=ADn_Bustelo?=) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 18:03:09 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] REBELION: The FARC had Already Expressed Willingness to Liberate the Hostages In-Reply-To: <486FE9A8.9020807@igc.org> References: <486FE9A8.9020807@igc.org> Message-ID: KIdnapping for ransom as a "revolutionary tax" has a few basic problems. In addition to rich people, the FARC has captured and held countless soldiers and non-coms, who by no stretch of the imagination can be considered bourgeois. They also captured and held for years local politicians, including a group of 12, 11 of whom were (apparently) executed by the FARC when they thought either the government troops were about to free them or they were about to fall into the hands of the rival ELN. The FARC makes no distinction between civilians and military captives. The most egregious example is the three U.S. intelligence operatives that they captured. Sure, their cover story was that they were "civilian" contractors of the Pentagon, not members of military intelligence or the CIA themselves. But even if that is the way payroll checks were handled, the U.S. itself admitted they were conducting "intelligence" gathering over FARC territory for the Pentagon. Here one of the niceties of the law of war comes into play. To be treated as POW's people have to be in uniform and under the discipline of a military command. This is to protect the civilian, non-combatant population by not allowing combatants to masquerade and hide as civilians. Under traditional military practice, non-uniformed persons in combatant roles are subject to summary courts-martial by their enemy and execution as spies and saboteurs. The FARC's lumping in of these people with civilians and normal POW's only serves to legitimize this U.S. practice of endangering civilian populations by blurring the distnction between combatants and non-combatants. But what it also shows is that the FARC does not itself recognize the distinction. Finally, whether what is going on is "revolutionary taxation" or just plain criminal extortion is a matter of how the masses regard it. The evidence is overwhelming that the FARC is held with little sympathy by the Colombian masses, and the rallying point of public opinion against the FARC is precisely the taking and holding of hostages. On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Jay Moore wrote: > Without taking a position one way or another, "Monthly Review" had a > recent interview (probably available online) with one of the main FARC > spokespersons in which he was asked about the whole kidnapping business > -- asked rather critically although the interview was generally > sympathetic. The spokesperson had an interesting frank response, > basically justifying it in terms of a "revolutionary tax" on the > bourgeoisie, whom he claimed anyhow were the targets, not ordinary > Colombian people. He said, in effect, that if the Revolution were in > power these people (many of whom evade taxes as it is) would have to pay > something similar or face legal sanctions. Joaquin From markalause at gmail.com Sat Jul 5 16:04:23 2008 From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 17:04:23 -0500 Subject: [Marxism] work-needs In-Reply-To: <060601c8dee5$255a6fa0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> References: <486FE1A7.2060901@sfu.ca> <060601c8dee5$255a6fa0$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Message-ID: http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/lenin-staterev.html You can search this and find references to phases and stages, but they don't seem to mean what's been implied here. ML From elishastephens at hotmail.com Sat Jul 5 16:33:54 2008 From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 15:33:54 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Tom Hayden on Obama Message-ID: Craig B.: "What bargaining power does a grass-roots movement have when it has pledged itself and its votes to Obama and its leadership is seeking to demobilize its mass demonstrations during the election year? None of consequence. When we have no bargaining power, we are begging. Any threat to withold votes or support from a campaign is undermined if we don't have another candidate, another choice, a champion of our demands." Exactly what was wrong with that "open letter to Obama" from Workers World that Walter posted a while back. The one that started something like, "Barack, you're our guy, but..." Once you get that "you're our guy" in there, the rest is meaningless. Craig talks about the emptiness of a threat to withhold votes, but in fact, that letter, and other articles like it (like the Hayden article) don't even threaten to do that! Gheesh, even Hillary Clinton voters are threatening to withhold their votes from Obama! Not antiwar voters (at least, the "mainstream" ones Hayden typifies), though, who have one HECK of a lot more reason for doing so than Clinton voters. _________________________________________________________________ Use video conversation to talk face-to-face with Windows Live Messenger. http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/connect_your_way.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_messenger_video_072008 From michael at ecst.csuchico.edu Sat Jul 5 16:47:46 2008 From: michael at ecst.csuchico.edu (Michael Perelman) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 15:47:46 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Healthcare Follies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20080705224746.GA25712@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu> I am getting ready to leave for my final summer trip to Las Vegas, where it will be appearing with a host of conservative luminaries, such as Ron Paul, Bob Barr, Steve Forbes, Christopher Hitchens, and Dinesh D'Souza. I will be in two debates beginning next Thursday. David Himmelstein and I will be debating single-payer with John Mackey, the head of Whole Foods and John Goodman, the man who invented health savings accounts. Here is what I whipped up today. I would very much appreciate any comments. http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com/2008/07/05/healthcare-follies The second debate will concern the nature of freedom. There, I will be debating John Mackey again and two others whom I do not know. I will call for help again on that one is in his I get something prepared. Here is the website for the conference. http://freedomfest.com/ -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu michaelperelman.wordpress.com -- From gary.maclennan at gmail.com Sat Jul 5 17:29:41 2008 From: gary.maclennan at gmail.com (gary.maclennan at gmail.com) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 16:29:41 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Healthcare Follies In-Reply-To: <20080705224746.GA25712@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu> References: <20080705224746.GA25712@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu> Message-ID: Michael I wish you luck as you "take weapons from the wall" and I intended to see if I could add a helpful comment but unfortunately I cannot get the link to open. However this gave me the opportunity to follow up on an intention that I have had for some time and that is to comment on an interview you gave recently - where I saw it I do not recall. However you talked there of the almost total absence of radical economists in the academy because none were being appointed. You went on to say something like that the ban on appointments could be understood in terms of the central political importance of economics. You also added an comment to the effect that English ( Humanities etc) was exempt at least to some extent from the ban because people cared less what happened in that field. My immediate response was that the field of English studies - cultural studies - media studies etc - had and has been thoroughly colonised by the postmodernists and the situation is just as dire there as in your field. The faux-radical avatars of Derrida, Foucault, Deleuze etc - the whole entire neo-Nietzschean filthy postmodern tide- have disoriented and depoliticised an entire generation much more thoroughly than any crude control on appointments ever could. Does it matter? Well it may be the hubris of someone who has worked all his life in the area but yes it matters! Admittedly I cannot really argue that case very much beyond the level of a simple affirmation - very much like the author in Brecht's poem *Mein junge sohn fragt mich.* In any case good luck at the "freedom fest". best regards Gary From michael at ecst.csuchico.edu Sat Jul 5 17:44:51 2008 From: michael at ecst.csuchico.edu (Michael Perelman) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 16:44:51 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Healthcare Follies In-Reply-To: References: <20080705224746.GA25712@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu> Message-ID: <20080705234451.GB25712@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu> The link is now fixed. http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com/2008/07/05/healthcare-follieshealthcare-follies/ Gary, in the US, at least, people in the humanities [outside of middle east studies] have not been censored as much, although I suspect that the noose is tightening there as well. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu michaelperelman.wordpress.com From lnp3 at panix.com Sat Jul 5 18:02:46 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 20:02:46 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] From Cliff Conner Message-ID: <20080706000244.DB4BD17D2A@mailbackend.panix.com> Hi folks, I wanted to let you know, in case you don't already, about the publication of a new book that I thought you might be interested in. "The Sweetest Dream" is a novel--actually, a memoir with a little fictional overlay--about a young woman in the 1930s who joins the Young Communist League but soon awakens to the crimes of Stalinism and joins the Trotskyist movement. Eventually she winds up in Mexico in the Trotsky milieu. The author, Lillian Pollak, was herself in Mexico back then, hanging out with Trotsky, Natalia, Frida Kahlo, et al. Lillian is now 93 and is still an activist. She's a "Raging Granny" who raises all kinds of hell at Army recruiting stations, etc. I'm reviewing the book and will send you the review when I finish it, but I wanted to go ahead and recommend it now. It's a good read! If you are so inclined, you can get it on Amazon.com or you can go to the closest bookstore and have them order it for you. (The full title is "The Sweetest Dream: Love, Lies and Assassination," and the publisher is iUniverse.) Cliff From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net Sat Jul 5 18:12:43 2008 From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 20:12:43 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] work-needs. wok-needs, woo-needs, and so forth Message-ID: <000001c8defd$03cb0cb0$12e9fea9@office1pc> I wrote an article on the Cuban wage incentives available at http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2008w26/msg00022.htm and also available on LINKS. I think it is useful particularly for gaining a sense of proportion of how this decision -- hardly unprecedented at all despite the lies and ignorance of the capitalist media -- fits into to the overall course of the Cuban revolution. Quite comfortably, in fact. I assume Mike is literate, and does not need special Cuban-Venezuelan type training to determine what he agrees or disagrees with in the article I wrote on the, frankly, touch of hysteria generated by the Cuban wage incentives, of which Counterpunch's bourgeois economist (sent to the list by Louis) was one example. If the problem is that he can find nothing in it that he disagrees with, I am a very happy bunny. Yet I doubt that this is the case. I don't think I need to educate him either way. Among other things, I found when I reread my article and Mike's latest on LINKS that we really do have somewhat differing visions of what 21st Century Socialism means and should be. I plan to do that I also assume he bothered to read the article I wrote, but from what he wrote, I am not sure. At any rate, he obviously finds nothing in it worth discussing from his particular point of view. His right, when all is said and done. I think otherwise, and having said my piece, I see no need to say more. Everybody should feel free to parse the Critique of the Gotha Programme to their heart's content. Fred Feldman From jbustelo at gmail.com Sat Jul 5 20:02:35 2008 From: jbustelo at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Joaqu=C3=ADn_Bustelo?=) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 22:02:35 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Joaquin Bustelo on FARC In-Reply-To: <05fc01c8dee2$3a1db620$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> References: <553548.87404.qm@web63515.mail.re1.yahoo.com> <05fc01c8dee2$3a1db620$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Message-ID: On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 5:00 PM, S. Artesian wrote: > Let me see if I have this right: > > Joaquin argues, 3 weeks ago, that all natural imbalances could be put right > if we just got rid of all the white people by dropping nukes on the USA, > Europe, and Japan [sic!], and/or by developing or finding some plague that > only targets whites and setting it loose on the melanin-deprived/challenged > of the species... > > ...And now we are supposed to believe, accept, concur with his humanitarian > feelings toward Ingrid Bentacourt and his oppositon to the inhumane behavior > of the FARC??? I have to apologize to Sartesian for taxing his obviously limited intellectual capacity through literary devices like hnyperbole and irony to make political points. Since I'm unlikely to change my errant ways at my age, I suggest he try brain surgery (having some installed) or, in the alternative, stop reading my posts. Joaqu?n From sabocat59 at mac.com Sat Jul 5 20:09:32 2008 From: sabocat59 at mac.com (Greg McDonald) Date: Sat, 05 Jul 2008 22:09:32 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Healthcare Follies Message-ID: Thanks Michael for tackling such an important topic. I like the points you've already made, in particular with regard to HMO bureaucracy and paperwork, as well as care denial. Both key points. I'd like to make a few small points based on my experience within the field of health care. I've lived and worked as a massage therapist in a variety of settings, both rural and urban, and over the years have developed professional relationships with medical doctors, chiropractors, orthopedists, physical therapists, osteopaths, acupuncturists, etc. I frequently give and receive referrals to and from a wide range of health practitioners. I've developed a bit of a niche as someone dealing with both chronic and acute pain reduction, so I get to see a diverse group of traumas, injuries, and structural imbalances. I've come to the conclusion that private health care distorts the quality of care delivered, and can lead to inappropriate treatments based more on cost-benefit analysis rather than the health and well- being of the patient or client in question. This is due to the institutional power structures, which in many cases determine treatment protocol, and not to the advantage of the client necessarily. We see this time and again in relation to the pharmaceutical industry and insurance, as well as, unfortunately, to certain surgical procedures. I've also observed turf wars between different medical professions, also to the detriment of the patient. These are of course due to capitalist distortions within the industry. Sometimes legislation is passed, usually denying access to a certain treatment protocol for one group of practitioners to the advantage of a more firmly entrenched profession, and usually the cutting-edge science is in favor of the insurgent profession. go figure. US health care is also extremely expensive, favoring technologically sophisticated treatments, but ones usually based on some heroic intervention. Such is the case with a warrior culture that got it's medical advances primarily on the battlefield. Surgery, morphine, sterilization. Fortunately, preventive medicine, which is in the forefront of much new science and traditional non-occidental practice, is gaining a footing within the industry. Unfortunately, the benefits seem to be going mainly to the wealthy. Single-payer could help to revolutionize medical care, taking all the current cutting edge practices and making them more accessible to the citizenry. The problem is the contradiction created by capitalism, which feeds on and magnifies people's dis-ease, and a health care system which would prioritize keeping people healthy. Greg McDonald From michael at ecst.csuchico.edu Sat Jul 5 20:55:53 2008 From: michael at ecst.csuchico.edu (Michael Perelman) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 19:55:53 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Healthcare Follies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20080706025553.GA25982@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu> Thank you Greg. I will try to work on this. You might be interested in a friend's site on body mechanics. He has mortgaged his home to make a video of his new techniques. On Sat, Jul 05, 2008 at 10:09:32PM -0400, Greg McDonald wrote: > Thanks Michael for tackling such an important topic. I like the > points you've already made, in particular with regard to HMO > bureaucracy and paperwork, as well as care denial. Both key points. > > I'd like to make a few small points based on my experience within the > field of health care. I've lived and worked as a massage therapist in > a variety of settings, both rural and urban, and over the years have > developed professional relationships with medical doctors, > chiropractors, orthopedists, physical therapists, osteopaths, > acupuncturists, etc. I frequently give and receive referrals to and > from a wide range of health practitioners. > > I've developed a bit of a niche as someone dealing with both chronic > and acute pain reduction, so I get to see a diverse group of traumas, > injuries, and structural imbalances. > > I've come to the conclusion that private health care distorts the > quality of care delivered, and can lead to inappropriate treatments > based more on cost-benefit analysis rather than the health and well- > being of the patient or client in question. This is due to the > institutional power structures, which in many cases determine > treatment protocol, and not to the advantage of the client > necessarily. We see this time and again in relation to the > pharmaceutical industry and insurance, as well as, unfortunately, to > certain surgical procedures. > > I've also observed turf wars between different medical professions, > also to the detriment of the patient. These are of course due to > capitalist distortions within the industry. Sometimes legislation is > passed, usually denying access to a certain treatment protocol for > one group of practitioners to the advantage of a more firmly > entrenched profession, and usually the cutting-edge science is in > favor of the insurgent profession. go figure. > > US health care is also extremely expensive, favoring technologically > sophisticated treatments, but ones usually based on some heroic > intervention. Such is the case with a warrior culture that got it's > medical advances primarily on the battlefield. Surgery, morphine, > sterilization. > > Fortunately, preventive medicine, which is in the forefront of much > new science and traditional non-occidental practice, is gaining a > footing within the industry. Unfortunately, the benefits seem to be > going mainly to the wealthy. Single-payer could help to revolutionize > medical care, taking all the current cutting edge practices and > making them more accessible to the citizenry. The problem is the > contradiction created by capitalism, which feeds on and magnifies > people's dis-ease, and a health care system which would prioritize > keeping people healthy. > > Greg McDonald > > > ________________________________________________ > YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu > Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/michael%40ecst.csuchico.edu -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu michaelperelman.wordpress.com From sartesian at earthlink.net Sat Jul 5 21:39:49 2008 From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 23:39:49 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Joaquin Bustelo on FARC References: <553548.87404.qm@web63515.mail.re1.yahoo.com><05fc01c8dee2$3a1db620$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Message-ID: <066d01c8df19$f1739740$6401a8c0@dmsthinkpad> Not worth caring this any further on list. Just let me say that advocating dropping nuclear devices on a country that has suffered from 2 nuclear bombs does not qualify as a literary device or irony. Ignorance is a much more fitting description. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joaqu?n Bustelo" To: Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2008 10:02 PM Subject: Re: [Marxism] Joaquin Bustelo on FARC From DBachmozart at aol.com Sat Jul 5 22:15:45 2008 From: DBachmozart at aol.com (DBachmozart at aol.com) Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2008 06:15:45 +0200 Subject: [Marxism] Shalit is not more important than 10, 000 Palestinian prisoners Message-ID: <909385311CAE4F6F8F8BECA5FAD194EC@pic3dcinhmr9h4> The Palestinian Information Center Emailed You Dennis Brasky The Following : Israeli prisoner no more important than 10,000 Palestinian prisoners Shalit is not more important than 10,000 Palestinian prisoners From ok.president+marxml at gmail.com Sat Jul 5 22:25:20 2008 From: ok.president+marxml at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists) Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2008 00:25:20 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] work - ability - needs In-Reply-To: <010EE223-E93B-43A0-A667-6CCC0AA24291@pipeline.com> References: <486E20B4.84C9.00BF.0@cncl.ci.detroit.mi.us> <908b689f0807051209g296a0a8bn29106b0fb3db9a01@mail.gmail.com> <010EE223-E93B-43A0-A667-6CCC0AA24291@pipeline.com> Message-ID: <908b689f0807052125p3dc234b3l98bc7f3a2378d8bc@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 4:24 PM, Shane Mage wrote: > > On Jul 5, 2008, at 3:09 PM, Ruthless Critic of All that Exists wrote: >> >> In the Grundrisse, Marx emphasizes that "the creation of real wealth >> ... is itself out of all proportion to the direct labor time spent on >> their production". (This is part of the famous passage about "The >> General Intellect" in the Grundrisse.) >> > Why all the quoting of the preliminary notebooks for Das Kapital? and > why is it always cited by the first word of its heading instead of the > fully descriptive *last* word--Rohentwurf (rough draft)? Marx was only able to finish vols 1-3 of the projected six volumes of Das Kapital. So, his notebooks are important to try to reconstruct his thought. From schaffer at optonline.net Sat Jul 5 22:45:07 2008 From: schaffer at optonline.net (Les Schaffer) Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2008 00:45:07 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Healthcare Follies In-Reply-To: <20080705234451.GB25712@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu> References: <20080705224746.GA25712@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu> <20080705234451.GB25712@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu> Message-ID: <48704DD3.8080507@optonline.net> Michael Perelman wrote: > The link is now fixed. > > http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com/2008/07/05/healthcare-follieshealthcare-follies/ i think Michael meant this: http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com/2008/07/05/healthcare-follies/ Les From walterlx at earthlink.net Sat Jul 5 23:06:49 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 22:06:49 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Letter to Desmond Tutu concerning President Robert Mugabe Message-ID: <000401c8df26$1e4f1670$0600a8c0@new1501> MADELEINE ALBRIGHT: http://youtube.com/watch?v=m5QFnAoqRZM (49 seconds) Letter to Desmond Tutu concerning President Robert Mugabe Lloyd Whitefield BUTLER, Jr. Fri, 11 Apr 2008 10:45:00 +0000 DEAR Honorable Desmond Tutu, Archbishop of South Africa. As a theologian and an honorable churchman your recent comments to the news media raises serious questions... Archbishop Tutu, another headline that raises questions in my mind is "A Cry for Zimbabwe" - 'A Moment to End the Repression -- Unless the World Retreats Into Silence' by Desmond Tutu and Madeleine Albright. Thursday, March 29, 2007. Co-authoring an article with Madeleine Albright former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations during the Rwanda Massacre of 800,000 Christian Africans in 1984 is unpleasant in my opinion. Mrs. Albright was not bright enough to answer her phone calls from Rwanda during the massacre; and you see fit to align yourself with her as a representative of good will. Can you Archbishop Tutu locate a text where former U.S. Secretary of State Madeline Albright apologized, repented, or offered restitution to Rwanda? Google cannot find it. The two of you (Albright and Tutu) fail in your article to mention the illegality of economic sanctions against an entire nation and the effects on the economy and social infrastructure. http://www.talkzimbabwe.com/news/128/ARTICLE/2103/2008-04-11.html ======================================== WALTER LIPPMANN, CubaNews Los Angeles, California http://www.walterlippmann.com http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Paraiso bajo el bloqueo" ======================================== From jonflanders at jflan.net Sun Jul 6 05:00:00 2008 From: jonflanders at jflan.net (Jon Flanders) Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2008 07:00:00 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Healthcare Follies In-Reply-To: <20080705234451.GB25712@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu> References: <20080705224746.GA25712@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu> <20080705234451.GB25712@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu> Message-ID: <1215342000.5200.4.camel@localhost> I just read Michael's paper and think it a very good riposte to the free marketeers. Since these folks are much like religious fanatics I doubt he will change many minds at the conference, however. Fortunately, in my experience, most working people, even quite conservative ones, are almost communist on this question. They are far ahead of the Democrat's position on health care, that's for sure. Jon Flanders On Sat, 2008-07-05 at 16:44 -0700, Michael Perelman wrote: > The link is now fixed. > > http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com/2008/07/05/healthcare-follieshealthcare-follies/ > > Gary, in the US, at least, people in the humanities [outside of middle east studies] > have not been censored as much, although I suspect that the noose is tightening > there as well. > > > From walterlx at earthlink.net Sun Jul 6 06:22:55 2008 From: walterlx at earthlink.net (Walter Lippmann) Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2008 08:22:55 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Marxism] Fidel Castro: Pax Romana Message-ID: <19707621.1215346975715.JavaMail.root@mswamui-blood.atl.sa.earthlink.net> ("If I dared suggest anything to the FARC guerrillas that would simply be that they declare, by any means possible to the International Red Cross, their willingness to release the hostages and prisoners they are still holding, without any precondition. I do not intend to be heard; it is simply my duty to say what I think. Anything else would only serve to reward disloyalty and treason.") ==================================================================== Reflections by comrade Fidel http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/reflexiones/2008/ing/f050708i.html PAX ROMANA I basically drew these data from statements made by William Brownfield, US ambassador to Colombia, from that country?s press and television, from the international press, and other sources. It?s impressive the show of technology and economic resources at play. While in Colombia the senior military officers went to great pains to explain that Ingrid Betancourt?s rescue had been an entirely Colombian operation, the US authorities were saying that ?it was the result of years of intense military cooperation of the Colombian and United States? armies.? ??The truth is that we have been able to get along as we seldom have in the United States, except with our oldest allies, mostly in NATO,? said Brownfield, referring to his country?s relationships with the Colombian security forces, which have received over 4 billion USD in military assistance since the year 2000.? ??on various occasions it became necessary for the US Administration to make decisions at the top levels concerning this operation. ?The US spy satellites helped in locating the hostages during a month period starting on May 31st until the rescue action on Wednesday.? ?The Colombians installed video surveillance equipment, supplied by the United States. Operated by remote control, these can take close-ups and pan along the rivers which are the only transportation routes through thick forests, said the Colombian and US authorities.? ?US surveillance aircraft intercepted the rebels? radio and satellite phone talks and used imaging equipment that can break through the forest foliage.? ??The defector will receive a considerable sum of the close to one- hundred-million-dollars reward offered by the government?, stated the Commander General of the Colombian Army.? On Wednesday, July 1st, the London BBC reported that Cesar Mauricio Velasquez, press secretary at Casa de Nari?o (Colombian Government House) had informed that delegates from France and Switzerland had met with Alfonso Cano, chief of the FARC. According to the BBC, that would be the first contact with international delegates accepted by the new chief after the death of Manuel Marulanda. The false information of the meeting of two European envoys with Cano had been released in Bogota. The deceased leader of the FARC had been born on May 12, 1932, according to his father?s testimony. Marulanda, a poor peasant with a liberal thinking and a Gaitan follower, had started his armed resistance 60 years back. He was a guerrilla before us; he had reacted to the carnage of peasants carried out by the oligarchy. The Communist Party he later joined, the same as every other in Latin America, was under the influence of the Communist Party of the USSR and not of Cuba. They were in solidarity with our Revolution but they were not subordinated to it. It was the drug-traffickers and not the FARC that unleashed terror in that sister nation as part of their feuds over the United States market. They caused powerful bomb blasts and even blew up trucks loaded with plastic explosives destroying facilities and injuring or killing countless people. The Colombian Communist Party never contemplated the idea of conquering power through the armed struggle. The guerrilla was a resistance front and not the basic instrument to conquer revolutionary power, as it had been the case in Cuba. In 1993, at the 8th FARC Conference, they decided to break ranks with the Communist Party. Its leader, Manuel Marulanda, took over the leadership of that Party?s guerrillas which had always excelled in their narrow sectarianism when admitting combatants as well as in their strong and compartmented commanding methods. Marulanda, a man with a remarkable natural talent and a leader?s gift, did not have the opportunity to study when he was young. It is said that he had only completed the 5th grade of grammar school. He conceived a long and extended struggle; I disagreed with this point of view. But, I never had the chance to talk with him. The FARC became considerable strong with over 10 thousand combatants. Many had been born during the war and had known nothing else. Other leftist organizations rivaled the FARC in the struggle. By then the Colombian territory had become the largest source of cocaine production in the world. Then, extreme violence, kidnappings, taxes and demands from the drug producers became widespread. The paramilitary forces, armed by the oligarchy, drew basically from the great amount of men enlisted in the country?s armed forces who were discharged from duty every year without a secure job. These created in Colombia a very complex situation with only one way out: real peace, albeit remote and difficult as many other goals Humanity have set itself. This is the option that, for three decades, Cuba has advocated for that nation. While our journalists meeting in their 8th Congress debated on the new technologies of information, the principles and ethic of social communicators, I meditated on the abovementioned developments. I have expressed, very clearly, our position in favor of peace in Colombia; but, we are neither in favor of foreign military intervention nor of the policy of force that the United States intends to impose at all costs on that long-suffering and industrious people. I have honestly and strongly criticized the objectively cruel methods of kidnapping and retaining prisoners under the conditions of the jungle. But I am not suggesting that anyone laid down their arms, when everyone who did so in the last 50 years did not survive to see peace. If I dared suggest anything to the FARC guerrillas that would simply be that they declare, by any means possible to the International Red Cross, their willingness to release the hostages and prisoners they are still holding, without any precondition. I do not intend to be heard; it is simply my duty to say what I think. Anything else would only serve to reward disloyalty and treason. I will never support the pax romana that the empire tries to impose on Latin America. Fidel Castro Ruz July 5, 2008 8:12 p.m. ========================================= WALTER LIPPMANN Los Angeles, California Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/ "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo" ========================================= From lnp3 at panix.com Sun Jul 6 07:31:07 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2008 09:31:07 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Letter to Desmond Tutu concerning President Robert Mugabe In-Reply-To: <000401c8df26$1e4f1670$0600a8c0@new1501> References: <000401c8df26$1e4f1670$0600a8c0@new1501> Message-ID: <20080706133115.9EEEED51F@mailbackend.panix.com> >Letter to Desmond Tutu concerning President Robert Mugabe >Lloyd Whitefield BUTLER, Jr. > > >http://www.talkzimbabwe.com/news/128/ARTICLE/2103/2008-04-11.html Butler makes some useful points about Tutu undermining his credibility by co-writing a letter with Albright but ends his article on an odd note: --- Is the One Person One Vote Divisive? The two most powerful militarized countries in the world are America and Great Britain. Both war-makers promote and forcefully feed nations the "One Man One Vote" theoretical concept of electing a Head of State. Neither US nor UK utilized the "One Person One Vote" system to elect their Head of State. Great Britain is a modernized medieval constitutional monarchy. Elizabeth II is the Queen regnant of sixteen independent states and their overseas territories and dependencies. The Queen has ruled 56 years and Mugabe of Zimbabwe 27 years. The Queen rules Britain by Royal Prerogative not a One Person One Vote system. The United States Electoral College is a term used to describe the 538 Presidential electors who meet every four years to cast the official votes for President and Vice President of the United States. The President of United States of America is elected by the Electoral College not through a One Person One Vote system. Why then do US and UK insist that other countries adopt the mob rule principle of One Person One Vote to elect their Head of State? Answer: it creates chaos. Historical governments and kingdoms in Africa were governed by a Council of Elders or Chiefs when electing their head of state. Archbishop Tutu, please reconsider past statements involving nations imposing their wills on others to solve problems when their past records speak to the contrary. When Archbishop Tutu are you going to commend the people of Zimbabwe for their civilized example in maintaining peace, harmony, and respect for one another during difficult and trying times? --- Why would one equate "one person, one vote" with mob rule? The suggestion that Mugabe is carrying on in the tradition of historical governments and kingdoms in Africa governed by a council of elders or chiefs really points to the heavy hand of paternalism that has led to Zimbabwe's current impasse. From elishastephens at hotmail.com Sun Jul 6 07:41:23 2008 From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens) Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2008 06:41:23 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Their Morals and Ours Message-ID: For those interested in exploring these questions further, last night I watched the fascinating film "Terror's Advocate," about French lawyer Jacques Verg?s and his defense of Algerian and Palestinian (and many other) "terrorists." Well worth watching. More extensive comments and links: http://lefti.blogspot.com/2008_07_01_archive.html#6393421443055486136 _________________________________________________________________ The i?m Talkaton. Can 30-days of conversation change the world? http://www.imtalkathon.com/?source=EML_WLH_Talkathon_ChangeWorld From lnp3 at panix.com Sun Jul 6 08:00:51 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2008 10:00:51 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Their Morals and Ours In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20080706140049.2031E14496@mailbackend.panix.com> >For those interested in exploring these questions further, last >night I watched >the fascinating film "Terror's Advocate," about French lawyer >Jacques Verg?s and >his defense of Algerian and Palestinian (and many other) "terrorists." Well >worth watching. > >More extensive comments and links: > http://lefti.blogspot.com/2008_07_01_archive.html#6393421443055486136 Here was my take: The Terror's Advocate A documentary on French lawyer Jacques Verg?s, who is that country's version of Ramsey Clark but even more defiant in his willingness to stand up to the warmongering pieties of people like Bernard Kouchner. Verg?s, a WWII veteran, was born to a French father who was serving as a diplomat on R?union island and a Vietnamese mother. He became a lawyer after the war and defended Djamila Bouhired, the woman who was depicted blowing up the Algiers caf? in Pontecorvo's movie. They later married and had two children. Verg?s, no exemplary as a human being, abandoned his family and returned to Paris, where he began practicing law after a 7 year "disappearance" and on the same basis as years past. He agreed to defend some of the imperialist world's most hated enemies, from Slobodan Milosevic to Saddam Hussein. He even decided to defend Klaus Barbie, but on a completely unexpected basis. Rather than trying to prove his innocence, he turned the tables on the prosecution, pointing out that Barbie did nothing different in France than they did in Algeria. One of director Barbet Schroeder's main goals is to prove that Verg?s is some kind of crypto-Nazi. Not only is the defense of Barbie held against him, there is an amalgam made with Francois Genoud, a Nazi sympathizer who financed Barbie's defense as well as donating money to Palestinian resistance groups that Verg?s was defending in court. Basically, Schroeder has made a film that is consistent with the "Islamofascism" narrative spun out by Paul Berman, Christopher Hitchens and others. What redeems this film is Verg?s ample opportunity to make his own case, which is far more convincing than his detractors. In an interview with Schroeder that can be read on the film's website, the director states that he initially saw the world like Verg?s but eventually had a change of heart: "I felt very close to the Algerian cause, but shortly after independence, Ben Bella made a speech saying that, now, they were going to take care of Israel and I was shocked. At that time, I knew a lot about the Holocaust, and nothing about the Palestinian cause, and for me it was a crushing disappointment, seeing this great struggle ending up in one country's waging war against another." I would say that Schroeder still knows nothing about the Palestinian cause. "The Terror's Advocate" is now available in DVD. From acpollack2 at gmail.com Sun Jul 6 08:03:38 2008 From: acpollack2 at gmail.com (Andrew Pollack) Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2008 10:03:38 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Healthcare Follies Message-ID: <2fa1449b0807060703o5e86b725kb1f3cdff20d035d3@mail.gmail.com> Michael, you make a lot of great points. One note on Coase: I would argue that the VA system -- and other integrated systems, including Kaiser at its best here, and socialized medicine systems from Cuba to the UK -- show that transaction costs can also be minimized by expanding the boundaries of the firm, and thus limiting needless transactions between different components of them that are necessary when they are freestanding economic actors, whether patients, clinicians or administrators. Which brings us back to the question of socialized medicine that you said at the start of your speech you wouldn't deal with. By the way, the latest scheme to bring market mechanisms to healthcare -- "Pay For Performance" -- is an unwieldy, Rube Goldberg-like contraption that grafts on incentives to a select group of hospital and physician processes and outcomes. Andy P. From dan.dimaggio at gmail.com Sat Jul 5 17:34:12 2008 From: dan.dimaggio at gmail.com (Daniel DiMaggio) Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 19:34:12 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Is Obama's shift to the right meant to lower expectations? Message-ID: Hey, I have been following Obama's rapid move to the right over the last weeks (and yes, I understand he wasn't that far left to begin with). It seems like he is attempting to dampen down the expectations his campaign has aroused even before he is elected. My question is this: Is this a conscious strategy pursued by the U.S. ruling class, who fear that Obama's campaign has raised expectations too high, and want him to use the time between now and November to dampen expectations? Given that the presidential elections are generally the most politicized time in U.S. society, they have a crucial impact on consciousness, and so the ruling elite in this country must fear that things could get out of hand, particularly in a time of economic crisis and an unpopular war, so expectations have to be lowered. Are there historical precedents for this? Obviously there are tons of historical precedents for Democrats moving to the right after sowing up the primary nomination, but I guess I'm asking specifically if there are precedents for using these candidates to dampen down expectations? Hope that makes sense. Or is it more that Obama is following a primarily electoral strategy dictated by the DLC of trying to win over swing voters to insure victory and help the Democrats win more Congressional seats? (We've all seen how well this worked for Kerry and Gore and the Democrats in general ...) What do you all think? Thanks, Dan From lnp3 at panix.com Sun Jul 6 08:24:44 2008 From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect) Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2008 10:24:44 -0400 Subject: [Marxism] Rethinking GDP Message-ID: <20080706142443.0D72B133E0@mailbackend.panix.com> Testimony of Jonathan Rowe Before the United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, Subcommittee on Interstate Commerce, on "Rethinking the Gross Domestic Product as a Measurement of National Strength," March 12, 2008 Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: Let's suppose that the head of a federal agency came before this committee and reported with pride that agency employees had burned 10% more calories in the workplace than they did the year before. Not only that ? they had spent 10% more money too. I have a feeling you would want to know more. What were these employees doing when they burnt those calories? What did they spend that money on? Most important, what were the results? Expenditure is a means not an end; and to assess the health of an agency, or system, or whatever, you need to know what it has accomplished, not just how much motion it has generated and money it has spent. The point seems obvious. Yet Congress does this very thing every day, and usually many times a day, when it talks about this thing called "the economy." The administration and the media do it too. Every time you say that the "economy" is up, or that you want to "stimulate" it, or get it going again, or whatever words you use, this is what you actually are saying. You are urging more expenditure and motion without regard to what that expenditure is and what it might accomplish ? and without regard to what it might crowd out or displace in the process. That term "the economy": what it means, in practice, is the Gross Domestic Product or GDP. It's just a big statistical pot that includes all the money spent in a given period of time. (I'm simplifying but that's the gist.) If the pot is bigger than it was the previous quarter, or year, then you cheer. If it isn't bigger, or bigger enough, then you get Bernanke up here and ask him what the heck is going on. The what of the economy makes no difference in these councils. It never seems to come up. The money in the big pot could be going to cancer treatments or casinos, violent video games or usurious credit card rates. It could go towards the $9 billionor so that Americans spend on gas they burn while they sit in traffic and go nowhere; or the billion plus that goes to drugs such as Ritalin and Prozac that schools are stuffing into kids to keep them quiet in class. The money could be the $20 billion or so that Americans spend on divorce lawyers each year; or the $5 billion on identity theft; or the billions more spent to repair property damage caused by environmental pollution. The money in the pot could betoken social and environmental breakdown ? misery and distress of all kinds. It makes no difference. You don't ask. All you want to know is the total amount, which is the GDP. So long as it is growing then everything is fine. We aren't here today to talk about an obscure technical measure. This isn't stuff for the folks in the back room. We are talking about what you mean when you use that term "the economy." Few words induce such a reverential hush in these halls. Few words are so laden with authority and portent. When you say "the economy" is up then no news is brighter. When you argue that a proposal will help the economy or hurt it, then you have played the ultimate trump card in your polemical decks, bin Laden possibly excepted. As I said it isn't just you. The President does it, the media, the reporters sitting at that table over there. They do it too. How many of them, or of you, asked during the recent debate over the "stimulus" package, exactly what it was that would be stimulated. How many of them say, when Bernanke comes up here to report on the nation's growth, "Hey wait a minute. What exactly are we talking about here?" Doesn't it matter whether it is textbooks or porn magazines, childbirths or treatments for childhood asthma born of bad air? Doesn't it matter whether the expenditure comes from living within our means or from going into financial and ecological debt? Don't we need to know such things before we can say whether the increase in transactions in the pot ? what we call "growth" -- has been good or not? This is not an argument against growth by the way. To be reflexively against growth is as numb-minded as to be reflexively for it. Those are theological positions. I am arguing for an empirical one. Let's find out what is growing, and the effects. Tell us what this growth is, in concrete terms. Then we can begin to say whether it has been good or not. The failure to do this is insane, literally. It is an insanity that is embedded in the political debate, and in media reportage; and it leads to fallacy in many directions. We hear for example that efforts to address climate change will hurt "the economy." Do they mean that if we clean up the air we will spend less money treating asthma in young kids? That Americans will spend fewer billions of dollars on gasoline to sit in traffic jams? That they will spend less on coastal insurance if the sea level stops rising? There is a basic fallacy here. The atmosphere is part of the economy too ? the real economy that is, though not the artificial construct portrayed in the GDP. It does real work, as we would discover quickly if it were to collapse. Yet the GDP does not include this work. If we burn more gas, the expenditure gets added to the GDP. But there is no corresponding subtraction for the toll this burning takes on the thermostatic and buffering functions that the atmosphere provides. (Nor is there a subtraction for the oil we take out of the ground.) Yet if we burn less gas, and thus maintain the crucial functions of the atmosphere, we say "the economy" has suffered, even though the real economy has been enhanced. With families it's the same thing. By the standard of the GDP, the worst families in America are those that actually function as families ? that cook their own meals, take walks after dinner and talk together instead of just farming the kids out to the commercial culture. Cooking at home, talking with kids, talking instead of driving, involve less expenditure of money than do their commercial counterparts. Solid marriages involve less expenditure for counseling and divorce. Thus they are threats to the economy as portrayed in the GDP. By that standard, the best kids are the ones that eat the most junk food and exercise the least, because they will run up the biggest medical bills for obesity and diabetes. This kind of thinking has been guiding the economic policy minds of this country for the last sixty years at least. Is it surprising that the family structure is shaky, real community is in decline, and kids have become Petri dishes of market-related dysfunction and disease? The nation has been driving by a instrument panel that portrays such things as growth and therefore good. It is not accidental that the two major protest movements of recent decades ? environmental and pro-family -- both deal with parts of the real economy that the GDP leaves out and that the commercial culture that embodies it tends to erode or destroy. How did we get to this strange pass, in which up is down and down is up? How did it happen that the nation's economic hero is a terminal cancer patient going through a costly divorce? How is it that Congress talks about stimulating "the economy" when much that actually will be stimulated is the destruction of things it says it cares about on other days? How did the notion of economy become so totally uneconomic? It's a long story, but for the present purpose it probably starts in Ireland in the 1640s. British troops just had repressed another uprising there, and the Cromwell government had devised a final solution to put its Irish problem to rest. The government would remove a significant portion of the populace ? Catholics in particular ? to a remote part of the island. Then it would redistribute their lands to British troops, thus providing compensation to them, and also an occupational presence for the benefit of the government in London. The task of creating an inventory of the lands went to an army surgeon by the name of William Petty. Petty was a quick study, and also a man with an eye for the main chance. He classified much land as marginal that actually was quite good. Then he got himself appointed to the panel that made the distributions, and bestowed much of that land upon himself. Petty's survey was the first known attempt in Western history to create a total inventory of a nation's wealth. It was not done for the well being of the Irish people, but rather to take their lands away from them. It was an instrument of government policy; and this has been true from that time to the present. Governments have sought to catalogue the national wealth for purposes of taxation, confiscation, planning and mobilization in times of war. They have not designed these catalogues to be measures of national wellbeing or of quality of life. full: http://commerce.senate.gov/public/_files/GDPtest1.pdf From elishastephens at hotmail.com Sun Jul 6 08:31:49 2008 From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens) Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2008 07:31:49 -0700 Subject: [Marxism] Is Obama's shift to the right meant to lower expectations? Message-ID: Daniel: "I have been following Obama's rapid move to the right over the last weeks" As Alex Cockburn put it yesterday (http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn07062008.html): The