From jjonas at nic.fi  Sun Feb  1 01:02:43 2009
From: jjonas at nic.fi (Joonas Laine)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 10:02:43 +0200
Subject: [Marxism] Some stats about the US.
In-Reply-To: <641762.49806.qm@web82607.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <641762.49806.qm@web82607.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <49855723.1010708@nic.fi>

Steve Palmer wrote:
> I decided to get some numbers together about the US for an article
> I'm writing and here is an overview. Note that it barely begins to
> look at class/'race' differences within the US:

Class and race, yes, but where's gender..

In 2006, for example, according to the Census Bureau, men made $32,265 a 
year, whereas women made $20,014 a year.

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/p05ar.html


From leninstombblog at googlemail.com  Sun Feb  1 03:13:31 2009
From: leninstombblog at googlemail.com (Lenin's Tomb)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 10:13:31 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Challenging claim UK oil strikes are xenophobic (from
	'Guardian')
In-Reply-To: <0B967A3BB708439CABC9C5134353AACC@office1pc>
References: <0B967A3BB708439CABC9C5134353AACC@office1pc>
Message-ID: <c17d8d380902010213u1e42c286g910769126f36a0af@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 4:09 AM, Fred Feldman <ffeldman at bellatlantic.net>wrote:

> Our flexible friendsThe real theme of these strikes is not xenophobia but
> outrage at UK and EU rules designed to keep labour cheap and weakComments


This is an attractive argument, of course.  It is one that is being pushed
by the TUC, as well as by many on the Labour left, and it is one that I
would very much like to believe was accurate (indeed, until I spoke to a
couple of people who had visited the picket lines, I *did* believe it).  If
it were right, then we would be seeing the first shoots of resistance to the
recession, and it would be an excellent retort to those who said that
British workers were inherently conservative and so on.

However, there are a few things to get right about this strike.  The
central, more or less official, slogan is *British jobs for British
workers*.  This is a slogan that originated with the fascist right.  The
National Front made it a rallying cry during the recessions of the 1970s.
It was appropriated by Gordon Brown in 2007, and it is now being
regurgitated by union shop stewards who are mouthing off about "the
victimisation of the British worker".  Look at all the images of the
strikers, and you will see this slogan, alongside variants such as 'British
Workers 1st', surrounded by a load of union jacks - there isn't a single
socialist slogan, placard or banner.  The only way in which the strike could
win at this time would be if the Italian workers were sacked.  Not all of
those on strike accept the nationalist argument, and there are those who are
trying to move it in a different direction, but it is unfortunately the main
argument of the strikers, who are treating the Italian workers as "scabs" -
this is completely different to the past approach of the unions, which was
to try and form links and solidarity with migrant workers.

It is because of this that the right-wing press and the BNP are salivating
over this action.  BNP activists are crawling all over the picket lines,
much to the alarm of many of the trade unionists who are strongly
anti-fascist.  Now it seems that there is to be a lobby of parliament to
demand "British jobs for British workers".  The most right-wing New Labour
MPs are also trying to make capital out of it (see Frank Field's rancid
polemic here:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1133122/FRANK-FIELD-You-promised-British-jobs-British-workers-Gordon--make-happen.html
).

It is important to bear in mind that the Unite union, where there is a
leadership contest due between Derek Simpson and left-wing challenger Jerry
Hicks, has recently taken a turn toward 'protectionism' in response to the
recession.  Unite's tacit support for this action and (they can't openly
support it because of Tory anti-union laws) could be seen as in part a way
for Simpson to out-manoeuvre his rival, and as a logical corollary of their
current 'protectionist' stance.  But whatever the reason for it, they are
playing with fire.

From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Feb  1 06:53:18 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 08:53:18 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Challenging claim UK oil strikes are xenophobic (from
 'Guardian')
In-Reply-To: <c17d8d380902010213u1e42c286g910769126f36a0af@mail.gmail.com>
References: <0B967A3BB708439CABC9C5134353AACC@office1pc>
	<c17d8d380902010213u1e42c286g910769126f36a0af@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4985A94E.6020007@panix.com>

The Socialist Unity blog is still pushing the line that the strikes are 
not racist: http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=3502


From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Feb  1 06:56:03 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 08:56:03 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] A New Deal under Obama?
Message-ID: <4985A9F3.3040803@panix.com>

http://monthlyreview.org/090201foster-mcchesney.php


From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Feb  1 06:59:53 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 08:59:53 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Renditions to continue (and expand) under Obama
Message-ID: <4985AAD9.5020202@panix.com>

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-rendition1-2009feb01,0,4661244.story
 From the Los Angeles Times
Obama preserves renditions as counter-terrorism tool
The role of the CIA's controversial prisoner-transfer program may 
expand, intelligence experts say.
By Greg Miller

February 1, 2009

Reporting from Washington ? The CIA's secret prisons are being 
shuttered. Harsh interrogation techniques are off-limits. And Guantanamo 
Bay will eventually go back to being a wind-swept naval base on the 
southeastern corner of Cuba.

But even while dismantling these programs, President Obama left intact 
an equally controversial counter-terrorism tool.

Under executive orders issued by Obama recently, the CIA still has 
authority to carry out what are known as renditions, secret abductions 
and transfers of prisoners to countries that cooperate with the United 
States.

Current and former U.S. intelligence officials said that the rendition 
program might be poised to play an expanded role going forward because 
it was the main remaining mechanism -- aside from Predator missile 
strikes -- for taking suspected terrorists off the street.

The rendition program became a source of embarrassment for the CIA, and 
a target of international scorn, as details emerged in recent years of 
botched captures, mistaken identities and allegations that prisoners 
were turned over to countries where they were tortured.

The European Parliament condemned renditions as "an illegal instrument 
used by the United States." Prisoners swept up in the program have sued 
the CIA as well as a Boeing Co. subsidiary accused of working with the 
agency on dozens of rendition flights.

But the Obama administration appears to have determined that the 
rendition program was one component of the Bush administration's war on 
terrorism that it could not afford to discard.

The decision underscores the fact that the battle with Al Qaeda and 
other terrorist groups is far from over and that even if the United 
States is shutting down the prisons, it is not done taking prisoners.

"Obviously you need to preserve some tools -- you still have to go after 
the bad guys," said an Obama administration official, speaking on 
condition of anonymity when discussing the legal reasoning. "The legal 
advisors working on this looked at rendition. It is controversial in 
some circles and kicked up a big storm in Europe. But if done within 
certain parameters, it is an acceptable practice."

One provision in one of Obama?s orders appears to preserve the CIA's 
ability to detain and interrogate terrorism suspects as long as they are 
not held long-term. The little-noticed provision states that the 
instructions to close the CIA's secret prison sites "do not refer to 
facilities used only to hold people on a short-term, transitory basis."

Despite concern about rendition, Obama's prohibition of many other 
counter-terrorism tools could prompt intelligence officers to resort 
more frequently to the "transitory" technique.

The decision to preserve the program did not draw major protests, even 
among human rights groups. Leaders of such organizations attribute that 
to a sense that nations need certain tools to combat terrorism.

"Under limited circumstances, there is a legitimate place" for 
renditions, said Tom Malinowski, the Washington advocacy director for 
Human Rights Watch. "What I heard loud and clear from the president's 
order was that they want to design a system that doesn't result in 
people being sent to foreign dungeons to be tortured -- but that 
designing that system is going to take some time."

Malinowski said he had urged the Obama administration to stipulate that 
prisoners could be transferred only to countries where they would be 
guaranteed a public hearing in an official court. "Producing a prisoner 
before a real court is a key safeguard against torture, abuse and 
disappearance," Malinowski said.

CIA veterans involved in renditions characterized the program as 
important but of limited intelligence-gathering use. It is used mainly 
for terrorism suspects not considered valuable enough for the CIA to 
keep, they said.

"The reason we did interrogations [ourselves] is because renditions for 
the most part weren't very productive," said a former senior CIA 
official who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive 
nature of the subject.

The most valuable intelligence on Al Qaeda came from prisoners who were 
in CIA custody and questioned by agency experts, the official said. Once 
prisoners were turned over to Egypt, Jordan or elsewhere, the agency had 
limited influence over how much intelligence was shared, how prisoners 
were treated and whether they were later released.

"In some ways, [rendition] is the worst option," the former official 
said. "If they are in U.S. hands, you have a lot of checks and balances, 
medics and lawyers. Once you turn them over to another service, you lose 
control."

In his executive order on lawful interrogations, Obama created a task 
force to reexamine renditions to make sure that they "do not result in 
the transfer of individuals to other nations to face torture," or 
otherwise circumvent human rights laws and treaties.

The CIA has long maintained that it does not turn prisoners over to 
other countries without first obtaining assurances that the detainees 
will not be mistreated.

In a 2007 speech, https:// 
www.cia.gov/news-information/speeches-testimony/2007/general-haydens-remarks-at-the-council-on-foreign-relations.html 
"> 
www.cia.gov/news-information/speeches-testimony/2007/general-haydens-remarks-at-the-council-on-foreign-relations.html 
the agency had to make a determination in every case "that it is less, 
rather than more, likely that the individual will be tortured." He added 
that the CIA sought "true assurances" and that "we're not looking to 
shave this 49-51."

Even so, the rendition program became a target of fierce criticism 
during the Bush administration as a series of cases surfaced.

In one of the most notorious instances, a German citizen named Khaled 
Masri was arrested in Macedonia in 2003 and whisked away by the CIA to a 
secret prison in Afghanistan. He was quietly released in Albania five 
months later after the agency determined it had mistaken Masri for an 
associate of the Sept. 11 hijackers.

Masri later described being abducted by "seven or eight men dressed in 
black and wearing black ski masks." He said he was stripped of his 
clothes, placed in a diaper and blindfolded before being taken aboard a 
plane in shackles -- an account that matches other descriptions of 
prisoners captured in the rendition program.

In another prominent case, an Egyptian cleric known as Abu Omar was 
abducted in Italy in 2003 and secretly flown to an Egyptian jail, where 
he said he was tortured. The incident became a major source of 
embarrassment to the CIA when Italian authorities, using cellphone 
records, identified agency operatives involved in the abduction and 
sought to prosecute them.

Defenders of the rendition program point out that it has been an 
effective tool since the early 1990s and was often used to bring 
terrorism suspects to courts in the United States. Among them was Ramzi 
Ahmed Yousef, who was captured in Pakistan and was convicted of helping 
orchestrate the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

Because details on the rendition program are classified, the scale of 
the program has been a subject of wide-ranging speculation.

An exhaustive investigation by the European Union concluded that the CIA 
had operated more than 1,200 flights in European airspace after the 
Sept. 11 attacks.

The implication was that most were rendition-related, with some taking 
suspects to states where they faced torture.

But U.S. intelligence officials contend that the EU report greatly 
exaggerated the scale of the program and that most of the flights 
documented by the Europeans involved moving supplies and CIA personnel, 
not prisoners.

Instead, recent comments by Hayden suggest that the program has been 
used to move no more than a handful of prisoners in recent years and 
that the total is in the "midrange two figures" since the Sept. 11 attacks.

greg.miller at latimes.com


From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Feb  1 07:02:31 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 09:02:31 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Pope promotes pastor who said hurricane was God's
	punishment
Message-ID: <4985AB77.8030105@panix.com>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/01/gerhard-wagner-hurricane-katrina

Pope promotes pastor who said hurricane was God's punishment
New Catholic bishop called Katrina 'divine retribution' for New Orleans' 
permissive sexual attitudes
by Mark Tran

Pope Benedict XVI leaving Rome on his first official visit to the United 
States

Pope Benedict XVI has made another controversial appointment by 
elevating to the position of bishop an Austrian pastor who said 
Hurricane Katrina was God's punishment for homosexuality in New Orleans.

The Vatican yesterday announced that Gerhard Wagner has been appointed 
as auxiliary bishop in Linz, Austria.

Wagner has served as the pastor of a church in the Austrian town of 
Windischgarsten since 1988, and received a doctorate in theology from 
the Gregorian Pontifical University in Rome.

In 2005, the 54-year-old was quoted in a parish newsletter as saying he 
was convinced that the death and destruction caused by Katrina that year 
was "divine retribution" for New Orleans' permissive sexual attitudes 
and tolerance of homosexuality.

Kath.Net, a Catholic news agency in Austria, said the newsletter quoted 
Wagner as saying that Katrina had destroyed not only nightclubs and 
brothels in New Orleans but also abortion clinics.

He first attracted international attention in 2001 when he described JK 
Rowling's best-selling Harry Potter novels as "satanism" and warned 
against the magical spells and formulas used in thenovels.

The Chief Rabbinate of Israel last week broke off official ties with the 
Vatican to protest against the Pope's decision to rehabilitate a bishop 
who once said he did not believe there had been Nazi gas chambers.

British-born Richard Williamson is one of four bishops who are members 
of the Society of Pius X, a traditionalist Catholic order, whose 
excommunication was lifted a week ago.

Williamson, who now lives in Argentina, had claimed in a television 
interview that historical evidence was "hugely against six million 
having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers as a deliberate policy 
of Adolf Hitler ... I believe there were no gas chambers".

Williamson was excommunicated 20 years ago after being consecrated by 
the French archbishop Marcel Lefebvre without papal consent.

The Vatican said it had been unaware of Williamson's views on the 
Holocaust when the decision was made to readmit the group, and the Pope 
quickly distanced himself from the comments and expressed "full and 
indisputable solidarity" with Jews.

However, condemnation from Jewish groups was widespread.

On Thursday, Bishop Bernard Fellay, the superior general of the Society 
of St Pius X, asked for forgiveness from the Pope for the "dramatic 
consequences" of Williamson's comments.

Fellay said he had forbidden Williamson from speaking publicly about any 
historical or political questions and added that his views "don't 
reflect in any way the position of the society".


From farmelantj at juno.com  Sun Feb  1 07:35:35 2009
From: farmelantj at juno.com (Jim Farmelant)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 09:35:35 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] A New Deal under Obama?
Message-ID: <20090201.093535.2572.1.farmelantj@juno.com>

 
On Sun, 01 Feb 2009 08:56:03 -0500 Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> writes:
> http://monthlyreview.org/090201foster-mcchesney.php
> 
> ________________________________________________


Like many of Sweezy's own writings, that piece seems to 
combine a Keynesian economic analysis with a Marxian political analysis.
Sweezy in fact was one of the pioneer Keyensian
economists in the US, right alongside his more
famous colleagues like Paul Samuelson and
J.K. Galbraith (all of whom were BTW students
of the conservative economist Joseph Schumpeter).

In fact as I understand him, his point of view in his earlier work 
(like *The Theory of Capitalist Development*) was that 
Keynesian macroeconomic tools could in principle provide effective 
management for capitalist economies. However, capitalist
ruling classes would never be willing to embrace the complete and 
permanent adoption of Keynesian economic management policies 
because the creation of a permanent ?full-employment? economy 
would necessarily empower labor at the expense of capital, 
which, of course, would be unacceptable to the capitalists. 
Hence, capitalist ruling classes would be most likely to accept 
Keynesian policies in periods of economic crises 
when workers unrest would pose a threat to their rule, 
but they would be resistant to them at other times. 
In this respect, as in some others, Sweezy was influenced 
by Michal Kalecki and also by Joan Robinson.
(The one exception to this would seem to be Nazi
Germany, where big business seemed largely
acquisecent in Hitler's adoption of Keynesian-type
economic policies.  But then again, Hitler had already
smashed the trade unions).

Sweezy?s later views concerning as expressed in 
*Monopoly Capital* for instance suggest that he felt 
that starting with the Second World War and continuing on
in the cold war period, the US ruling class had found ways 
of applying Keynesian economics so as to bolster (rather
than undermine) their own domination. The development of 
military Keynesianism in which the economy was stimulated 
through military spending was one example of this. 
And military Keynesianism, of course, dovetailed with imperialism, 
which was the more traditional method by which capitalist economies 
could overcome tendencies towards underconsumption.

Jim F.
____________________________________________________________
Click here for comprehensive information on stopping unwanted email.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw1bUdxSVbQnUwOHGHx1DTeKUSaXh3BwYma5a18sxGkdjn7Y7/

From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sun Feb  1 08:15:05 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 16:15:05 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] WA Maritime workers pledges boycott of Israeli goods
References: <024401c98438$537e2220$4efea97c@jammo>
Message-ID: <D9F7E62514EF45AD96FD3979D8D6014C@dmsthinkpad>

Thanks for the information,  thanks for the solid work.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "jammo" <ajamieson at vtown.com.au>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2009 7:42 AM
Subject: [Marxism] WA Maritime workers pledges boycott of Israeli goods




From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sun Feb  1 08:37:21 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 16:37:21 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Marx before Minsky
References: <4984D586.8000105@ecst.csuchico.edu>
Message-ID: <36893B18C8694AD2B2EAF48ADB389B07@dmsthinkpad>

Michael,

If this process started around 1972, and I certainly agree that the rate of 
profit for the US peaked in 69-70, and launched the bourgeoisie on their 
great offensive, then what possibly could have delayed its "reckoning"  for 
36 years?

The problem here is that, despite the overall trend of capital, the trend 
itself is punctuated by interruptions, cycles within cycles of contraction 
and expansion.    Overall rates of growth after 1973 do not match the rates 
of growth in the 1945-1969 period, certainly.  However, the 1973-79 rate is 
greater than the post 1981 rate, and the 1992-2001 rate exceeds the 
1981-1991 rate.

In addition there are real increases in capital investment, fixed asset 
accumulation in the 1992-2001 rate which are coincident over the long run 
with increased financialization.

To say capital increasingly reproduced itself along fictitious lines, says 
something, but it doesn't say why the fiction itself falls apart in 2007 as 
opposed to 1990-- it also does not answer why so much more "fictitious" 
capital  -- and I use quotes because ALL capital becomes fictitious when it 
cannot reproduce itself profitably enough-- could be supported.

Some answer-- that this fictitious expansion was supported on the backs of 
the NIE workers in Asia-- China, India, Taiwan, Thailand for example -- with 
the exchange of real goods for "paper," but that basically is a mercantilist 
description and not a Marxist investigation-- as it takes no notice of 
related-party trading between "home" country corporations and subsidiaries 
located in those NIEs; it takes no notice of who actually owns the revenue 
streams involved in that trade.

A friend of mine, pretty well known for his work on fictitious capital, 
argues that capitalism has "been running on empty for forty years."  Well, 
that's a helluva run on empty.  If it's been empty for forty years who can 
we account for the differences in the RPMs?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "michael perelman" <michael at ecst.csuchico.edu>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2009 11:49 PM
Subject: [Marxism] Marx before Minsky


> Previously, I made the case that the financial meltdown was basically a
> delayed response to the severe neglect of investment in plant,
> equipment, and infrastructure. I also explained the cause of this neglect.
>
> http://radicalnotes.com/content/view/73/39/
>



From mikedjyates at msn.com  Sun Feb  1 08:41:01 2009
From: mikedjyates at msn.com (MICHAEL YATES)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 07:41:01 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] letter to the New York TImes public editor
Message-ID: <COL107-W7284FDCFB4B5355488240EBBC40@phx.gbl>


Here is a letter I sent to the Times public editor.  Michael Perelman sent me the 
Times article on Braddock, PA.  Michael Yates
 
Dear Mr. Hoyt:
 
On January 31, the Times published an article by David Streitfeld on the town
of Braddock, PA. (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/01/us/01braddock.html?pagewanted=2&ref=us).This article, titled "Rock Bottom for Decades, But Showing Signs of Life,"
 is remarkably similar to one published in Monthly Review's December issue
by Jim Straub--"Braddock, Pennsylvania: Out of the Furnace and into the Fire."  Virtually everything in the
Straub article is in Streitfeld's.  Given that the Monthly Review article has gotten a good deal
of publicity, even praised on Jame's Wolcott's Vanity Fair blog (December 18, 2008).
I'd bet that Mr. Streitfeld got the idea for a Braddock piece from Straub and
used Straub's article as a template for his.  Yet he gave no credit to Straub or 
Monthly Review.  Straub did the original work and your journalist piggy-backed on it without 
telling readers what he had done.  I am from western Pennsylvania  and can assure you that 
unless Streitfeld is from around there too, he would not know much about Braddock.
 
The person who informed me of your Braddock piece remarked that newspapers are becoming more
like blogs.  Original research is a thing of the past.  Copying is in.
 
Sincerely yours,
 
Michael Yates, Associate Editor of Monthly Review and Editorial Director of Montlhy Review Press.
 
 
 

From davidrail68 at yahoo.com  Sun Feb  1 08:58:41 2009
From: davidrail68 at yahoo.com (David Walsh)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 07:58:41 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] google
Message-ID: <660477.70095.qm@web45312.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

When I Googled "Algerian Revolution" it stopped me the same way as people are explaining. -- Dave Walsh


      

From farmelantj at juno.com  Sun Feb  1 09:16:41 2009
From: farmelantj at juno.com (Jim Farmelant)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 11:16:41 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] letter to the New York TImes public editor
Message-ID: <20090201.111642.4212.0.farmelantj@juno.com>

 
On Sun, 1 Feb 2009 07:41:01 -0800 MICHAEL YATES <mikedjyates at msn.com>
writes:
> 
>
>  
> The person who informed me of your Braddock piece remarked that 
> newspapers are becoming more
> like blogs.  Original research is a thing of the past.  Copying is 
> in.

Which raises issues concerning what directions we expect
to see the newspaper business to take in the near
future.  It seems apparent that the traditional business
models that newspapers have followed no longer seem
viable in the Internet age.  Most leading newspapers
have cut their staffs to the bone and then some.
Most of those papers that had foreign bureaus have
closed them.  I suspect that to the extent that newspapers
have a future, they will be more like news aggregators,
who will be purchasing their reporting from freelancers
or perhaps from consortitiums of independent journalists,
rather than maintaining large staffs of reporters and
writers.  Of course that way, newspapers would have
less to do with unions.

Jim F.

>  
> Sincerely yours,
>  
> Michael Yates, Associate Editor of Monthly Review and Editorial 
> Director of Montlhy Review Press.
>  
>  
>  
> 
____________________________________________________________
Become a Photographer and earn up to $150/ hour. Click here.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw3h2M8RgH0t4NV75FGc5I0FHzMlsPOYFUJ1KABLkec7iYm8v/


From michael at ecst.csuchico.edu  Sun Feb  1 09:50:12 2009
From: michael at ecst.csuchico.edu (Michael Perelman)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 08:50:12 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Marx before Minsky
In-Reply-To: <36893B18C8694AD2B2EAF48ADB389B07@dmsthinkpad>
References: <4984D586.8000105@ecst.csuchico.edu>
	<36893B18C8694AD2B2EAF48ADB389B07@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <20090201165012.GB8336@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu>

Artesian's comment is very good.  One hint of an answer comes from Marx, who wrote 
something like -- at some point some trivial factor (he uses the metaphor of a feather) can 
upset the balance on a scale.

Of course, the financialization was aided by people here & abroad.

On Sun, Feb 01, 2009 at 04:37:21PM +0100, S. Artesian wrote:
> Michael,
> 
> If this process started around 1972, and I certainly agree that the rate of 
> profit for the US peaked in 69-70, and launched the bourgeoisie on their 
> great offensive, then what possibly could have delayed its "reckoning"  for 
> 36 years?
> 
> The problem here is that, despite the overall trend of capital, the trend 
> itself is punctuated by interruptions, cycles within cycles of contraction 
> and expansion.    Overall rates of growth after 1973 do not match the rates 
> of growth in the 1945-1969 period, certainly.  However, the 1973-79 rate is 
> greater than the post 1981 rate, and the 1992-2001 rate exceeds the 
> 1981-1991 rate.
> 
> In addition there are real increases in capital investment, fixed asset 
> accumulation in the 1992-2001 rate which are coincident over the long run 
> with increased financialization.
> 
> To say capital increasingly reproduced itself along fictitious lines, says 
> something, but it doesn't say why the fiction itself falls apart in 2007 as 
> opposed to 1990-- it also does not answer why so much more "fictitious" 
> capital  -- and I use quotes because ALL capital becomes fictitious when it 
> cannot reproduce itself profitably enough-- could be supported.
> 
> Some answer-- that this fictitious expansion was supported on the backs of 
> the NIE workers in Asia-- China, India, Taiwan, Thailand for example -- with 
> the exchange of real goods for "paper," but that basically is a mercantilist 
> description and not a Marxist investigation-- as it takes no notice of 
> related-party trading between "home" country corporations and subsidiaries 
> located in those NIEs; it takes no notice of who actually owns the revenue 
> streams involved in that trade.
> 
> A friend of mine, pretty well known for his work on fictitious capital, 
> argues that capitalism has "been running on empty for forty years."  Well, 
> that's a helluva run on empty.  If it's been empty for forty years who can 
> we account for the differences in the RPMs?
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "michael perelman" <michael at ecst.csuchico.edu>
> To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
> Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2009 11:49 PM
> Subject: [Marxism] Marx before Minsky
> 
> 
> > Previously, I made the case that the financial meltdown was basically a
> > delayed response to the severe neglect of investment in plant,
> > equipment, and infrastructure. I also explained the cause of this neglect.
> >
> > http://radicalnotes.com/content/view/73/39/
> >
> 
> 
> ________________________________________________
> 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 pieinsky at igc.org  Sun Feb  1 10:25:27 2009
From: pieinsky at igc.org (Jay Moore)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 12:25:27 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
Message-ID: <4985DB07.3070100@igc.org>

Anybody out there have a handle on the spreading (via the Internet) wave 
of strikes among skilled workers in Britain?  On the surface it looks 
like xenophobia, which is definitely one route things will go in during 
an economic crisis.  But this article in "The Times" makes it seem more 
complicated.  One worker is quoted saying that they are directing their 
efforts against foreign corporations and not foreign workers per se.  
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article5622371.ece  
I wonder what any British comrades on this List have to say.  What 
positions are being taken by the British Marxist groups like the SWP and 
whatever else there is?

jay
www.jaysleftist.info



From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Sun Feb  1 11:06:07 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 10:06:07 -0800
Subject: [Marxism]  British Wildcat Strike Wave?
Message-ID: <4985E48F.2080803@gmail.com>

It is very complicated an issue for the left.

This is not, strictly speaking, a strike against "immigrants". It's more 
a strike, it seems, against "migrants". In the sense that these are 
workers brought into UK oil refineries for a specific time and 
job...like a guest worker program in the US but industrial in nature.

One of the larger issues is that the EU rules allows for the total open 
borderish transfer of workers from any low paying EU country to any 
higher-paying one. The huge boom in the British economy over the last 15 
years or so has given rise to a large increase in outright immigration 
(500,000 Poles, for example, living in Britain) taking lower paying 
industrial jobs, and breeding a corresponding rise in anti-immigrant 
xenophobia.

In this case, the issue is why were not British workers hired from this 
contract job, why bring in workers from Italy? Much contradictory 
information is flying around. I believe the Times article notes that the 
workers are "paid the same" as the workers at the refinery but mentions 
no payments in terms of benefits and other items that would be in a 
standard union contract. Clearly this is also a form of union busting as 
members of British building trades were therefor *excluded* from 
consideration of employment by the Italian contractor.

The British SWP has a half-way decent article on this but it sorely 
lacking in serious analysis IMO. European immigration and work rules 
should be a discussion item here.

David


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sun Feb  1 11:23:44 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 19:23:44 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
References: <4985E48F.2080803@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <305E545760AB4717885C02BE1859AD28@dmsthinkpad>

Yes it's complicated, but we should have no wavering, no equivocation about
confronting head-on the racist characteristics, the national chauvinism
transparently evident in these UK strikes.  It exists, it is the "simple"
and "safe" way of  protesting the worsening of the economy--  and it must be
identified for what it is to be effectively defeated.

Britain, if I recall correctly, has a tiered structure regarding immigrant
workers, that affords them wage protection but not access to the full range
of benefits.

The migrant workers  are brought in to lower overall compensation costs.
The way to oppose that is not in establishing national preferences or
restricting immigration, but in demanding immediate legalization, full wages
and benefits for all migrant workers, and compulsory unionization, and
ending the bailout programs that subsidize the British finanical and
corporate ruling class.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "nada" <dwaltersMIA at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2009 7:06 PM
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?




From lajany_otum at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Feb  1 11:39:37 2009
From: lajany_otum at yahoo.co.uk (Lajany Otum)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 18:39:37 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Marxism] Obama 'Accessory' To War Crimes If No Prosecution
Message-ID: <772321.35048.qm@web27402.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>



>
> What happened in your "old country" is irrelevant in terms of the US.
> The UN has always functioned as a kind of steering committee of those
> major powers and when something needs to be done that directly crosses
> the national interests of one of those superpowers, it doesn't follow
> through.  The UN has almost never addressed any of these questions
> when doing so might cross the US interests.
> 
> To have them "clucking" or doing much of anything about the conduct of
> US officials in connections with "war crimes" is something new.  It's
> impact remains unclear, but international public opinion was a major
> consideration in the civil right legislation.
>

The UN does not function as "steering committee" with autonomy to form 
important decisions, but rather lends an after the fact veneer of legality to 
decisions that have already been made elsewhere, i.e. by Washington with 
a greater or lesser degree of support from the subordinate powers of 
Western Europe and Japan. Analysis of any major incident in which the 
UN has played a significant role during the last sixty years will bear this out. 
To pick two examples, the sanctions regime against Iraq under the previous 
Clinton administration, nor the murder of Lumumba in the Congo were, 
though carried out under the banner of the UN, were cooked up in Washington 
and London, and Washington and Brussels respectively, quite independently 
of the UN, which simply functioned as an handy legal cover for the banditry 
by the imperialist powers in either case. 

This does not mean of course that conscionable individuals in the UN 
structure have not spoken out against the policies of the imperialist powers,
but it is a gross and seemingly wilful misinterpretation of the facts to claim
that such officials are able to influence the conduct and behaviour of Washington 
more than they can the conduct of local notables who control African states such 
as the one I used to live in. I mean, how many UN officials have had to resign or 
been sidelined after criticising Botswana or Burundi, but where is Hans von 
Sponeck today? My point however, was that I am rather used to hearing people 
in such places express illusions in the autonomy and civilising function of the 
UN, but find it rather surprising to hear the same expressed here in relation to 
the ability of UN officials to influence imperialist powers.

Which brings me to the question of war crimes and torture. These are 
essential tools for the maintenance the position of Washington and its 
subordinate powers in the world system and, not withstanding the recently
reshuffled management, it is virtually guaranteed than neither war crimes nor 
torture will effectively criminalised without sustained pressure from mass 
movements of the sort that brought an end to US war crimes in Vietnam or 
forced the US to pass civil rights legislation and for which wishful thinking
about the UN makes a more or less worthless substitute. 

At "best" we should expect torture by the new regime to be carried out 
under more effective CIA wraps, or through outsourcing arrangements with the 
various goons and thugs that are allied with the US in the third world. But 
it is delusional to think that the US is going to allow its conduct, or the 
conduct of its officials, to be subject to scrutiny under "international law". 

As Richard Nixon might have said, when the US does it, that means it 
isn't illegal. 

Lajany Otum


      

From cdb1003 at prodigy.net  Sun Feb  1 11:42:23 2009
From: cdb1003 at prodigy.net (Charles Brown)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 10:42:23 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Evidence that poverty and restricted consumption cause
	crisis
Message-ID: <346043.2345.qm@web180112.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>


?
?



if (typeof YAHOO == "undefined") {
 var YAHOO = {};
}
YAHOO.Shortcuts = YAHOO.Shortcuts || {};
YAHOO.Shortcuts.hasSensitiveText = true;
YAHOO.Shortcuts.sensitivityType = ["adult"];
YAHOO.Shortcuts.doUlt = false;
YAHOO.Shortcuts.location = "us";
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_id = 0;
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_type = "";
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_title = "Evidence that poverty and restricted consumption cause crisis";
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_publish_date = "";
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_author = "cdb1003 at prodigy.net";
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_url = "";
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_tags = "";
YAHOO.Shortcuts.document_language = "english";
YAHOO.Shortcuts.annotationSet = {
"lw_1233513473_0": {
"text": "http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/society/society_general/335869.html",
"extended": 0,
"startchar": 484,
"endchar": 545,
"start": 484,
"end": 545,
"extendedFrom": "",
"predictedCategory": "",
"predictionProbability": "0",
"weight": 1,
"relScore": 0,
"type": ["shortcuts:/us/instance/identifier/hyperlink/http"],
"category": ["IDENTIFIER"],
"wikiId": "",
"relatedWikiIds": [],
"relatedEntities": [],
"showOnClick": [],
"context": "December 2008, and published on 22 January 2009 in Hankyoreh, http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/society/society_general/335869.html )       Brenner responds to a question:   -clip-   JEONG How would you",
"metaData": {
"linkHref": "http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/society/society_general/335869.html",
"linkProtocol": "http",
"linkRel": "nofollow",
"linkTarget": "_blank",
"visible": "true"
}
 },
"lw_1233513473_1": {
"text": "rate of return on capital",
"extended": 0,
"startchar": 864,
"endchar": 888,
"start": 868,
"end": 892,
"extendedFrom": "rate of return",
"predictedCategory": "",
"predictionProbability": "0",
"weight": 0.861423,
"relScore": 5.31561,
"type": ["shortcuts:/concept"],
"category": ["CONCEPT"],
"wikiId": "",
"relatedWikiIds": [],
"relatedEntities": [],
"showOnClick": [],
"context": "for it is a deep, and lasting, decline of the rate of return on capital investment since the end of the 1960s. The failure of",
"metaData": {
"visible": "false"
}
 },
"lw_1233513473_2": {
"text": "Japan",
"extended": 0,
"startchar": 1344,
"endchar": 1348,
"start": 1348,
"end": 1352,
"extendedFrom": "",
"predictedCategory": "PLACE",
"predictionProbability": "0.968587",
"weight": 0.223559,
"relScore": 2.06677,
"type": ["shortcuts:/us/instance/place/destination", "shortcuts:/us/instance/place/jp/country"],
"category": ["PLACE"],
"wikiId": "Japan",
"relatedWikiIds": ["Australia", "Canada", "China", "Europe", "Germany", "India", "Singapore", "South_Korea", "Taiwan", "Tokyo"],
"relatedEntities": ["australia", "beijing", "canada", "china", "europe", "germany", "hong kong", "singapore", "tibet", "tokyo", ],
"showOnClick": [],
"context": "one-after- another new manufacturing power entered the world market--Germany and Japan, the northeast Asian NICS, the southeast Asian Tigers, and, finally",
"metaData": {
"geoArea": "373617",
"geoCountry": "Japan",
"geoIsoCountryCode": "JP",
"geoLocation": "(139.83829, 37.487598)",
"geoName": "Japan",
"geoPlaceType": "Country",
"type": "shortcuts:/us/instance/place/jp/country",
"visible": "false"
}
 },
"lw_1233513473_3": {
"text": "aggregate demand",
"extended": 0,
"startchar": 2440,
"endchar": 2455,
"start": 2446,
"end": 2461,
"extendedFrom": "",
"predictedCategory": "",
"predictionProbability": "0",
"weight": 0.596648,
"relScore": 5.96467,
"type": ["shortcuts:/concept"],
"category": ["CONCEPT"],
"wikiId": "Aggregate_demand",
"relatedWikiIds": [],
"relatedEntities": [],
"showOnClick": [],
"context": "cutbacks in spending has been a long term problem of aggregate demand. The persistent weakness of aggregate demand has been the immediate",
"metaData": {
"visible": "false"
}
 }
};
YAHOO.Shortcuts.headerID = "c842a8cc61e54807654ef6dab580e4fa";










In an Interview with Robert Brenner on the Current Crisis, 

(Conducted by Seongjin Jeong on 22 December 2008, and published on 22 January 2009 in Hankyoreh, http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/society/society_general/335869.html )
?
Brenner responds to a question:


-clip-


JEONG How would you explain the long-term weakening of the real economy since 1973, what you call in your work ?the long downturn??

BRENNER What mainly accounts for it is a deep, and lasting, decline of the rate of return on capital investment since the end of the 1960s. The failure of the rate of profit to recover is all the more remarkable, in view of the huge drop-off in the growth of real wages over the period. The main cause, though not the only cause, of the decline in the rate of profit has been a persistent tendency to over-capacity in global manufacturing industries. What happened was that one-after- another new manufacturing power entered the world market--Germany and Japan, the northeast Asian NICS, the southeast Asian Tigers, and, finally, the Chinese Leviathan. These later-developing economies produced the same goods that were already being produced by the earlier developers, only cheaper. The result was too much supply compared to demand in one industry after another, and this forced down prices and in that way profits. The corporations that experienced the squeeze on
 their profits did not, moreover, meekly leave their industries. They tried to hold their place by falling back on their capacity for innovation, speeding up investment in new technologies. But of course this only made over-capacity worse. Due to the fall in their rate of return, capitalists were getting smaller surpluses from their investments. They therefore had no choice but to slow down the growth of plant and equipment and employment. At the same time, in order to restore profitability, they held down employees? compensation, while governments reduced the growth of social expenditures. But the consequence of all these cutbacks in spending has been a long term problem of aggregate demand. The persistent weakness of aggregate demand has been the immediate source of the economy?s long term weakness.



?
?

> ^^^^^

?CB:The concomitance of the 
?
decline in the rate of profit and
?real wages?would?be remarkable
?to Brenner?only?
to the extent that?he's an?
"overproductionist "?.?
?"Poverty and restricted 
consumptionists"?
expect a?drop off in wages 
to cause a decline
?in the rate of profit. In the 
last 4 sentences , he
does?see cause?in drop in demand.

From david at miradoiro.com  Sun Feb  1 11:59:20 2009
From: david at miradoiro.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?David_Pic=F3n_=C1lvarez?=)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 19:59:20 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
References: <4985E48F.2080803@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <79C5AC05FE4249D3BE01A150AB2D1BF1@Nautilus>

European immigration policy... It's hard to judge what's going on in the UK
from outside. Although I studied there for some time, I never worked there
and I have no idea how things work in regards collective bargaining
agreements, unionization, etc. Here in Spain, at least by law, a worker from
the EU should have the same rights and duties as a worker from Spain. I
think it was recently that the moratorium on the free movement of workers
from some of the new EU member states was lifted here, so it should apply to
all member states now. However, it's probably the case that certain EU
workers may be cheaper, because they may not be as willing to assert their
rights. To this the obvious answer is to try to stand in solidarity with
foreign workers, it's something that, even from a self-interested viewpoint,
should be clear enough.

It's also the case that many workers commute from Portugal, especially in
construction and the like (although with the housing crisis this is probably
no longer as common). This stuff has already been fought over in some cases,
I recommend for interested readers to check out the arduous legislative
journey of the Directive on Services in the Internal Market, better known by
some as Bolkestein Directive:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_on_services_in_the_internal_market

This Wikipedia article is not very good, by the way, but in part because it 
isn't well finished it presents the picture of a directive which didn't have 
an easy process. It's ironic that Gordon Brown, who calls now for British 
jobs for British workers, or so we hear, strongly supported the enactment of 
this instrument back in the day...

--David.



From david at miradoiro.com  Sun Feb  1 12:02:51 2009
From: david at miradoiro.com (David Picon Alvarez)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 20:02:51 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Evidence that poverty and restricted consumption
	causecrisis
References: <346043.2345.qm@web180112.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <8A0519325B76487999E5EA67467DF468@Nautilus>

Goodness, so it looks like the semantic web moves ahead...

I got quite an interesting tag soup. Am I the only one?
--David.



From youcanemailbenhere at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Feb  1 12:05:03 2009
From: youcanemailbenhere at yahoo.co.uk (Ben Ben)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 19:05:03 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Marxism] New film: Zizek, Hardt, Judith Butler et al
Message-ID: <619052.70698.qm@web26303.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>

http://www.zeitgeistfilms.com/film.php?directoryname=examinedlife


      


From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Feb  1 12:09:17 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 14:09:17 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] New film: Zizek, Hardt, Judith Butler et al
In-Reply-To: <619052.70698.qm@web26303.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
References: <619052.70698.qm@web26303.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4985F35D.6070001@panix.com>

Ben Ben wrote:
> http://www.zeitgeistfilms.com/film.php?directoryname=examinedlife
> 
>

I have a screener of this that I plan to review very soon.


From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Sun Feb  1 12:44:41 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 14:44:41 -0500
Subject: [Marxism]  British Wildcat Strike Wave?
Message-ID: <E13EB9493C414E52A2AD4737F72578A3@office1pc>

Thank you, David, for your thoughts, which parallel how I feel about it as
well. I did not send in the item by Milne because I was sure the strike
should be supported, but because, having read a few short things on the
UK-left list, I suspect the predominant left response here is too knee-jerk.

Do supporters of immigrant rights from a working class/oppressed nationality
point of view favor the bracero program, for example, which is possible only
because borders aren't open. I have always thought it was a completely
antilabor operation, aimed at unionization in the fields, canning factories,
and so on. The bracero program is a product of the closed borders and
basically creates a situation, or at least tries to, where these workers
have no bargaining power.

We also do not advocate a complete free market for labor. Unions have been
directed against this forever. We are not necessarily opposed to union
hiring halls for instance.

This is a divide-and-rule operation in the most fundamental sense but
calling these workers who are protesting "racists" on the basis of the
available information seems like a serious and probably harmful stretch. 

Of course the slogans tend to be nationalist. These are of course workers
from a privileged imperialist state. But they are being radically screwed IN
FACT. To describe them as simply trying to oppress others, which is what the
racist-xenophobic claim implies, doesn't strike me as quite capturing the
reality. 

The fascists are all over the place on this one.  Get used to it. They are
going to be paying a lot more attention to workers' struggles in imperialist
countries in the next few years, and judging strikes to be reactionary
bercause they attract the National Front will not be the right criterion.

We would not be opposed to the labor protests if these workers had been
brought in to break a strike, I think, even if the strikers' national
composition was piss-poor. So what should be our stance here, and how should
it be expressed. This is the beginning of challenges we will face again and
again.
Fred Feldman




From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Sun Feb  1 13:13:40 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 12:13:40 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
Message-ID: <49860274.3080202@gmail.com>

Good discussion. Obviously we have to wait for more European comrades to 
chime in here. It is complex and not altogether clear.

S. Artesian's comments run more or less along the lines of my thoughts 
as a..."knee jerk"reaction to all this (to use Fred's description, per 
haps). But what S. Artesian states is not at all in contradiction to 
Fred's POV on this. The only thing, right now, I would disagree with 
Fred on is "how to apply it here". By that he means the US and it's a 
different situation to a large degree.

First, Italians are not an "oppressed" nationality. In fact, the 
internal "oppressed nationality" doesn't really come in here unless we 
want to talk about the Irish, and, in some minds, the Scots, Welsh and 
even the Cornish. The "oppressed" (yes, ironic quotes here in this case) 
walked out WITH their English counterparts during this refinery strike. 
This is only a small part of why this is not the same or comparable 
*specifically* with the US (the overall question of immigration is), 
and, it's also about migrant vs immigrant labor, which is different, I 
think.

The point about compulsory unionization is a good demand to make, but 
doesn't address the underlying xenophobia that is caused by the result 
of increasingly higher unemployment among Britain's skilled trades.

A few things should be pointed out: The Conservatives and their Tory 
press seem unanimous in their outlook: "Support the Strikers". Now, this 
IMHO, is NOT a reason NOT to support the strikes, but raises some 
interesting questions about where the ruling class in the UK sees this 
issue or, rather, a wing OF the ruling class, which by and large are 
supporters of New Labour for obvious reasons.

A small point on the US. The Bracero program was not *necessarily* 
designed to thwart unionization at canneries and in the fields. Many 
canneries were already unionized and this did not result in a 
de-unionization campaign. There were no unionized agricultural workers 
in the US during the 1950s outside of Hawaii. It was, IMO, a capitalist 
design to *assure* a compliant labor force and one paid at a lower 
standard than even the already living-standard deprived non-Bracero 
workers already working on most US farms. Just a thought.

David


From jjonas at nic.fi  Sun Feb  1 13:38:24 2009
From: jjonas at nic.fi (Joonas Laine)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 22:38:24 +0200
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
In-Reply-To: <49860274.3080202@gmail.com>
References: <49860274.3080202@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <49860840.6060707@nic.fi>

nada wrote:
> Good discussion. Obviously we have to wait for more European comrades to 
> chime in here. It is complex and not altogether clear.

I can't write anything right now, but I'll get back in a few days' time 
(maybe already on Monday afternoon). What I will write deals with recent 
EC court rulings on labour issues concerning Sweden/Latvia and 
Finland/Estonia.


From giobon at comcast.net  Sun Feb  1 13:58:38 2009
From: giobon at comcast.net (Bonnie Weinstein)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 12:58:38 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Banishment
In-Reply-To: <660477.70095.qm@web45312.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <660477.70095.qm@web45312.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <A41037F1-8F50-4DE6-AA15-46070E26948C@comcast.net>

I am appalled at the banishment of Walter Lippmann from Marxmail.  
Certainly, I do not support his appraisal of Obama by any stretch of  
the imagination. However, banishment from the list is not just  
ridiculous, it's totally against all democratic norms. Marxmail is  
not a political party. And, in fact, I have the same objections to  
Green Party candidates as I do to Obama!

So, therefore, probably a majority of Marxmail subscribers should be  
banished based on my criteria if I were to react as Louis has. But  
the purpose of the list-serve is to be able to have a dialogue--even  
with those  you disagree with on some or even many issues.

I am sorry I did not speak out about this earlier. I have been  
swamped with work. But I did and do rely on Walter's extensive Cuba  
reporting.

Walter belongs back on the list and this "banishment" stuff must end  
now.

Comradely,

Bonnie Weinstein, SocialistViewpoint.org


From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Sun Feb  1 14:21:40 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 16:21:40 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Anti-semitic attack is -- challenge to and frame-up of
	Chavez govt
Message-ID: <EDE7836BD9CF40B5A18732060EC7D848@office1pc>

The most likely perpetrator, in my opinion, is the increasingly active and
violent Venezuelan fascist movement, which has been killing workers with
relative impunity, stymieing teform of the latifundia in the countryside
through the landlords' armed thugs, and now lending ammunition to a
US-Israeli campaign against Venezuela while, I think, getting off their own
anti-Semitic jollies at the same time.

Even if it turns out that the action was done by a group that thought it had
the interests of the Palestinians at heart, which I think is possible but
improbable, the reactionary character of this act is unmistakable, and the
government must take it seriously not only as an embarrassment but a threat
to the revolution.

We can't be certain who did this act, although the current situation does
point to fascists, but we should have no doubt that the US and Israel would
much rather have an anti-Semitic government in Venezuela than an
anti-imperialist one.

I think Venezuela is more under siege than we in the north believe today.
And Chavez winning a vote, while positive, will not be enough to settle it.
Fred Feldman

http://www.iht.com/bin/printfriendly.php?id=19826175

Venezuelan synagogue attacked as relations worsen
The Associated PressPublished: January 31, 2009

CARACAS, Venezuela: An armed group vandalized Caracas' oldest synagogue,
shattering religious objects and spray-painting walls in what Jewish leaders
called the worst attack ever on their community in Venezuela.

Two security guards were overpowered by about 15 people who ransacked the
synagogue's sanctuary and offices late Friday, leaving graffiti such as: "We
don't want murderers," and "Jews, get out."

Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro condemned the attack and promised it would
be investigated, while reiterating his government's opposition to what he
called Israel's "criminal" government.

"We respect the Jewish people, but we ask respect for the people of
Palestine and their right to life," Maduro said in a ceremony called to
welcome home two Venezuelan diplomats expelled from Israel this week.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry ordered the envoys to leave after Venezuela
expelled all Israeli diplomats on Jan. 6, to protest Israel's offensive in
the Gaza strip. President Hugo Chavez labeled Israeli leaders as
"genocidal."

1,300 Palestinians died in the three weeks of fighting.

Leaders of Venezuela's estimated 15,000-member Jewish community warned that
vocal denunciations of Israel by Chavez and the country's government-funded
news media may have encouraged Friday's attack.

"These declarations permeate society," said Abraham Levy, president of the
Venezuelan Confederation of Israelite Associations.

The incident forced the synagogue to cancel Saturday's worship service.

 




From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Feb  1 14:39:07 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 16:39:07 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Banishment
In-Reply-To: <A41037F1-8F50-4DE6-AA15-46070E26948C@comcast.net>
References: <660477.70095.qm@web45312.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
	<A41037F1-8F50-4DE6-AA15-46070E26948C@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <4986167B.4030302@panix.com>

Bonnie Weinstein wrote:
  > I am sorry I did not speak out about this earlier. I have been
> swamped with work. But I did and do rely on Walter's extensive Cuba  
> reporting.

Another reminder. Walter's reporting on Cuba can be read here:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cubanews/

I also assume that Bonnie failed to notice my request that the Walter 
unsubbing thread come to an end a couple of days ago. So let's not pick 
up on it again now.


From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Sun Feb  1 14:40:57 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 13:40:57 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Banishment
Message-ID: <498616E9.9020605@gmail.com>

Bonnie,
 I haven't weighed in much on this issue. I've been banned from this 
site twice I think. I'm back. I hope Walter is back as well. Even Louis 
wants Walter back (at some point).

Is it "undemocratic"? How so? This isn't set up as a "democratic" 
anything. It's Louis' salon. In other words, it in his living room. If 
you act obnoxiously, you will be asked to leave, it's that simple.

My understanding of Walter's missive is not his position, simply "I 
support Obama" (which he never stated), there were others here who 
openly stated they voted for him, in fact. I don't believe that was the 
issue. The issue was how Walter handled critics of Obama, as if they 
were attacking his actual deity, Fidel Castro. That any criticism OF 
Obama was some how the "typical 'perfectionist' sectarianism" and THAT 
is who I interpret Walter's "support" for Obama. Like a few others, I 
don''t think THAT kind of expression of support for Obama has *any 
place* on a list calling itself Marxist. But then, it's no one's call 
but Lous'.

Secondly, there were others defending Obama on this list that did so in 
a very enlightening, and non-sectarian manner, such was the person 
"Waistline2". As supportive of Obama as Walter, but not in the childish 
and sectarian way Walter did. In fact, Waistline2 elicited a serious 
discussion. We need MORE of that and LESS of Walter's immature antics in 
support of ruler of the Imperialist World.

Latly, ALL of Walter's translations, news-from-Cuba and althings 
Fidelista can be had from his very informative web site 
http://www.walterlippmann.com/ or his newsite at: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/messages  I highly recommend both 
these sites. This site, however, I think is more for discussion and not 
the latest write-news in Cuba's diplomatic missions abroad...

David


From e.c.apling at btinternet.com  Sun Feb  1 14:48:28 2009
From: e.c.apling at btinternet.com (Paddy Apling)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 21:48:28 -0000
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
In-Reply-To: <4985E48F.2080803@gmail.com>
References: <4985E48F.2080803@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5064F222A60E4314847B268D2D990517@PaddyPC>

This message makes a very good point - what we have here is an entirely new 
concept of the freedom of movement of capital and its operations:

not only was the Italoian company given a contract to do the job - 
completely OK under EC regulations and law;
but they have brought their workforce over to carry out the contract - 
accomodating them, I understand, in the ship which brought them.

Imagine the outcry if the Honda car factory over here was organised with the 
importation of workers from Japan as the complete complement of workers in 
the plant.

No wonder there are protests - which, of course, in whicht he BNP is trying 
to intervene with its obnoxious racist ideas.

Paddy
http://apling.freeservers.com

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "nada" <dwaltersMIA at gmail.com>
To: <e.c.apling at btinternet.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2009 6:06 PM
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?


> It is very complicated an issue for the left.
>
> This is not, strictly speaking, a strike against "immigrants". It's more
> a strike, it seems, against "migrants". In the sense that these are
> workers brought into UK oil refineries for a specific time and
> job...like a guest worker program in the US but industrial in nature.



From jeremy at infowells.com  Sun Feb  1 14:59:56 2009
From: jeremy at infowells.com (Jerry Wells)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 13:59:56 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] WSWS: The rising tide of economic nationalism
Message-ID: <1233525596.28102.8.camel@pool-96-251-16-208.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net>

FYI-
A critical socialist perspective against "Buy American"
protectionism.

The rising tide of economic nationalism
30 January 2009
Peter Symonds

(Link to full article:)
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/jan2009/pers-j30.shtml

(excerpts:)

As the global economic crisis continues to deepen, the unmistakable
stench of economic nationalism is on the rise around the world.
Confronted with collapsing industries and growing anger over job losses,
governments are reaching for protectionist measures despite the
disastrous consequences of such beggar-thy-neighbour policies in the
1930s.
...
The new Obama administration spurred on the rising tide of protectionism
with the comments last week of Treasury Secretary nominee Tim Geithner
accusing China of manipulating its currency to boost exports.
Designating Beijing as a ?currency manipulator? would allow the White
House to invoke a broad range of punitive tariffs and other economic
penalties against China under US trade legislation.
...
The Democrats in the House of Representatives went one step further by
including a ?Buy American? provision in Obama?s $825 billion stimulus
package approved on Wednesday. The clause, which requires infrastructure
projects funded by the package to use only US-made iron and steel, has
provoked protests from European steelmakers. Democrat senator Byron
Dorgan is proposing a broader measure to exclude most foreign-made
manufactured goods when the package reaches the Senate.
...
The working class cannot defend its interests under the banner of either
protectionism or ?free trade?. 







From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Feb  1 14:58:04 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 16:58:04 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] New film: Zizek, Hardt, Judith Butler et al
In-Reply-To: <619052.70698.qm@web26303.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
References: <619052.70698.qm@web26303.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <49861AEC.8090602@panix.com>

Ben Ben wrote:
> http://www.zeitgeistfilms.com/film.php?directoryname=examinedlife
> 

Good god. I had to walk away from my TV during the Zizek segment or else 
risk having my head explode. In his latest theoretical permutation, he 
has adopted Spiked Online's "critique" of ecology. Most of it is 
attacking a straw man that is a caricature of deep ecology--not to speak 
of his total avoidance of Marxist ecology of the John Bellamy Foster or 
Mike Davis variety.

Michael Hardt is nearly as stupid.

More tomorrow...


From lueko.willms at t-online.de  Sun Feb  1 15:05:01 2009
From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (=?iso-8859-1?q?L=FCko_Willms?=)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 23:05:01 +0100 (MEZ)
Subject: [Marxism] =?iso-8859-1?q?Jean-Mo=EFse_Braitberg=3A_=22Erase_my_gr?=
	=?iso-8859-1?q?andfather=27s_name_at_Yad_Vashem=22?=
Message-ID: <300.d89a0a008d1c8649.002@lws-media.de>

Erase my grandfather's name at Yad Vashem, by Jean-Mo?se Braitberg

[this english translation from French found at
> 
<http://www.paklinks.com/gs/world-affairs/310123-jean-moise-braitberg-era
se-my-grandfathers-name-yad-vashem.html>
French original follows further down]


LE MONDE | 28.01.09 |


Mr. President of the State of Israel, I am writing to you to intervene with the 
appropriate authorities to withdraw, from the Yad Vashem memorial dedicated 
to the memory of Jewish victims of Nazism, the name of my grandfather, 
Moshe Brajtberg, gassed at Treblinka in 1943, and those of other members of 
my who family died during deportation to various Nazi camps during World 
War II. I ask you to honor my request, Mr. Chairman, because what took place 
in Gaza, and more generally, the injustices to the Arab people of Palestine 
for sixty years, disqualifies Israel to be the center of the memory of the harm 
done to Jews, and thus to all humanity.

You see, since my childhood, I lived in amongst survivors of the death 
camps. I saw the numbers tattooed on their arms, I heard the story of torture; 
I knew the impossible grief and I shared their nightmares. I was taught that 
these crimes must never happen again, that never again must man, because 
of ethnicity or religion despise other man, mock his Human Rights of living a 
safe, dignified life, without barriers, and hope, so remote be it, of a future of 
peace and prosperity.

Yet Mr. President, I note that despite dozens of resolutions adopted by the 
international community, despite the glaring evidence of the injustices done to 
the Palestinian people since 1948, despite the hopes raised in Oslo, and 
despite the recognition of the right of Israeli Jews to live in peace and 
security, repeatedly reaffirmed by the Palestinian Authority, the only answers 
given by successive governments of your country have been violence, 
bloodshed, confinement, incessant controls, colonization, deprivations.

You'll tell me Mr. President, that Israel has the right to defend itself against 
people launching rockets into Israel, or suicide bombers that destroy innocent 
Israeli lives. My response to that is that my humanism doesn't vary according 
to the nationality of the victims.

Yet you, Mr. President, you lead the destiny of a country which claims not 
only to represent the Jews as a whole, but also the memory of those who 
were victims of Nazism. This is what concerns me and that I find 
unacceptable.

By displaying the names of my family members at the Yad Vashem Memorial, 
in the heart of the state of Israel, your state imprisons my family memories 
behind the barbed wires of zionism, and makes it hostage of a so-called 
moral authority which commits every day the abomination of denying justice.

So, please, remove the name of my grandfather from the shrine dedicated to 
cruelty against Jews so that it no longer justifies the injustice being done to 
the Palestinians.

Please accept, Mr. President, the assurances of my respectful consideration.

Jean-Mo?se Braitberg is a French author
http://mobile.lemonde.fr/opinions/article/2009/01/...


Effacez le nom de mon grand-p?re ? Yad Vashem, par Jean-Mo?se Braitberg 
- LeMonde.fr

now only for money:
> 
<http://www.lemonde.fr/cgi-bin/ACHATS/acheter.cgi?offre=ARCHIVES&type_it
em=ART_ARCH_30J&objet_id=1067894>

here is the French original text: 

------ cut ------------------

Effacez le nom de mon grand-p?re ? Yad Vashem, par Jean-Mo?se Braitberg
LE MONDE | 28.01.09 | 14h23  .  Mis ? jour le 29.01.09 | 09h15

> 
<http://www.lemonde.fr/opinions/article/2009/01/28/effacez-le-nom-de-mo
n-grand-pere-a-yad-vashem_1147635_3232.html>


Monsieur le Pr?sident de l'Etat d'Isra?l, 

je vous ?cris pour que vous interveniez aupr?s de qui de droit afin que l'on 
retire du M?morial de Yad Vashem d?di? ? la m?moire des victimes juives du 
nazisme, le nom de mon grand-p?re, Moshe Brajtberg, gaz? ? Treblinka en 
1943, ainsi que ceux des autres membres de ma famille morts en d?portation 
dans diff?rents camps nazis durant la seconde guerre mondiale. Je vous 
demande d'acc?der ? ma demande, monsieur le pr?sident, parce que ce qui 
s'est pass? ? Gaza, et plus g?n?ralement, le sort fait au peuple arabe de 
Palestine depuis soixante ans, disqualifie ? mes yeux Isra?l comme centre de 
la m?moire du mal fait aux juifs, et donc ? l'humanit? tout enti?re.

Voyez-vous, depuis mon enfance, j'ai v?cu dans l'entourage de survivants 
des camps de la mort. J'ai vu les num?ros tatou?s sur les bras, j'ai entendu 
le r?cit des tortures ; j'ai su les deuils impossibles et j'ai partag? leurs 
cauchemars.

Il fallait, m'a-t-on appris, que ces crimes plus jamais ne recommencent ; que 
plus jamais un homme, fort de son appartenance ? une ethnie ou ? une 
religion n'en m?prise un autre, ne le bafoue dans ses droits les plus 
?l?mentaires qui sont une vie digne dans la s?ret?, l'absence d'entraves, et 
la lumi?re, si lointaine soit-elle, d'un avenir de s?r?nit? et de prosp?rit?.

Or, monsieur le pr?sident, j'observe que malgr? plusieurs dizaines de 
r?solutions prises par la communaut? internationale, malgr? l'?vidence 
criante de l'injustice faite au peuple palestinien depuis 1948, malgr? les 
espoirs n?s ? Oslo et malgr? la reconnaissance du droit des juifs isra?liens ? 
vivre dans la paix et la s?curit?, maintes fois r?affirm?s par l'Autorit? 
palestinienne, les seules r?ponses apport?es par les gouvernements 
successifs de votre pays ont ?t? la violence, le sang vers?, l'enfermement, 
les contr?les incessants, la colonisation, les spoliations.

Vous me direz, monsieur le pr?sident, qu'il est l?gitime, pour votre pays, de 
se d?fendre contre ceux qui lancent des roquettes sur Isra?l, ou contre les 
kamikazes qui emportent avec eux de nombreuses vies isra?liennes 
innocentes. Ce ? quoi je vous r?pondrai que mon sentiment d'humanit? ne 
varie pas selon la citoyennet? des victimes.

Par contre, monsieur le pr?sident, vous dirigez les destin?es d'un pays qui  
pr?tend, non seulement repr?senter les juifs dans leur ensemble, mais aussi 
la m?moire de ceux qui furent victimes du nazisme. C'est cela qui me  
concerne et m'est insupportable. En conservant au M?morial de Yad Vashem, 
au coeur de l'Etat juif, le nom de mes proches, votre Etat retient prisonni?re 
ma m?moire familiale derri?re les barbel?s du sionisme pour en faire l'otage  
d'une soi-disant autorit? morale qui commet chaque jour l'abomination qu'est 
le d?ni de justice.

Alors, s'il vous pla?t, retirez le nom de mon grand-p?re du sanctuaire d?di?  
? la cruaut? faite aux juifs afin qu'il ne justifie plus celle faite aux  
Palestiniens. 

Veuillez agr?er, monsieur le pr?sident, l'assurance de ma respectueuse 
consid?ration.


Jean-Mo?se Braitberg est ?crivain. 


------------ off ------------

L?ko Willms
Frankfurt, Germany
--------------------------------
visit http://www.mlwerke.de Marx, Engels, Luxemburg, Lenin, Trotzki in Ge

From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sun Feb  1 15:10:21 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 23:10:21 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
References: <4985E48F.2080803@gmail.com>
	<5064F222A60E4314847B268D2D990517@PaddyPC>
Message-ID: <27F05D582F5D47AD95C1C0E34CEE709F@dmsthinkpad>

Yes, but the attack is not against the workers; the attack must be against 
the European Union, which seeks to create  a "common market" for driving 
down wages.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paddy Apling" <e.c.apling at btinternet.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2009 10:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?


> This message makes a very good point - what we have here is an entirely 
> new
> concept of the freedom of movement of capital and its operations:
>
> not only was the Italoian company given a contract to do the job -
> completely OK under EC regulations and law;
> but they have brought their workforce over to carry out the contract -
> accomodating them, I understand, in the ship which brought them.
>
> Imagine the outcry if the Honda car factory over here was organised with 
> the
> importation of workers from Japan as the complete complement of workers in
> the plant.
>
> No wonder there are protests - which, of course, in whicht he BNP is 
> trying
> to intervene with its obnoxious racist ideas.
>
> Paddy
> http://apling.freeservers.com
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "nada" <dwaltersMIA at gmail.com>
> To: <e.c.apling at btinternet.com>
> Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2009 6:06 PM
> Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
>
>
>> It is very complicated an issue for the left.
>>
>> This is not, strictly speaking, a strike against "immigrants". It's more
>> a strike, it seems, against "migrants". In the sense that these are
>> workers brought into UK oil refineries for a specific time and
>> job...like a guest worker program in the US but industrial in nature.
>
>
> ________________________________________________
> 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 michael at ecst.csuchico.edu  Sun Feb  1 15:42:13 2009
From: michael at ecst.csuchico.edu (Michael Perelman)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 14:42:13 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Renditions to continue (and expand) under Obama
In-Reply-To: <4985AAD9.5020202@panix.com>
References: <4985AAD9.5020202@panix.com>
Message-ID: <20090201224213.GA10699@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu>

Would Obama look kindly on an Iranian unit rederring some inside the US?

Also, renderring has an interesting meaning -- as in a rendering plant.

-- 
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 cdb1003 at prodigy.net  Sun Feb  1 15:44:40 2009
From: cdb1003 at prodigy.net (Charles Brown)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 14:44:40 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] test
Message-ID: <83387.73081.qm@web180111.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>


From mlebowit at sfu.ca  Sun Feb  1 15:46:21 2009
From: mlebowit at sfu.ca (michael a. lebowitz)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 18:16:21 -0430
Subject: [Marxism] re Sweezy
Message-ID: <4986263D.6040706@sfu.ca>

Lots of problems in Jim Farmelant's note on Paul Sweezy. See my piece on 
him, reprinted in Monthly Review and part of a new collection 
['Following Marx: Method, Critique and Crisis'] that Brill will bring 
out shortly:
http://www.monthlyreview.org/1004lebowitz.htm
          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
www.centrointernacionalmiranda.gob.ve
mlebowit at sfu.ca



From lueko.willms at t-online.de  Sun Feb  1 16:32:04 2009
From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (=?iso-8859-1?q?L=FCko_Willms?=)
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 00:32:04 +0100 (MEZ)
Subject: [Marxism] U.Avnery - Black Flag of Illegality waving over the Gaza
	war
Message-ID: <300.a8070f00f3308649.001@lws-media.de>




--------------- full text ---------------------
Uri Avnery

> <http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/avnery/1233508695/>

Black Flag

31/01/09


A SPANISH JUDGE has instituted a judicial inquiry against seven Israeli 
political and military personalities on suspicion of war crimes and crimes 
against humanity. The case: the 2002 dropping of a one ton bomb on the 
home of Hamas leader Salah Shehade. Apart from the intended victim, 14 
people, most of them children, were killed.

For those who have forgotten: the then commander of the Israeli Air Force, 
Dan Halutz, was asked at the time what he feels when he drops a bomb on a 
residential building. His unforgettable answer: "A slight bump to the wing." 
When we in Gush Shalom accused him of a war crime, he demanded that we 
be put on trial for high treason. He was joined by the Prime Minister, Ariel 
Sharon, who accused us of wanting to "turn over Israeli army officers to the 
enemy". The Attorney General notified us officially that he did not intend to 
open an investigation against those responsible for the bombing.

I should be happy, therefore, that at long last somebody is ready to put that 
action to a judicial test (even if he seems to have been thwarted by political 
pressure.) But I am sorry that this has happened in Spain, not in Israel.


ISRAELI TV VIEWERS have lately been exposed to a bizarre sight: army 
officers appearing with their faces hidden, as usual for criminals when the 
court prohibits their identification. Pedophiles, for example, or attackers of old 
women.

On the orders of the military censors, this applies to all officers, from 
battalion commanders down, who have been involved in the Gaza war. Since 
the faces of brigade commanders and above are generally known, the order 
does not apply to them.

Immediately after the cease-fire, the Minister of Defense, Ehud Barak, 
promoted a special law that would give unlimited backing by the state to all 
officers and soldiers who took part in the Gaza war and who might be 
accused abroad of war crimes. This seems to confirm the Hebrew adage: "On 
the head of the thief, the hat is burning".


I DO NOT object to trials abroad. The main thing is that war criminals, like 
pirates, should be brought to justice. It is not so important where they are 
caught. (This rule was applied by the State of Israel when it abducted Adolf 
Eichmann in Argentina and hanged him in Israel for heinous crimes committed 
outside the territory of Israel and, indeed, before the state even existed.)

But as an Israeli patriot, I would prefer suspected Israeli war criminals to be 
put on trial in Israel. That is necessary for the country, for all decent officers 
and soldiers of the Israeli army, for the education of future generations of 
citizens and soldiers.

There is no need to rely on international law alone. There are Israeli laws 
against war crimes. Enough to mention the immortal phrase coined by Justice 
Binyamin Halevy, serving as a military judge, in the trial of the border 
policemen who were responsible for the 1956 massacre in Kafr Kassem, 
when dozens of children, women and men were mown down for violating a 
curfew which they did not even know about.

The judge announced that even in wartime, there are orders over which flies 
"the black flag of illegality". These are orders which are "manifestly" illegal - 
that is to say, orders which every normal person can tell are illegal, without 
having to consult a lawyer.

War criminals dishonor the army whose uniform they wear - whether they are 
generals or common soldiers. As a combat soldier on the day the Israeli 
Defense Army was officially created, I am ashamed of them and demand that 
they be cast out and be put on trial in Israel.

My list of suspects includes politicians, soldiers, rabbis and lawyers.


THERE IS not the slightest doubt that in the Gaza war, crimes were committed. 
The question is to what extent and by whom.

Example: the soldiers call on the residents of a house to leave it. A woman 
and her four children come out, waving white handkerchiefs. It is absolutely 
clear that they are not armed fighters. A soldier in a near-by tank stands up, 
points his rifle and shoots them dead at short range. According to testimonies 
that seem to be beyond doubt, this happened more than once.

Another example: the shelling of the United Nations school full of refugees, 
from which there was no shooting - as admitted by the army, after the 
original pretexts were disproved.

These are "simple" cases. But the spectrum of cases is far wider. A serious 
judicial investigation has to start right from the top: the politicians and senior 
officers who decided on the war and confirmed its plans must be investigated 
about their decisions. In Nuremberg it was laid down that the starting of a war 
of aggression is a crime.

An objective investigation has to find out whether the decision to start the 
war was justified, or if there existed another way of stopping the launching of 
rockets against Israeli territory. Without doubt, no country can or should 
tolerate the bombing of its towns and villages from beyond the border. But 
could this be prevented by talking with the Gaza authorities? Was our 
government's decision to boycott Hamas, the winner of the democratic 
Palestinian elections, the real cause of this war? Did the imposition of the 
blockade on a million and a half Gaza Strip inhabitants contribute to the 
launching of the Qassams? In brief: were the alternatives considered before it 
was decided to start a deadly war?

The war plan included a massive attack on the civilian population of the Strip. 
The real aims of a war can be understood less from the official declarations 
of its initiators, than from their actions. If in this war some 1300 men, women 
and children were killed, the great majority of whom were not fighters; if 
about 5000 people were injured, most of them children; if some 2500 homes 
were partly or wholly destroyed; if the infrastructure of life was totally 
demolished - all this clearly could not have happened accidentally. It must 
have been a part of the war plan.

The things said during the war by politicians and officers make it clear that 
the plan had at least two aims, which might be considered war crimes: (1) To 
cause widespread killing and destruction, in order to "fix a price tag". "to burn 
into their consciousness", "to reinforce deterrence", and most of all - to get 
the population to rise up against Hamas and overthrow their government. 
Clearly this affects mainly the civilian population. (2) To avoid casualties to 
our army at (literally) any price by destroying any building and killing any 
human being in the area into which our troops were about to move, including 
destroying homes over the heads of their inhabitants, preventing medical 
teams from reaching the victims, killing people indiscriminately. In certain 
cases, inhabitants were warned that they must flee, but this was mainly an 
alibi-action: there was nowhere to flee to, and often fire was opened on 
people trying to escape.

An independent court will have to decide whether such a war-plan is in 
accordance with national and international law, or whether it was ab initio a 
crime against humanity and a war-crime.

This was a war of a regular army with huge capabilities against a guerrilla 
force. In such a war, too, not everything is permissible. Arguments like "The 
Hamas terrorists were hiding within the civilian population" and "They used 
the population as human shields" may be effective as propaganda but are 
irrelevant: that is true for every guerrilla war. It must be taken into account 
when a decision to start such a war is being considered.

In a democratic state, the military takes its orders from the political 
establishment. Good. But that does not include "manifestly" illegal orders, 
over which the black flag of illegality is waving. Since the Nuremberg trials, 
there is no more room for the excuse that "I was only obeying orders".

Therefore, the personal responsibility of all involved - from the Chief of 
Staff, the Front Commander and the Division Commander right down to the 
last soldier - must be examined. From the statements of soldiers one must 
deduce that many believed that their job was "to kill as many Arabs as 
possible". Meaning: no distinction between fighters and non-fighters. That is a 
completely illegal order, whether given explicitly or by a wink and a nudge. 
The soldiers understood this to be "the spirit of the commander".


AMONG THOSE suspected of war crimes, the rabbis have a place of honor.

Those who incite to war crimes and call upon soldiers, directly or indirectly, 
to commit war crimes may be guilty of a war crime themselves.

When one speaks of "rabbis", one thinks of old men with long white beards 
and big hats, who give tongue to venerable wisdom. But the rabbis who 
accompanied the troops are a very different species.

In the last decades, the state-financed religious educational system has 
churned out "rabbis" who are more like medieval Christian priests than the 
Jewish sages of Poland or Morocco. This system indoctrinates its pupils with 
a violent tribal cult, totally ethnocentric, which sees in the whole of world 
history nothing but an endless story of Jewish victimhood. This is a religion 
of a Chosen People, indifferent to others, a religion without compassion for 
anyone who is not Jewish, which glorifies the God-decreed genocide 
described in the Biblical book of Joshua.

The products of this education are now the "rabbis" who instruct the religious 
youths. With their encouragement, a systematic effort has been made to take 
over the Israeli army from within. Kippa-wearing officers have replaced the 
Kibbutzniks, who not so long ago were dominant in the army. Many of the 
lower and middle-ranking officers now belong to this group.

The most outstanding example is the "Chief Army Rabbi", Colonel Avichai 
Ronsky, who has declared that his job is to reinforce the "fighting spirit" of 
the soldiers. He is a man of the extreme right, not far from the spirit of the 
late Rabbi Meir Kahane, whose party was outlawed in Israel for its fascist 
ideology. Under the auspices of the army rabbinate, religious-fascist 
brochures of the ultra-right "rabbis" were distributed to the soldiers.

This material includes political incitement, such as the statement that the 
Jewish religion prohibits "giving up even one millimeter of Eretz Israel", that 
the Palestinians, like the Biblical Philistines (from whom the name Palestine 
derives), are a foreign people who invaded the country, and that any 
compromise (such as indicated in the official government program) is a 
mortal sin. The distribution of political propaganda violates, of course, army 
law.

The rabbis openly called upon the soldiers to be cruel and merciless towards 
the Arabs. To treat them mercifully, they stated, is a "terrible, awful 
immorality". When such material is distributed to religious soldiers going into 
war, it is easy to see why things happened the way they did.


THE PLANNERS of this war knew that the shadow of war crimes was hovering 
over the planned operation. Witness: the Attorney General (whose official title 
is "Legal Advisor to the Government") was a partner to the planning. This 
week the Chief Army Attorney, Colonel Avichai Mandelblut, disclosed that his 
officers were attached throughout the war to all the commanders, from the 
Chief of Staff down to the Division Commander.

All this together leads to the inescapable conclusion that the legal advisors 
bear direct responsibility for the decisions taken and implemented, from the 
massacre of the civilian police recruits at their graduating ceremony to the 
shelling of the UN installations. Every attorney who was a partner to the 
deliberations before an order was given is responsible for its consequences, 
unless he can prove that he objected to it.

The Chief Army Attorney, who is supposed to give the army professional and 
objective advice, speaks about "the monstrous enemy" and tries to justify the 
actions of the army by saying that it was fighting against "an unbridled 
enemy, who declared that he 'loves death' and finds shelter behind the backs 
of women and children". Such language is, perhaps, pardonable in a pep-talk 
of a war-drunk combat commander, like the battalion chief who ordered his 
soldiers to commit suicide rather than be captured, but totally unacceptable 
when it comes from the chief legal officer of the army.


WE MUST pursue all the legal processes in Israel and call for an independent 
investigation and the indictment of suspected perpetrators. We must demand 
this even if the chances of it happening are slim indeed.

If these efforts fail, nobody will be able to object to trials abroad, either in an 
international court or in the courts of those nations that respect human rights 
and international law.

Until then, the black flag will still be waving.

-------------- end full text ------------




L?ko Willms
Frankfurt, Germany
--------------------------------
visit http://www.mlwerke.de Marx, Engels, Luxemburg, Lenin, Trotzki in Ge

From farmelantj at juno.com  Sun Feb  1 16:47:08 2009
From: farmelantj at juno.com (Jim Farmelant)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 18:47:08 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] re Sweezy
Message-ID: <20090201.184709.6100.0.farmelantj@juno.com>

 
On Sun, 01 Feb 2009 18:16:21 -0430 "michael a. lebowitz"
<mlebowit at sfu.ca> writes:
> Lots of problems in Jim Farmelant's note on Paul Sweezy. See my piece 
> on 
> him, reprinted in Monthly Review and part of a new collection 
> ['Following Marx: Method, Critique and Crisis'] that Brill will 
> bring 
> out shortly:
> http://www.monthlyreview.org/1004lebowitz.htm
>           michael

Mike,

I am sure there were lots of problems in my
brief note on Sweezy although it would
have been nice to mentioned at least one
or two of them.  On the other hand, it
seems to me, that your MR piece on
Sweezy, supports most of the points
that I made including the importance
of Keynes for Sweezy.  As I am
sure that you are well aware, the
Keynesian influence on Sweezy
has always been a bone of contention
for other Marxists.  Back in the late
1960s, Paul Mattick wrote a critique
of Keynesianism, in which Sweezy,
was at least by implication, one of his
targets.  Marc Linder et al. in their
book *Anti-Samuelson*, while
primarily (as the title suggests)
targeting Paul Samuelson's
brand of Keynesianism, also took 
time out to critique Sweezy precisely
for his Keynesianism.

Of course as Sweezy's economic
thought matured, the problem of
monopoly loomed larger and
larger.  But here too, his thinking
was both congruent with and indeed
influenced by what contemporary
left Keynesians like Joan Robinson
and Michal Kalecki were doing in
that area.  And Joan Robinson
had famously rejected the thesis
that Keyensianism could be reconciled
to neoclassical economics in the way
that people like Samuelson were
pushing.

> 
> -- 
> 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
> www.centrointernacionalmiranda.gob.ve
> mlebowit at sfu.ca
> 
> 
> ________________________________________________
> 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/farmelantj%40juno.com
> 
> 
 
____________________________________________________________
Make up to $150/hour by attending Hospitality Management School. Click Now!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw3gDBfNlKyCtFG4VZbrqHz0TcemEykOhrOXw5VP1yvSWDwsf/


From markalause at gmail.com  Sun Feb  1 17:05:34 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 19:05:34 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Banishment
In-Reply-To: <498616E9.9020605@gmail.com>
References: <498616E9.9020605@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0902011605m30159ea1j2727d13de4be2c01@mail.gmail.com>

I don't want to join in beating this dead horse either--particularly
since Walter's positon non the elections wasn't the point--but he
actually took a position on the elections more "nuanced" than is being
presented here.  He said BOTH that he supported McKinney AND that he
would vote for Obama if the outcoming in a state looked close.  I'm
sure I wasn't the only one who did a mental flashback to the CP
running Browder and backing FDR or David Cobb's "safe state"
Green-but-Democratic strategy in 2004.

We all want to have our cake and eat it, too, but we shouldn't carry
our self-indulgence to where we talk out of both sides of our
mouths....

I did and do have immensely more personal respect for people who said
right out that they were voting for Obama and made a straightforward
case for doing so.

ML


From stuartmunckton at gmail.com  Sun Feb  1 17:27:37 2009
From: stuartmunckton at gmail.com (Stuart Munckton)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 11:27:37 +1100
Subject: [Marxism] Venezuelan gov condemns anti-Jewish violence
Message-ID: <2c6145850902011627y61ab595as3ccc1c6fd48e375a@mail.gmail.com>

*Bolivarian government condemns violent acts against Jewish Community in
Venezuela*



 "The government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela rejects and
condemns the acts of vandalism against the synagogue - headquarters of the
Israeli Association of Venezuela, located in Marip?rez, Caracas -
perpetrated by an unknown group." This happened at daybreak Saturday.



This statement was made by Foreign Affairs Minister, Nicol?s Maduro, this
Saturday, during a special act to receive the Venezuelan top officials of
the Diplomatic Mission in Israel .



"With the usual clearness of the Bolivarian Revolution, which always says
the truth, we undertake, (?) on behalf of President Hugo Ch?vez, to
investigate and present the results of such investigation, so we can put in
prison the responsible of this delinquent acts," said Maduro.



He ratified the respect towards the Venezuelan Jewish community and denied
that the Bolivarian Government promotes anti-Semitism.



"Thanks to the Constitution passed in 1999 and the behavior and conscience
of our head of State, our government and people, Venezuela guarantees
absolute religious freedom and equality for all practicing and believers of
the countries," said Mr. Maduro.



Daybreak Saturday, some persons, who have not been identified yet, went to
the synagogue shoot into the air, made ring out sirens and shouted rude
words against the Jewish community. This information was later confirmed by
the president of the Israeli Association of Venezuela, El?as Farache.



*Bolivarian News Agency (ABN) / January 31, 2009*

*  ****Visite nuestra P?gina Web **www.minci.gob. ve<http://www.minci.gob.ve/>
** / Visit our Web Page **www.minci.gob. ve <http://www.minci.gob.ve/>*

*Visite nossa p?gina: **www.minci.gob. ve <http://www.minci.gob.ve/>**
**/**Visitez notre site:
**www.minci.gob. ve <http://www.minci.gob.ve/>***

*Ministerio del Poder Popular para la Comunicaci?n y la Informaci?n -
Direcci?n de Medios  Internacionales             *
*Ministry of People's Power for Communication and Information ?
International Media Department*

-- 
"The free market is perfectly natural... do you think I am some kind of
dummy?" - Jarvis Cocker

"Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious" - Oscar Wilde

From mqduck at sonic.net  Sun Feb  1 17:59:04 2009
From: mqduck at sonic.net (Jeffrey Thomas Piercy)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 16:59:04 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] 50% of Britain doesn't believe in evolution
Message-ID: <49864558.6070601@sonic.net>

I was previously given the impression that only the US was this 
backwards on science among advanced imperialist nations. Further, only 
25% think evolution is "definitely true" while the other 25% of 
believers think it's "probably true". Though there are probably people 
in Britain who, like me, are nervous about saying anything is 
"definitely" true (I would have gone with the word "certainly").


http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/feb/01/evolution-darwin-survey-creationism
==Half of Britons do not believe in evolution, survey finds==
More than one-fifth prefer creationism or intelligent design, while many 
others are confused about Darwin's theory

Riazat Butt, religious affairs correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 1 February 2009 13.52 GMT

Half of British adults do not believe in evolution, with at least 22% 
preferring the theories of creationism or intelligent design to explain 
how the world came about, according to a survey.

The poll found that 25% of Britons believe Charles Darwin's theory of 
evolution is "definitely true", with another quarter saying it is 
"probably true". Half of the 2,060 people questioned were either 
strongly opposed to the theory or confused about it.

The Rescuing Darwin survey, published to coincide with the 200th 
anniversary of Darwin's birth and the 150th anniversary of the 
publication of On the Origin of ?Species, found that around 10% of 
people chose young Earth creationism ? the belief that God created the 
world some time in the last 10,000 years ? over evolution.

About 12% preferred intelligent design, the idea that evolution alone is 
not enough to explain the structures of living organisms. The remainder 
were unsure, often mixing evolution, intelligent design and creationism 
together. The survey was conducted by the polling agency ComRes on 
behalf of the Theos thinktank.

A spokesman for Sense about Science, an independent charitable trust, 
said it was important for scientists and educators to disentangle 
religious belief from evidence.

James Williams, a lecturer at Sussex University, said: "Creationists ask 
if ?people believe in evolution. Evolution is a theory and a fact. You 
accept it because of the evidence. What the creationists have done is 
put a cloak of pseudo-science to wrap up their religious belief."

Later this month scientists and academics from across Europe will meet 
in Dortmund, Germany, to discuss evolution and creationism. It will be 
the first European conference of its kind to deal with different aspects 
of attitudes and knowledge related to evolution. They will discuss 
specific difficulties regarding the acceptance of evolution theory in 
their home countries.

Williams, who will give a paper presenting a British perspective on 
evolution and creationism in school science, said: "Evolution is very 
badly taught in schools so the results of the survey don't surprise me. 
On the other hand, creationism has traditionally been an issue in North 
America and there is a big problem in Australia and Turkey. It matters 
if people don't understand how science works."

The Rescuing Darwin project includes the launch of Darwin and God, a new 
book on the naturalist's religious beliefs, at Westminster Abbey, where 
he is buried, and a debate about evolution and religion. Participants 
will include Dr Denis Alexander, Lord Robert Winston, Professor Steve 
Jones and Professor Nancy Rothwell.

Events celebrating Darwin's achievements are taking place throughout the 
year. Cambridge University is hosting a festival to unravel themes of 
science, society, literature, philosophy, theology and music arising 
from his writings, life and times.

The Natural History Museum, in London, is exhibiting previously unseen 
specimens and artefacts, while Darwin's home in Kent, Down House, opens 
to the public from 13 February.

-- 
Human: An animal so lost in loathing contemplation of what it thinks it 
is as to overlook what it ought to be.


From david at miradoiro.com  Sun Feb  1 18:02:41 2009
From: david at miradoiro.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?David_Pic=F3n_=C1lvarez?=)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 02:02:41 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
References: <4985E48F.2080803@gmail.com><5064F222A60E4314847B268D2D990517@PaddyPC>
	<27F05D582F5D47AD95C1C0E34CEE709F@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <E690E78FD3F94C6F90A5B2D661F37E7C@Nautilus>

From: "S. Artesian" <sartesian at earthlink.net>
> Yes, but the attack is not against the workers; the attack must be against
> the European Union, which seeks to create  a "common market" for driving
> down wages.

I think the nature of the EU is far more contradictory than that. It's true 
that freedom of movement for capital is a big pillar, but it's no less true 
that freedom of movement for labour, freedom of establishment, etc, is also 
central, and increasingly so. The EU has come at building Europe from the 
idea of a common market, but a lot of the jurisprudence of the ECJ is 
actually about letting people move freely within the union and not be 
bothered by certain forms of anti-foreigner state regulations.

--David.



From glparramatta at greenleft.org.au  Sun Feb  1 18:12:32 2009
From: glparramatta at greenleft.org.au (glparramatta)
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 12:12:32 +1100
Subject: [Marxism] Interview with Luis Bilbao: Venezuela and `the rebirth of
 the idea of revolution' | Links
Message-ID: <49864880.9080402@greenleft.org.au>

Interview with *Luis Bilbao*, conducted by *Agustina Desalvo* for the 
Argentinian journal /Raz?n y Revoluci?n/, issue #18. Translated by 
/Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal/Green Left Weekly? 
<http://www.greenleft.org.au>s/ *Federico Fuentes* and published with 
the permission of Bilbao.
Luis Bilbao is a central participant in the construction of the mass 
United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) and in the formation of the 
Union of South American Nations (UNASUR); founding editor of the Latin 
America-wide monthly magazine /Am?rica XXI. /Luis Bilbao will be a 
featured guest at the /World at a Crossroads/ conference, to be held in 
Sydney, Australia, on April 10-12, 2009, organised by the Democratic 
Socialist Perspective and /Green Left Weekly/. Visit 
http://www.worldATACrossroads.org for full agenda and to book your tickets.

Full interview at http://links.org.au/node/886

Subscribe free to /Links - International Journal of Socialist Renewal/ -
at http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373


From russell.morse at yahoo.com  Sun Feb  1 18:27:34 2009
From: russell.morse at yahoo.com (Russell Morse)
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 17:27:34 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
In-Reply-To: <E13EB9493C414E52A2AD4737F72578A3@office1pc>
Message-ID: <651526.88345.qm@web45304.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Interesting counterpoint -

"SANTA CLARA, Calif. ? Major U.S. banks sought government permission to bring thousands of foreign workers into the country for high-paying jobs even as the system was melting down last year and Americans were getting laid off, according to an Associated Press review of visa applications.

"The dozen banks now receiving the biggest rescue packages, totaling more than $150 billion, requested visas for more than 21,800 foreign workers over the past six years for positions that included senior vice presidents, corporate lawyers, junior investment analysts and human resources specialists. The average annual salary for those jobs was $90,721, nearly twice the median income for all American households. ..."

Read the rest at http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090201/ap_on_bi_ge/bailout_foreign_workers





      



From mlebowit at sfu.ca  Sun Feb  1 18:50:21 2009
From: mlebowit at sfu.ca (michael a. lebowitz)
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 21:20:21 -0430
Subject: [Marxism] re Sweezy
Message-ID: <4986515D.9010405@sfu.ca>

Jim,
    You asked for some specifics. Ok, you begin by saying 'Sweezy in 
fact was one of the pioneer Keyensian
economists in the US, right alongside his more famous colleagues like 
Paul Samuelson..' Aside from the fact that Samuelson wasn't a colleague 
[maybe a student in the socialism class-- I can't recall; remember that 
Sweezy was denied a job at Harvard], your comment that he was a 'pioneer 
Keynesian'  is contrary to his own statements about the Keynesians and 
has about as much credibility as saying Marx was a pioneer Ricardian 
because he drew upon some of Ricardo's insights. What some who view 
themselves as untainted by Keynes and thus the only true Marxists may 
not understand is the basic principle of a dialectical worldview that 
[in the words of listmember Richard Levins] 'parts acquire properties by 
virtue of being parts of a particular whole, properties they do not have 
in isolation or as parts of another whole.' So, the question is what was 
the whole in which those parts were situated. As for Kalecki's 
influence, that came later--- but both he and Sweezy were influenced by 
Rosa Luxembourg [and the former's obscure essays working through the 2 
Dept model in the 30s preceded Keynes and, in my view, were superior].
            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
www.centrointernacionalmiranda.gob.ve
mlebowit at sfu.ca



From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Sun Feb  1 22:43:25 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 00:43:25 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Zionist complains that holocaust is becoming weapon of
 enemy -- as it should
Message-ID: <CF0DC5DA05C54D668D33C845C0D7F67C@office1pc>

'An indication that the Zionists feel they are beginning -- just beginning,
but this is VERY significant -- to lose control of the discussion of the
holocaust. The holocaust is supposed to belong exclusively to the Jews, and
actually exclusively to the Zionists, as a weapon against any and all
enemies. But in fact it belongs to progressive and advancing humanity, just
what happened to the natives in the Americas and so forth.

That what happened in Gaza resembles the industrial mass murder of the Jews
by the Hitler regime is inescapable. The distinctions -- there were fewer
Palestinians in Gaza, they didn't kill all or even most of them THIS TIME --
fall into the categories of significant historical facts that create no
moral difference.

The latest articles by Jean Moise Brandberg and Shlomo Avneri -- a man who
is clearly putting his life on the line in the Israel of today -- are
powerful answers to what follows.
Fred Feldman


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/30/AR2009013002
770.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
THE NEW ANTI-SEMITISM 
Using the Holocaust to Attack the Jews
 

By Walter Reich
Sunday, February 1, 2009; Page B02 

Dozens of cities held ceremonies last week to mark International Holocaust
Remembrance Day. The good news is that the dead were remembered. The bad
news is that even as the Holocaust is becoming a fixture in the world's
memory, it is also being increasingly used as a weapon against the Jews and
the Jewish state. 

For some, ironically, the acknowledgment of the Holocaust's reality has
become a screen behind which anti-Semitism has gathered new force. The
hard-core Jew-haters spent decades denying that the best-documented genocide
in world history ever took place. That won them such derision that even many
anti-Semites have begun to admit the reality of the Holocaust -- and now are
hoping that simply by doing so, they can immunize themselves from the charge
that they're anti-Semites in the first place. How can you be an anti-Semite,
they figure, if you recognize the Holocaust? 

But as some people who don't like Jews have found, it's worth acknowledging
the Holocaust if you can then turn it into a cudgel against the Jews. And
that they've done, in spades. According to this crowd, the Jews today have
become Nazis. The Jewish state is now supposedly carrying out a Holocaust
against the Palestinians. Jews, the haters say, have always been evil, and
their evil is only growing. 


Of course, not all criticisms of Israel are the product of such bigoted
logic. People of good will around the world are naturally shocked by the
tragic and appalling deaths of Palestinian civilians, including those killed
in the recent war in the Gaza Strip. Like any country, Israel can be
criticized. But the massive and unceasing eruptions of outrage against the
Jewish state -- in a world in which other countries and groups have, often
provoking barely any outrage, engaged in immensely more destructive and
immoral behavior -- can only be explained in a few ways. One is that
attacking Israel has become a means of attacking Israel's ally, the United
States. Another is that over-the-top attacks on Israel, particularly those
invoking Holocaust language, have become a means of once again attacking the
Jews. 

The Anti-Defamation League has documented the way this weapon was used
during the recent war with Hamas. Here are a few of the placards spotted at
rallies: In Times Square, the group reported such signs as, "Israel: The
Fourth Reich," "Stop Israel's Holocaust," "Holocaust by Holocaust
Survivors," "Stop the Nazi Genocide in Gaza" and "Nazi Genocide, Israeli
Genocide." In Chicago: "Palestinian Holocaust in Gaza Now." In a Los Angeles
demonstration, the Star of David in an Israeli flag was said to have been
replaced by a swastika, accompanied by the words, "Upgrade to Holocaust
Version 2.0." In San Diego: "Stop the Israeli Holocaust on Gaza." And the
league reported that one rally in Washington included an effigy of the
Israeli prime minister wearing a swastika armband and holding a dead baby. 

The Gaza war provoked similar attacks from some world leaders and people of
influence. "The Holocaust, that is what is happening right now in Gaza,"
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said in televised comments, according to
Reuters. The New York Times quoted a Catholic cardinal who argued that Gaza
increasingly "resembled a big concentration camp." And according to the
Jerusalem Post, a Norwegian diplomat based in Saudi Arabia sent out an
e-mail from her Foreign Ministry account in which she wrote, "The
grandchildren of Holocaust survivors from World War II are doing to the
Palestinians exactly what was done to them by Nazi Germany." She reportedly
also attached paired photos designed to suggest that Gaza was equivalent to
the Holocaust: Next to the iconic photo of the Jewish child in the Warsaw
Ghetto being menaced by a rifle-toting Nazi soldier, the diplomat is said to
have placed an "image of an Israeli soldier aiming his weapon at a
Palestinian boy." 

Are all those who have accused Israel of being a Nazi state anti-Semites?
Hardly. There's genuine anger in the Muslim world, as well as in Europe and
elsewhere, about Israel's actions in Gaza. The suffering is terrible. So are
the images of devastation Israel left behind. And there are also plenty of
people who are angry at Israel because it stands for the reviled United
States. 

But the reality is that much of the vitriol directed at Israel has indeed
been spouted by anti-Semites. Not only have they hurled the Nazi canard at
Israel, they've expressed clear anti-Semitism -- some of it openly violent
or even eliminationist. The pro-Israel but reliable Middle East Media and
Research Institute has been documenting anti-Semitism on Palestinian
television for years, including calls for the murder of Jews. It reports
that, the day before International Holocaust Remembrance Day, one Egyptian
cleric admitted on an Islamist TV channel that the Holocaust had happened --
and added that he hoped that one day Muslims would do to the Jews what the
Germans had done to them. To demonstrate what he had in mind, according to
the institute, he showed footage of heaps of Jewish corpses being bulldozed
into pits. 

In designating an International Holocaust Remembrance Day back in 2005, the
U.N. General Assembly acted with noble intentions, even if parts of the
world body still aim to delegitimize Israel. Such commemorations help the
world understand that the goal of the Holocaust was the annihilation of an
entire people -- and help them appreciate the vast differences between that
event and, for example, the war in Gaza. But even as the Holocaust has been
increasingly acknowledged and explained, it also has been increasingly used
as a cudgel to beat Jews and the Jewish state. 

wreich at gwu.edu 


Walter Reich, a professor of international affairs at George Washington
University, is a former director of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. 








From sartesian at earthlink.net  Mon Feb  2 01:19:08 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 09:19:08 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
References: <4985E48F.2080803@gmail.com><5064F222A60E4314847B268D2D990517@PaddyPC><27F05D582F5D47AD95C1C0E34CEE709F@dmsthinkpad>
	<E690E78FD3F94C6F90A5B2D661F37E7C@Nautilus>
Message-ID: <BE87C99EF80B4FB8B916BF4A8D3BC09A@dmsthinkpad>

I don't think so David.  It is a capitalist union, and as such, as 
conditions dictate, it will create mechanisms to stratify, separate workers; 
it will create tiers of membership-- something it has pretty much done with 
the EU 15 (or 12) and EU 27.

We face the same task in opposing the EU, the same "complication"-- that in 
opposing it we do not mimic, embrace, or allow an hints of nationalism into 
that opposition.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Pic?n ?lvarez" <david at miradoiro.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 2:02 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?


> I think the nature of the EU is far more contradictory than that. 



From Midhurst14 at aol.com  Mon Feb  2 01:56:08 2009
From: Midhurst14 at aol.com (Midhurst14 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 03:56:08 EST
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
Message-ID: <c08.5534aa67.36b80f28@aol.com>

This is nonsense
This is an action against the EU and the low wages paid to Italian workers  
as shown
Government warned in 2004 that EU laws were being used to prevent locals  
taking up UK jobs
Average monthly salaries paid in the construction  sector
UK-?2,160
Germany-?1,806
Italy-?1,386
France-?1,046
Portugal-?614
Source  ILO 2005 data   
George Anthony   


From leninstombblog at googlemail.com  Mon Feb  2 01:59:32 2009
From: leninstombblog at googlemail.com (Lenin's Tomb)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 08:59:32 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
In-Reply-To: <c08.5534aa67.36b80f28@aol.com>
References: <c08.5534aa67.36b80f28@aol.com>
Message-ID: <c17d8d380902020059y3dc00258v490b353fb3975c56@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 8:56 AM, <Midhurst14 at aol.com> wrote:

> This is an action against the EU and the low wages paid to Italian workers
> as shown


There is absolutely no protest against low wages for Italian workers in this
strike, and no solidarity has been sought from the Italian workers.  The
slogan is 'British jobs for British workers'.  This morning, it is being
reported that racist thugs are touring the bars near the plant looking for
Italians to beat up.  Several of them have quit and gone home in fear of
their safety.  Pretending that they are the subjects of solidarity in this
strike is absolutely preposterous.

From sartesian at earthlink.net  Mon Feb  2 02:02:18 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 10:02:18 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
References: <c08.5534aa67.36b80f28@aol.com>
Message-ID: <58942217385B45E1954037558A987E36@dmsthinkpad>

Which part is nonsense?  I think that most would agree that the leverage the 
EU provides to the bourgeoisie is that of driving down wages.

Do you mean this strike is not "national" in goal, that if the workers were 
paid to scale, there would be no action on the part of the British workers? 
That would be great news indeed.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Midhurst14 at aol.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 9:56 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?


This is nonsense
This is an action against the EU and the low wages paid to Italian workers
as shown
Government warned in 2004 that EU laws were being used to prevent locals
taking up UK jobs
Average monthly salaries paid in the construction  sector
UK-?2,160
Germany-?1,806
Italy-?1,386
France-?1,046
Portugal-?614
Source  ILO 2005 data
George Anthony

________________________________________________
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 Midhurst14 at aol.com  Mon Feb  2 02:09:53 2009
From: Midhurst14 at aol.com (Midhurst14 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 04:09:53 EST
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
Message-ID: <d58.38bc2693.36b81261@aol.com>

Capitalist unions!!!!
A complete diversion
Just stick to the issue of undermining UK wages and conditions
The role now becoming more and more obvious of the EU's function
George Anthony

From sartesian at earthlink.net  Mon Feb  2 03:34:13 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 11:34:13 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
References: <d58.38bc2693.36b81261@aol.com>
Message-ID: <04CEB7A2FAD944F4A4B14B298A5C0799@dmsthinkpad>

Sticking to that issue, that false issue of a "foreign" source undermining 
"UK wages and conditions" is perfect recipe for defeat of class struggle. 
It's about class not location.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Midhurst14 at aol.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 10:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?


> Capitalist unions!!!!
> A complete diversion
> Just stick to the issue of undermining UK wages and conditions
> The role now becoming more and more obvious of the EU's function
> George Anthony
> ________________________________________________
> 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 ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Mon Feb  2 03:35:28 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 05:35:28 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Likely next Israeli prime minister commits to more war v.
	Gaza
Message-ID: <40085E75BDBF4A909A04291BF769BD84@office1pc>

Israel's Key Election Issue: Did War End Too Soon?

By Griff Witte
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, February 2, 2009; A01



JERUSALEM, Feb. 1 -- Just over a week before Israel holds elections to
choose a new government, the outcome of the war in the Gaza Strip has
emerged as a central issue in the campaign, with the candidates sparring
over whether the massive military operation went far enough.

The argument reflects the reality that elections here often turn on a single
question: Who looks tougher on national security?

The war, initiated to stop Hamas rocket fire that has persisted for years,
was viewed by many here as motivated at least in part by electoral politics.
Two of the three Israeli architects of the war, Defense Minister Ehud Barak
and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, are candidates to become the nation's next
prime minister.

The operation in Gaza drew condemnation abroad for the high Palestinian
death toll, and praise at home for the relatively low number of Israelis
killed. But it has not done much to elevate Barak's or Livni's prospects of
winning the top job. Now their even-more-hawkish opposition is on the
offensive.

In recent days, former prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who according to
polls appears poised to reclaim his old job, has argued in speeches and
interviews that his political rivals ended the war prematurely. Israel, he
says, should have destroyed Hamas -- which he views as an outpost of Iranian
power on Israel's southern border -- rather than withdrawing amid a shaky
cease-fire. He has left little doubt over what he would do if elected.

"The next government will have no choice but to finish the work and remove
the Iranian terror base for good," he said in a radio interview last week.

One of his top lieutenants in the right-wing Likud party, Zeev "Benny"
Begin, was even more emphatic at a rally in Jerusalem, describing the
military operation in Gaza as a failure. "One million Israelis remain under
the threat of rockets," Begin, son of Israel's first Likud prime minister,
Menachem Begin, told a cheering crowd. "After this operation, the terrorists
came out of their hiding places waving not white flags but the green flags
of Hamas."

In Israel's fractious political culture, left and right are generally
determined by a party's relative willingness to cede land to the
Palestinians in exchange for a peace deal, as well as by its criteria for
going to war.

Netanyahu's Likud has generally been critical of U.S.-backed negotiations
between Israel and the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority, which are
aimed at creating a Palestinian state. Netanyahu has also advocated an
uncompromising stand against Iran, particularly when it comes to that
country's nuclear ambitions. But during his tenure as prime minister in the
late 1990s, he demonstrated a willingness to govern more pragmatically than
he had campaigned, agreeing to a limited peace accord with the Palestinians
on control of the West Bank city of Hebron.

Likud's criticism of the recent Gaza operation is aimed squarely at
Netanyahu's two main rivals for the prime ministership, Livni and Barak.
They have strongly defended the conduct of the military campaign, while also
hinting that Israel is not finished in Gaza and that there could be more
attacks before the Feb. 10 elections.

"We are on the right course to achieve peace and quiet," Barak, leader of
the center-left Labor Party, told students in the seaside city of Herzliyya.
"The operation had real accomplishments. Our deterrence has been restored.
Hamas was dealt a blow like no other since its creation."

But he also vowed that Israel would "keep one hand on the pistol."

Beginning Dec. 27 with a surprise air assault, Israeli jets pounded Gaza for
22 days and nights, with tanks overrunning large swaths of the coastal
territory.

Approximately 1,300 Palestinians died in the operation, about half of them
civilians, according to Gazan medical officials. Thirteen Israelis were
killed, three of them civilians.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said in launching the war that the intent
was to stop the persistent rocket fire from Gaza into southern Israel and to
end the smuggling of weapons into Gaza from Egypt.

But when the dust cleared, Hamas declared victory and quickly reasserted its
control over the strip. In the two weeks since the cease-fire took effect,
the smuggling has resumed, scattered rocket fire has continued and an
Israeli soldier was killed last week in an attack carried out by a radical
splinter group of Hamas that does not support the cease-fire. Hamas itself
denied involvement but praised the killing.

On Sunday, Palestinian fighters launched about a dozen rockets and mortar
shells toward Israel, slightly injuring at least three people, according to
the Israel Defense Forces. Olmert, in his weekly cabinet meeting, vowed that
Israel's response to the attacks would be "disproportionate." Since the
cease-fire took hold, Israel has responded to attacks from Gaza with
periodic airstrikes aimed at Hamas fighters and at tunnels.

Although Israel won the war by almost any military standard, Hamas's
resilience has provided a political opening for Netanyahu. For more than a
year before the government launched the operation, he had agitated for war
from his seat as leader of the opposition. During the operation, he was a
vocal supporter.

But since it ended, he and his party have gone into attack mode, accusing
the government of weakness for not killing top Hamas leaders or reclaiming
the strategically important Philadelphi corridor, which runs along the
Gazan-Egyptian border and is dotted with smugglers' tunnels. Netanyahu and
his allies have tried to paint the decision to halt the operation as just
another failure of the ruling Kadima party, which also spearheaded Israel's
disengagement from Gaza in 2005.

The argument seems to be working: Netanyahu has consolidated his position as
the election's front-runner in recent weeks, despite his opponents'
orchestration of a popular war.

"If Likud was in power, the operation would not have ended. It started well,
but it ended too soon," said Leon Amoyal, a 59-year-old retiree who traveled
to Jerusalem from the northern city of Haifa this week to cheer Netanyahu.
"We could have eradicated Hamas."

Netanyahu got a boost last week when one of the operation's key commanders,
reserve Brig. Gen. Zvika Fogel, publicly declared that Israel had missed "a
historic opportunity" to crush Hamas's military capabilities.

"Hamas was really at a breaking point," said Fogel, who commanded artillery
and other units. "We should have turned up the pressure."

Instead, he said, Israel's political leaders first stalled the operation,
then pulled the plug, announcing a unilateral cease-fire Jan. 17. Fogel said
he believed the decision was made to avoid heavy Israeli casualties in the
weeks before an election and to spare President Obama from having to deal
with the war during his first days in office. "On January 20th, they didn't
want to see the TV screen divided in two parts -- one for the ceremony and
the other for the war," he said.

But backers of Livni and Barak say the war ended at just the right moment.
In 22 days of fighting, they say, Israel achieved its goals without being
drawn into a quagmire. Throughout the war, military planners worried that
Israel would sustain high casualty rates if it sent large numbers of ground
forces into Gaza's densely packed cities and refugee camps in search of
Hamas leaders. They also fretted over what would come next if they really
did destroy Hamas: The relatively moderate Fatah movement has little
organized presence in Gaza, and a power vacuum in the strip could lead to an
even more dangerous situation for Israel.

At a question-and-answer session with students at the Hebrew University of
Jerusalem last week, Livni cited her own diplomatic efforts as crucial,
first to keeping the war going despite international pressure for it to end,
and then to bringing about a responsible conclusion.

Netanyahu, she said, is "an extreme ideologist" who may know how to fight
but won't know how to work with allies, including the United States, to
achieve peace.

Livni, wary of looking soft, also spoke out forcefully against Hamas and
said Israel will continue to strike at the group when necessary. Her party,
Kadima, has featured images of tanks rolling into Gaza in its
advertisements, part of a bid to toughen her image.

Livni, who took control of the centrist Kadima last year after Olmert
stepped aside amid corruption charges, is running second in the polls, with
Labor's Barak a distant third.

During the Gaza war, all of the first-tier parties, as well as many of those
in the second tier, favored the decision to fight. Even a party considered
to be a stalwart of Israel's peace camp, Meretz, initially backed the war,
although it later called for a cease-fire. The party's campaign does not
highlight Gaza, focusing instead on education and social issues.

During Livni's Hebrew University speech, several dozen backers of one group
that did oppose the war -- the small leftist party Hadash -- rallied
outside, though their voices could not be heard in the auditorium.

Members said later that they see no significant differences among the major
candidates for leadership in Israel.

"They're two faces of the same coin," said Hanaa Mahamid, 24, a student and
an Arab citizen of Israel. "All of them are war criminals."





From Jscotlive at aol.com  Mon Feb  2 04:38:52 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 06:38:52 EST
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
Message-ID: <cd9.47ce0f55.36b8354c@aol.com>

sartesian:
 
Sticking to that issue, that false issue of a "foreign" source undermining  
"UK wages and conditions" is perfect recipe for defeat of class struggle.  
It's about class not location.

Reply:
 
The main slogan of the strike 'British Jobs for British Workers' I'll allow  
was initially adopted by the workers involved, and their leaders, as a dig  at 
British PM, Gordon Brown, who came out with this atrocious and  misleading 
term during a keynote speech recently. Brown knew when he said  it that it was a 
lie, as under EU legislation workers of member states are able  to travel to 
and work within other member states. That this Italian  subcontractor has 
exploited this legislation to import the entire workforce for  a specific contract 
has laid bare the reality of the free market and the  EU, despite the various 
strands of progressive legislation that  have been passed under its auspices, 
as at bottom a bosses' charter in the  interests of the corporations.
 
Worryingly, however, has been an ugly turn quickly taken by this strike. In  
all the news footage I've seen of the strike thus far, I see nothing but white 
 workers holding up placards carrying a slogan that is a gift to the far 
right  and will in effect play into the hands of the bosses by pitting worker 
against  worker.
 
I blame of course Brown for playing politics with nationalism, covering  
himself in the Union Jack in order to appease Tory scum and to distract from the  
reality of a free market to which he was a major proponent. But I also blame 
the  trade union bureaucracy for tailing the reactionary consciousness which 
has  taken hold of the strike rather than working to turn the strike into a 
clear and  unambiguous fight against the bosses.
 
J
 
 

From Midhurst14 at aol.com  Mon Feb  2 04:44:03 2009
From: Midhurst14 at aol.com (Midhurst14 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 06:44:03 EST
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
Message-ID: <bc4.3fcea418.36b83683@aol.com>

Do you know what you are talking about?
Read about  the role of the EU and study history, for instance;  Carnegie 
playing one nationality against another
Fortunately the TUC is not falling for your ultra-left nonsense
Anything but the real issue
Cutting wages and conditions
George Anthony

From sartesian at earthlink.net  Mon Feb  2 04:51:48 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 12:51:48 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
References: <cd9.47ce0f55.36b8354c@aol.com>
Message-ID: <A0E599A00D0042F796E5F41C0709F949@dmsthinkpad>

I didn't know the background-- Brown's remark, thanks for that info.

I really think the key everywhere to breaking the ruling continuum of 
oppression is in defense of migrant labor so that an action that targets the 
use of "imported" workers rather than the source of the current distress is 
exactly "the gift" as J puts it, that will keep on giving to capital exactly 
what it needs, political disorganization of the working class.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Jscotlive at aol.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 12:38 PM
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave? 



From Jscotlive at aol.com  Mon Feb  2 04:55:07 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 06:55:07 EST
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
Message-ID: <d08.4c3843fa.36b8391b@aol.com>

George:
 
Do you know what you are talking about?
Read about the role of the EU  and study history, for instance; Carnegie 
playing one nationality against  another
Fortunately the TUC is not falling for your ultra-left  nonsense
Anything but the real issue
Cutting wages and  conditions

Reply:
 
I ask you to read again what I wrote, as I say quite clearly  that this 
incident has laid bare the true nature of the EU as a  bosses' charter, set up to 
suit the corporations and big business. I mean,  I say that clearly.
 
This unrest is part of a wave of industrial disputes and protests currently  
sweeping Europe as the bosses and the governments that represent their 
interests  attempt to make the working class pay for the global economic crisis. 
 
The TUC is a fucking nest of reformist, careerist scumbags in the pockets  of 
New Labour politicians, whose apparatchiks have excelled themselves  in 
helping to ensure the smooth implementation of the worst of this  govt's 
pro-business, anti-working class economic policies. Not ultra-left, no,  just left. 
 
'Workers Of The World Unite'- remember that? Starting to ring any bells at  
all?
 
 

From farmelantj at juno.com  Mon Feb  2 06:01:19 2009
From: farmelantj at juno.com (farmelantj at juno.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 13:01:19 GMT
Subject: [Marxism] Likely next Israeli prime minister commits to more
	war v	. Gaza
Message-ID: <20090202.080119.21783.0@webmail08.vgs.untd.com>


Benjamin Netanyahu, who will most likely be
Israel's new PM following elections on
February 10, is often held up by liberals
as the great bogeyman of Israeli politics,
but comparing his actions when he was last
PM with the deeds of people like Olmert,
Barak, and Livni, there seems little to
choose from here.  Olmert, Barak, and Livni,
have had two wars to their credit within
a two year period.  Netanyahu, when he
was PM, had no wars to his credit, just 
the issuing of volleys of bellicose
rhetoric.  To be sure, when he was PM
in the past, we saw the creation of new
settlements and the expansion of existing
ones in the occupied territories, but then
again we have seen much the same thing under
Olmert, Barak, and Livni.

It is true that Livni and Barak can talk
a good game about peace and negotiations
with the Palestinians, but their beautiful
words are belied by their deeds.  Netanyahu
is at least an honest rejectionist.
If he is elected as PM it might make it
a bit easier for Western countries to
distance themselves from Israel and if
that happened, that would seem to be a
development that we would want to welcome.

It seems that there is developing within
the US ruling class a tendency that wants
to see a recalibration of the US/Israel
relationship.  The publication of the
Mearsheimer/Walt book on the Israel lobby
was one such indicator,  the segment that 
appeared in the 60 Minutes broadcast, with
its unsparing look at the occupation last
Sunday, is another such indicator.  More
bellicose rhetoric from Netanyahu as PM
could only help this trend.


-- "Fred Feldman" <ffeldman at bellatlantic.net> wrote:

Israel's Key Election Issue: Did War End Too Soon?

By Griff Witte
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, February 2, 2009; A01


____________________________________________________________
Click to lower your debt and consolidate your monthly expenses.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw2O7FGdICTJtYsJCxeU7fuV976QuPw3AW0WZTJThuzhqXZaX/


From nmgoro at gmail.com  Mon Feb  2 07:23:14 2009
From: nmgoro at gmail.com (Nestor Gorojovsky)
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 11:23:14 -0300
Subject: [Marxism] Likely next Israeli prime minister commits to more
 war v	. Gaza
In-Reply-To: <20090202.080119.21783.0@webmail08.vgs.untd.com>
References: <20090202.080119.21783.0@webmail08.vgs.untd.com>
Message-ID: <498701D2.6070707@gmail.com>

One pressing need Netanyahu DOES NOT feel: that of demonstrating that he 
is hawkish than the worst hawk.

Thus he is in a better position, paradoxically, to accept a new balance 
in the US-led Middle East caucus (which includes, let us not forget, 
Arab leaders as well as Israeli leaders)

I think it was Jim Farmelant (or Fred Feldman?) who posted on this list, 
once, the enlightening article by Z. Jabotinski where this leader of the 
"revisionist" wing of Zionism openly advocated for NOT CONSIDERING THE 
ARABS STUPID BABIES THAT COULD BE FOOLED BY THE LEADERS OF THE ISRAELI 
COLONIAL ATTEMPT.

This is realism, indeed.

Maybe Netanyahu can display a lot more realism of this kind than the 
"progressive" murderers of Gaza.

farmelantj en juno.com escribi?:
> Benjamin Netanyahu, who will most likely be
> Israel's new PM following elections on
> February 10, is often held up by liberals
> as the great bogeyman of Israeli politics,
> but comparing his actions when he was last
> PM with the deeds of people like Olmert,
> Barak, and Livni, there seems little to
> choose from here.  Olmert, Barak, and Livni,
> have had two wars to their credit within
> a two year period.  Netanyahu, when he
> was PM, had no wars to his credit, just 
> the issuing of volleys of bellicose
> rhetoric.  To be sure, when he was PM
> in the past, we saw the creation of new
> settlements and the expansion of existing
> ones in the occupied territories, but then
> again we have seen much the same thing under
> Olmert, Barak, and Livni.



From ccarrico at temple.edu  Mon Feb  2 06:29:15 2009
From: ccarrico at temple.edu (Christopher Carrico)
Date: Mon,  2 Feb 2009 08:29:15 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Marxism] New film: Zizek, Hardt,
 Judith Butler et al (Louis Proyect)
Message-ID: <20090202082915.DSC38069@po-f.temple.edu>


Well Hardt definitely comes across as retarded in the trailer,
but I will reserve fuller judgement until I've seen the film...

As far as Zizek's straw man goes... and the fact that he
expounds at great length about ecology without knowing the
first thing about it...

Just keep in mind what Zizek is: an anally expulsive hysteric
who is acting out in public...




From jjonas at nic.fi  Mon Feb  2 07:10:06 2009
From: jjonas at nic.fi (Joonas Laine)
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 16:10:06 +0200
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
In-Reply-To: <49860274.3080202@gmail.com>
References: <49860274.3080202@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4986FEBE.1030401@nic.fi>

nada wrote:
> Good discussion. Obviously we have to wait for more European comrades to 
> chime in here. It is complex and not altogether clear.

There's three recent EC court ruling that might be useful to bring up 
here: Viking Line (Finland/Estonia), Laval (Sweden/Latvia), and R?ffert 
(Germany/Poland).

The following text is from European Trade Union Institute's website, 
which also provides links to the actual court rulings.
http://www.etui-rehs.org/en/Headline-issues/Viking-Laval-Rueffert-Luxembourg

My comments are in brackets, and all emphasis is mine.

---

Viking Line versus the Finnish Seamen's Union

The shipping line Viking runs ferry services between Finland and Estonia 
under the Finnish flag. The company?s management decided to re-flag 
their ferries - using the Estonian flag. The decision was also taken to 
employ Estonian labour in order to take advantage of the fact that wages 
are lower in Estonia. In response, the Finnish Seamen?s Union (FSU) 
warned the company Viking that they might take collective action to stop 
the re-flagging process. To avoid the danger of being undercut, it also 
asked the International Transport Workers? Federation (ITF) under its 
?Flag of conveniences campaign? to ask their members not to start 
negotiations with Viking unless they were based in Finland. According to 
this campaign, the ITF affiliates agreed that only trade unions 
established in the state of beneficial ownership should have the right 
to conclude collective agreements covering the vessel concerned.

The judgement

The ECJ recognised the right to take collective action, including the 
right to strike as a fundamental right which forms an integral part of 
the general principles of Community law. *Nevertheless, this right might 
be restricted*, as reaffirmed by Article 28 of the Charter of 
Fundamental Rights of the European Union which states that it is to be 
protected in accordance with Community law and national law and 
practices. *Furthermore the exercise of this right may be subject to 
certain restrictions.* [..]

The ECJ sees the right of trade unions to take collective action as a 
restriction on the freedom to provide services or the freedom of 
establishment. *Collective action must be justified. It must have a 
legitimate aim, respond to overriding reasons of public interest* and be 
suitable for securing the attainment of the objective pursued and *not 
go beyond what is necessary in order to attain it*. Those conditions are 
often called the proportionality test, which is now introduced by the 
court with respect to the trade union rights. [..]

Laval versus the Swedish Construction Workers Union

The Latvian company Laval won the tender for construction work at a 
school in the town of Vaxholm. They posted their workers from Latvia to 
Sweden to fulfil the contract. As is standard practice in the Swedish 
industrial relations system the Swedish unions started negotiations with 
Laval in order to sign a collective agreement with regard to wages and 
other working conditions, which are always laid down by negotiation on a 
case-by-case basis. As Laval did not want to pay the wages requested, 
they signed a collective agreement in Latvia. Following the failure of 
the Swedish negotiations, the Swedish trade unions took action by 
blockading the construction site. Solidarity actions then followed from 
the electricians trade unions."

The judgement

[In this case the ECJ also applied the "proportionality test", and found 
that in this case the measures were not "proportionate". Perhaps one 
reason was that the Laval's Swedish subsidiary Baltic Bygg which was 
blockaded, went bankrupt because of the blockade, but formally the court 
says the action could not be justified due to an incorrect 
implementation of the posting of workers Directive. JL]

Most of the judgement concerns the interpretation of this Directive. The 
ECJ is of the opinion that *negotiation at the place of work, on a 
case-by-case basis*, when minimum rates of pay are not determined in 
accordance with one of the means provided for by the posting of workers 
directive, *are not permissible* under the Directive. The Court put into 
question the flexibility of the Swedish collective bargaining system, 
emphasising *the alleged lack of certainty for business unable to 
ascertain in advance the conditions they would have to guarantee to 
their posted workers.*

The objective of the Posting of Workers Directive is to lay down a set 
of mandatory rules for minimum protection to be observed in the host 
country by employers who post workers to perform temporary work in the 
territory of a Member State where the services are provided. The ECJ now 
judges that the Directive limits the level of protection guaranteed to 
posted workers. *Neither the host Member State nor the social partners 
can ask for more favourable conditions, which go beyond the mandatory 
rules for minimum protection in the Directive.*

R?ffert versus Lower Saxony

A German company won the tender with the Land Niedersachsen which 
involved construction work in a prison. The public procurement law of 
that Land states that ?the contracts for building services shall be 
awarded only to undertakings which, when lodging a tender, undertake in 
writing to pay their employees, when performing those services, at least 
the remuneration prescribed by the collective agreement in the place 
where those services are performed ??. The German company subcontracted 
the work to a Polish company and it turned out that the 53 Polish 
workers actually only earned 46,57 % of their German colleagues on the 
site. Therefore the Land Niedersachsen applied the contractual penalties 
and annulled the contract and imposed financial penalties on the company.

The judgement

Again the ECJ produced a judgement along the lines of the Posting of 
Workers Directive. *In its view the situation in Niedersachsen did not 
fulfil the criteria to fix pay as set out in the Directive as the law 
does not itself fix any minimum rate of pay and the collective agreement 
in question had not been declared universally applicable.* [..]

---

Here begin my further comments, especially on the Swedish case, because 
it is interesting from the Finnish point of view. The collective 
agreement systems in these two countries are quite similar, with high 
organisational densities in both countries (70-80%). However, one 
crucial difference seems to be that while Swedish law does not guarantee 
universal applicability of collective agreements (the ECJ refers to this 
fact in its verdict, paragraph 5), whereas Finland does.

In Sweden, if I've understood it correctly, the unions negotiate with 
capitalists (perhaps also with capitalists' organisations) to get a 
collective agreement. The resulting agreement is binding only to the 
members of the signatory organisations, i.e. the union members and the 
individual capitalist or the capitalists' organisation.

If you're not a member of the union, the capitalist doesn't have to 
apply the terms of the deal to you. Also capitalists not party to any 
such agreement can apply whichever terms (within legislation, of course) 
to workers they hire, whether they are union members or not. If I have 
understood correctly, the whole system in Sweden hinges crucially on the 
two parties, and the agreement they make that are binding re their 
members, but not others.

In Finland this is different. Let's take the Metal Workers Union (MWU) 
and the corresponding capitalist front organisation, Technology 
Industries (TI). They make a collective agreement, and if the TI member 
organisations are estimated to employ more than half of the work force 
in the trade, the collective agreement they make becomes universally 
applicable. The law provides for this, as is required by the EU 
Directive 96/71, article 3 on post workers in order for it to apply to 
posted workers as well.

The Finnish system means that also all the small capitalists who are not 
members of the TI (or some other deal-making capitalist front) are bound 
by the agreement they have not been negotiating, and they are of course 
furious about this. It also means that once the agreement is deemed 
universally applicable, it doesn't matter whether you are a member of a 
union or not; every capitalist has to apply the agreement's terms to 
you, just like to your workmate who is a union member and who's been 
paying union fees for years while you haven't.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Feb  2 07:28:37 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 09:28:37 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] HRW backs Obama's continuation of renditions
Message-ID: <49870315.2070302@panix.com>

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-hayden/cia-secret-rendition-poli_b_162916.html
CIA Secret Rendition Policy Backed by Human Rights Groups?
by Tom Hayden

It is confirmed that one of the loopholes in the president's 
anti-torture orders allows the continuance of rendition by the CIA, 
which consists of secretly snatching suspects off the street without any 
due process and "rendering" them to jails in other countries. Rendition 
is at the heart of the state secrecy apparatus, and should be of concern 
to any civil liberties, human rights, or democracy advocates.

But Human Rights Watch and, apparently, other human rights groups signed 
off on renditions in talks with the Obama administration, saying 
publicly that there is "a legitimate place" for the practice.

That's not a position that represents most human rights advocates, and 
deserves to be reconsidered in the months of drafting the new 
administration's rules. Human Rights Watch could have celebrated Obama's 
presidential order while vowing to close the rendition loophole. 
Instead, according to the LA Times, the proposal "did not draw major 
protests" among human rights groups because of "a sense that nations 
need certain tools to combat terrorism." [see LA Times, Feb. 1, 2009]

"You still have to go after the bad guys", says an Obama spokesman in 
defense of renditions, which have been condemned by the European 
parliament. A Human Rights Watch representative, Tom Malinowski, says he 
urged the administration to guarantee public hearings in the countries 
to which they are rendered, as a protection against torture and 
disappearances. That would be an important corrective, but leaves 
unanswered the purpose of the secret abductions in which the CIA is the 
judge, jury, and in certain cases the executioner.

Italian politics were shaken when it was revealed that the CIA, in 
cooperation with the Berlosconi government, abducted an Egyptian cleric 
who was flown to Egypt and tortured in 2003. In another 2003 case, an 
Egyptian citizen, Khalid Masri, was grabbed by men wearing ski masks, 
stripped, blindfolded, placed in diapers, shackled and flown from 
Macedonia to Albania. He was released five months later as a case of 
mistaken identity. There perhaps have been hundreds of cases of 
rendition, tracked by European citizens as suspected CIA planes utilized 
landing rights in other countries. Despite causing an international 
uproar, the numbers of renditions may never be known.

If the Obama Justice Department wants to defend renditions as 
constitutional on "executive privilege" and "national security" grounds, 
human rights groups should perhaps meet them in court and seek a better 
outcome.

As the policy stands now, Jack Bauer would be pleased.




From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Feb  2 07:31:33 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 09:31:33 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Stiglitz: is the entire bailout strategy flawed?
Message-ID: <498703C5.2050505@panix.com>

http://www.alternet.org/story/124166/

Is the Entire Bailout Strategy Flawed? Let's Rethink This Before It's 
Too Late
By Joseph Stiglitz, CNN

America's recession is moving into its second year, with the situation 
only worsening.

The hope that President Obama will be able to get us out of the mess is 
tempered by the reality that throwing hundreds of billions of dollars at 
the banks has failed to restore them to health, or even to resuscitate 
the flow of lending.

Every day brings further evidence that the losses are greater than had 
been expected and more and more money will be required.

The question is at last being raised: Perhaps the entire strategy is 
flawed? Perhaps what is needed is a fundamental rethinking. The 
Paulson-Bernanke-Geithner strategy was based on the realization that 
maintaining the flow of credit was essential for the economy. But it was 
also based on a failure to grasp some of the fundamental changes in our 
financial sector since the Great Depression, and even in the last two 
decades.

For a while, there was hope that simply lowering interest rates enough, 
flooding the economy with money, would suffice; but three quarters of a 
century ago, Keynes explained why, in a downturn such as this, monetary 
policy is likely to be ineffective. It is like pushing on a string.

Then there was the hope that if the government stood ready to help the 
banks with enough money -- and enough was a lot -- confidence would be 
restored, and with the restoration of confidence, asset prices would 
increase and lending would be restored.
Remarkably, Bush administration Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and 
company simply didn't understand that the banks had made bad loans and 
engaged in reckless gambling. There had been a bubble, and the bubble 
had broken. No amount of talking would change these realities.

It soon became clear that just saying that we were ready to spend the 
money would not suffice. We actually had to get it into the banks. The 
question was how. At first, the architects of the bailout argued (with 
complete and utter confidence) that the best way to do this was buying 
the toxic assets (those in the financial market didn't like the 
pejorative term, so they used the term "troubled assets") -- the assets 
that no one in the private sector would touch with a 10-foot pole.

It should have been obvious that this could not be done in a quick way; 
it took a few weeks for this crushing reality to dawn on them. Besides, 
there was a fundamental problem: how to value the assets. And if we 
valued them correctly, it was clear that there would still be a big hole 
in banks' balance sheets, impeding their ability to lend.

Then came the idea of equity injection, without strings, so that as we 
poured money into the banks, they poured out money, to their executives 
in the form of bonuses, to their shareholders in the form of dividends.

Some of what they had left over they used to buy other banks -- to 
pursue strategic goals for which they could not have found private 
finance. The last thing in their mind was to restart lending.

The underlying problem is simple: Even in the heyday of finance, there 
was a huge gap between private rewards and social returns. The bank 
managers have taken home huge paychecks, even though, over the past five 
years, the net profits of many of the banks have (in total) been negative.

And the social returns have even been less -- the financial sector is 
supposed to allocate capital and manage risk, and it did neither well. 
Our economy is paying the price for these failures -- to the tune of 
hundreds of billions of dollars.

But this ever-present problem has now grown worse. In effect, the 
American taxpayers are the major provider of finance to the banks. In 
some cases, the value of our equity injection, guarantees, and other 
forms of assistance dwarf the value of the "private" sector's equity 
contribution; yet we have no voice in how the banks are run.

This helps us understand the reason why banks have not started to lend 
again. Put yourself in the position of a bank manager, trying to get 
through this mess. At this juncture, in spite of the massive government 
cash injections, he sees his equity dwindling. The banks -- who prided 
themselves on being risk managers -- finally, and a little too late -- 
seem to have recognized the risk that they have taken on in the past 
five years.

Leverage, or borrowing, gives big returns when things are going well, 
but when things turn sour, it is a recipe for disaster. It was not 
unusual for investment banks to "leverage" themselves by borrowing 
amounts equal to 25 or 30 times their equity.

At "just" 25 to 1 leverage, a 4 percent fall in the price of assets 
wipes out a bank's net worth -- and we have seen far more precipitous 
falls in asset prices. Putting another $20 billion in a bank with $2 
trillion of assets will be wiped out with just a 1 percent fall in asset 
prices. What's the point?

It seems that some of our government officials have finally gotten 
around to doing some of this elementary arithmetic. So they have come up 
with another strategy: We'll "insure" the banks, i.e., take the downside 
risk off of them.

The problem is similar to that confronting the original "cash for trash" 
initiative: How do we determine the right price for the insurance? And 
almost surely, if we charge the right price, these institutions are 
bankrupt. They will need massive equity injections and insurance.

There is a slight variant version of this, much like the original 
Paulson proposal: Buy the bad assets, but this time, not on a one by one 
basis, but in large bundles. Again, the problem is -- how do we value 
the bundles of toxic waste we take off the banks? The suspicion is that 
the banks have a simple answer: Don't worry about the details. Just give 
us a big wad of cash.

This variant adds another twist of the kind of financial alchemy that 
got the country into the mess. Somehow, there is a notion that by moving 
the assets around, putting the bad assets in an aggregator bank run by 
the government, things will get better.

Is the rationale that the government is better at disposing of garbage, 
while the private sector is better at making loans? The record of our 
financial system in assessing credit worthiness -- evidenced not just by 
this bailout, but by the repeated bailouts over the past 25 years -- 
provides little convincing evidence.

But even were we to do all this -- with uncertain risks to our future 
national debt -- there is still no assurance of a resumption of lending. 
For the reality is we are in a recession, and risks are high in a 
recession. Having been burned once, many bankers are staying away from 
the fire.

Besides, many of the problems that afflict the financial sector are more 
pervasive. General Motors and GE both got into the finance business, and 
both showed that banks had no monopoly on bad risk management.

Many a bank may decide that the better strategy is a conservative one: 
Hoard one's cash, wait until things settle down, hope that you are among 
the few surviving banks and then start lending. Of course, if all the 
banks reason so, the recession will be longer and deeper than it 
otherwise would be.

What's the alternative? Sweden (and several other countries) have shown 
that there is an alternative -- the government takes over those banks 
that cannot assemble enough capital through private sources to survive 
without government assistance.

It is standard practice to shut down banks failing to meet basic 
requirements on capital, but we almost certainly have been too gentle in 
enforcing these requirements. (There has been too little transparency in 
this and every other aspect of government intervention in the financial 
system.)

To be sure, shareholders and bondholders will lose out, but their gains 
under the current regime come at the expense of taxpayers. In the good 
years, they were rewarded for their risk taking. Ownership cannot be a 
one-sided bet.

Of course, most of the employees will remain, and even much of the 
management. What then is the difference? The difference is that now, the 
incentives of the banks can be aligned better with those of the country. 
And it is in the national interest that prudent lending be restarted.

There are several other marked advantages. One of the problems today is 
that the banks potentially owe large amounts to each other (through 
complicated derivatives). With government owning many of the banks, 
sorting through those obligations ("netting them out," in the jargon) 
will be far easier.

Inevitably, American taxpayers are going to pick up much of the tab for 
the banks' failures. The question facing us is, to what extent do we 
participate in the upside return?

Eventually, America's economy will recover. Eventually, our financial 
sector will be functioning -- and profitable -- once again, though 
hopefully, it will focus its attention more on doing what it is supposed 
to do. When things turn around, we can once again privatize the 
now-failed banks, and the returns we get can help write down the massive 
increase in the national debt that has been brought upon us by our 
financial markets.

We are moving in unchartered waters. No one can be sure what will work. 
But long-standing economic principles can help guide us. Incentives 
matter. The long-run fiscal position of the U.S. matters. And it is 
important to restart prudent lending as fast as possible.

Most of the ways currently being discussed for squaring this circle fail 
to do so. There is an alternative. We should begin to consider it.

AlterNet is making this material available in accordance with Title 17 
U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without profit to those 
who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included 
information for research and educational purposes.

Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate, is a professor of economics at 
Columbia University.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Feb  2 07:34:26 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 09:34:26 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Chris Hedges ruminates
Message-ID: <49870472.60805@panix.com>

It?s Not Going to Be OK
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090202_its_not_going_to_be_ok/
Posted on Feb 2, 2009

By Chris Hedges

The daily bleeding of thousands of jobs will soon turn our economic 
crisis into a political crisis. The street protests, strikes and riots 
that have rattled France, Turkey, Greece, Ukraine, Russia, Latvia, 
Lithuania, Bulgaria and Iceland will descend on us. It is only a matter 
of time. And not much time. When things start to go sour, when Barack 
Obama is exposed as a mortal waving a sword at a tidal wave, the United 
States could plunge into a long period of precarious social instability.

At no period in American history has our democracy been in such peril or 
has the possibility of totalitarianism been as real. Our way of life is 
over. Our profligate consumption is finished. Our children will never 
have the standard of living we had. And poverty and despair will sweep 
across the landscape like a plague. This is the bleak future. There is 
nothing President Obama can do to stop it. It has been decades in the 
making. It cannot be undone with a trillion or two trillion dollars in 
bailout money. Our empire is dying. Our economy has collapsed.

How will we cope with our decline? Will we cling to the absurd dreams of 
a superpower and a glorious tomorrow or will we responsibly face our 
stark new limitations? Will we heed those who are sober and rational, 
those who speak of a new simplicity and humility, or will we follow the 
demagogues and charlatans who rise up out of the slime in moments of 
crisis to offer fantastic visions? Will we radically transform our 
system to one that protects the ordinary citizen and fosters the common 
good, that defies the corporate state, or will we employ the brutality 
and technology of our internal security and surveillance apparatus to 
crush all dissent? We won?t have to wait long to find out.

There are a few isolated individuals who saw it coming. The political 
philosophers Sheldon S. Wolin, John Ralston Saul and Andrew Bacevich, as 
well as writers such as Noam Chomsky, Chalmers Johnson, David Korten and 
Naomi Klein, along with activists such as Bill McKibben and Ralph Nader, 
rang the alarm bells. They were largely ignored or ridiculed. Our 
corporate media and corporate universities proved, when we needed them 
most, intellectually and morally useless.

Wolin, who taught political philosophy at the University of California 
in Berkeley and at Princeton, in his book ?Democracy Incorporated? uses 
the phrase inverted totalitarianism to describe our system of power. 
Inverted totalitarianism, unlike classical totalitarianism, does not 
revolve around a demagogue or charismatic leader. It finds its 
expression in the anonymity of the corporate state. It purports to 
cherish democracy, patriotism and the Constitution while cynically 
manipulating internal levers to subvert and thwart democratic 
institutions. Political candidates are elected in popular votes by 
citizens, but they must raise staggering amounts of corporate funds to 
compete. They are beholden to armies of corporate lobbyists in 
Washington or state capitals who write the legislation. A corporate 
media controls nearly everything we read, watch or hear and imposes a 
bland uniformity of opinion or diverts us with trivia and celebrity 
gossip. In classical totalitarian regimes, such as Nazi fascism or 
Soviet communism, economics was subordinate to politics. ?Under inverted 
totalitarianism the reverse is true,? Wolin writes. ?Economics dominates 
politics?and with that domination comes different forms of ruthlessness.?

I reached Wolin, 86, by phone at his home about 25 miles north of San 
Francisco. He was a bombardier in the South Pacific during World War II 
and went to Harvard after the war to get his doctorate. Wolin has 
written classics such as ?Politics and Vision? and ?Tocqueville Between 
Two Worlds.? His newest book is one of the most important and prescient 
critiques to date of the American political system. He is also the 
author of a series of remarkable essays on Augustine of Hippo, Richard 
Hooker, David Hume, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Max Weber, Friedrich 
Nietzsche, Karl Marx and John Dewey. His voice, however, has faded from 
public awareness because, as he told me, ?it is harder and harder for 
people like me to get a public hearing.? He said that publications, such 
as The New York Review of Books, which often published his work a couple 
of decades ago, lost interest in his critiques of American capitalism, 
his warnings about the subversion of democratic institutions and the 
emergence of the corporate state. He does not hold out much hope for Obama.

?The basic systems are going to stay in place; they are too powerful to 
be challenged,? Wolin told me when I asked him about the new Obama 
administration. ?This is shown by the financial bailout. It does not 
bother with the structure at all. I don?t think Obama can take on the 
kind of military establishment we have developed. This is not to say 
that I do not admire him. He is probably the most intelligent president 
we have had in decades. I think he is well meaning, but he inherits a 
system of constraints that make it very difficult to take on these major 
power configurations. I do not think he has the appetite for it in any 
ideological sense. The corporate structure is not going to be 
challenged. There has not been a word from him that would suggest an 
attempt to rethink the American imperium.?

Wolin argues that a failure to dismantle our vast and overextended 
imperial projects, coupled with the economic collapse, is likely to 
result in inverted totalitarianism. He said that without ?radical and 
drastic remedies? the response to mounting discontent and social unrest 
will probably lead to greater state control and repression. There will 
be, he warned, a huge ?expansion of government power.?

?Our political culture has remained unhelpful in fostering a democratic 
consciousness,? he said. ?The political system and its operatives will 
not be constrained by popular discontent or uprisings.?

Wolin writes that in inverted totalitarianism consumer goods and a 
comfortable standard of living, along with a vast entertainment industry 
that provides spectacles and diversions, keep the citizenry politically 
passive. I asked if the economic collapse and the steady decline in our 
standard of living might not, in fact, trigger classical 
totalitarianism. Could widespread frustration and poverty lead the 
working and middle classes to place their faith in demagogues, 
especially those from the Christian right?

?I think that?s perfectly possible,? he answered. ?That was the 
experience of the 1930s. There wasn?t just FDR. There was Huey Long and 
Father Coughlin. There were even more extreme movements including the 
Klan. The extent to which those forces can be fed by the downturn and 
bleakness is a very real danger. It could become classical totalitarianism.?

He said the widespread political passivity is dangerous. It is often 
exploited by demagogues who pose as saviors and offer dreams of glory 
and salvation. He warned that ?the apoliticalness, even 
anti-politicalness, will be very powerful elements in taking us towards 
a radically dictatorial direction. It testifies to how thin the 
commitment to democracy is in the present circumstances. Democracy is 
not ascendant. It is not dominant. It is beleaguered. The extent to 
which young people have been drawn away from public concerns and given 
this extraordinary range of diversions makes it very likely they could 
then rally to a demagogue.?

Wolin lamented that the corporate state has successfully blocked any 
real debate about alternative forms of power. Corporations determine who 
gets heard and who does not, he said. And those who critique corporate 
power are given no place in the national dialogue.

?In the 1930s there were all kinds of alternative understandings, from 
socialism to more extensive governmental involvement,? he said. ?There 
was a range of different approaches. But what I am struck by now is the 
narrow range within which palliatives are being modeled. We are supposed 
to work with the financial system. So the people who helped create this 
system are put in charge of the solution. There has to be some major 
effort to think outside the box.?

?The puzzle to me is the lack of social unrest,? Wolin said when I asked 
why we have not yet seen rioting or protests. He said he worried that 
popular protests will be dismissed and ignored by the corporate media. 
This, he said, is what happened when tens of thousands protested the war 
in Iraq. This will permit the state to ruthlessly suppress local 
protests, as happened during the Democratic and Republic conventions. 
Anti-war protests in the 1960s gained momentum from their ability to 
spread across the country, he noted. This, he said, may not happen this 
time. ?The ways they can isolate protests and prevent it from [becoming] 
a contagion are formidable,? he said.

?My greatest fear is that the Obama administration will achieve 
relatively little in terms of structural change,? he added. ?They may at 
best keep the system going. But there is a growing pessimism. Every day 
we hear how much longer the recession will continue. They are already 
talking about beyond next year. The economic difficulties are more 
profound than we had guessed and because of globalization more difficult 
to deal with. I wish the political establishment, the parties and 
leadership, would become more aware of the depths of the problem. They 
can?t keep throwing money at this. They have to begin structural changes 
that involve a very different approach from a market economy. I don?t 
think this will happen.?

?I keep asking why and how and when this country became so 
conservative,? he went on. ?This country once prided itself on its 
experimentation and flexibility. It has become rigid. It is probably the 
most conservative of all the advanced countries.?

The American left, he said, has crumbled. It sold out to a bankrupt 
Democratic Party, abandoned the working class and has no ability to 
organize. Unions are a spent force. The universities are mills for 
corporate employees. The press churns out info-entertainment or fatuous 
pundits. The left, he said, no longer has the capacity to be a 
counterweight to the corporate state. He said that if an extreme right 
gains momentum there will probably be very little organized resistance.

?The left is amorphous,? he said. ?I despair over the left. Left parties 
may be small in number in Europe but they are a coherent organization 
that keeps going. Here, except for Nader?s efforts, we don?t have that. 
We have a few voices here, a magazine there, and that?s about it. It 
goes nowhere.?


From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Mon Feb  2 07:53:44 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 09:53:44 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Chavez blames (correctly,
 I think) 'the oligarchy' for attack on synagogue
Message-ID: <7B4B31AED839410EB5DDCF3D7F7718D3@office1pc>

http://english.eluniversal.com/2009/02/01/en_pol_esp_chavez-blames-on-th_01A
2212363.shtml

Ch?vez blames on "the oligarchy" a raid on Caracas synagogue 
 

"They are trying to cast a shadow over a people's victory whose date has
actually been set on the calendar," said Hugo Ch?vez

 
Early on January 31st, attackers broke into the synagogue located in
Marip?rez, north Caracas (Handout Photo: Venezuela's Confederation of
Israeli Associations)
Politics 

"Does who benefit from this or these violent acts? Neither the government
nor the people or the revolution benefit from this. Efforts are under way to
disturb the climate prevailing in Venezuela," stated President Hugo Chavez
on Sunday referring to an attack early on January 31st against a synagogue
located in Marip?rez, north Caracas.
"They are trying to change the dynamics that is under way; they are trying
to break a trend that is under way, and you exactly what I mean. They are
trying to cast a shadow over a people's victory whose date has actually been
set on the calendar," Ch?vez said in a mandatory radio and television
address.
"It's them! It was them!," stressed the ruler. "I am making this statement
before the country. Mr. Minister (of the Interior and Justice) Tareck El
Aissami, we will do everything in our power, everything possible under the
law, to demonstrate the real causes behind this act," the Venezuelan ruler
added.
"The oligarchy is violent. Oligarchy kills, plots, threatens to set Caracas
ablaze, burns Avila mountain (a mountain range north Caracas), and uses some
soulless youth as cannon fodder, by driving them to violent acts."

Freddy Campos
EL UNIVERSAL

http://english.eluniversal.com/2009/02/01/en_pol_esp_chavez-blames-on-th_01A
2212363.shtml





From Midhurst14 at aol.com  Mon Feb  2 08:28:16 2009
From: Midhurst14 at aol.com (Midhurst14 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 10:28:16 EST
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
Message-ID: <d3a.3796558f.36b86b10@aol.com>

To scotlive
That's spot on
George Anthony

From donaloc at hotmail.com  Mon Feb  2 10:16:38 2009
From: donaloc at hotmail.com (D OC)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 17:16:38 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Launch of "Diego: the true story of a Colombian guerrilla
	fighter"
Message-ID: <BLU138-W27091D31365BE9245F65F4ABC50@phx.gbl>


Book launch by Jim Monaghan (one of Colombia 3).
 
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/90912
 
_________________________________________________________________
Get 30 Free Emoticons for your Windows Live Messenger
http://www.livemessenger-emoticons.com/funfamily/en-ie/

From naskha3 at gmail.com  Mon Feb  2 10:20:39 2009
From: naskha3 at gmail.com (Nasir Khan)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 18:20:39 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Obama to let CIA use controversial renditions
Message-ID: <18d70e600902020920v547d7865x28a8db1bd6f4023c@mail.gmail.com>

Obama to let CIA use controversial renditions
Terror suspects can still be secretly seized and sent to other countries.

LOS ANGELES TIMES | statesman.com
Sunday, February 01, 2009

WASHINGTON ? The CIA's secret prisons and Guant?namo Bay detention
center are being shuttered. Harsh interrogation techniques are
off-limits.

But, under executive orders issued by President Barack Obama last
week, the CIA still has authority to carry out "renditions," the
secret abductions and transfers of prisoners to countries that
cooperate with the U.S.

Current and former U.S. intelligence officials said that the rendition
program may be poised to play an expanded role going forward because
it is the main remaining mechanism ? aside from Predator missile
strikes ? for taking suspected terrorists off the street.

"Obviously you need to preserve some tools. You still have to go after
the bad guys," said an Obama administration official, speaking on
condition of anonymity when discussing the legal reasoning. "The legal
advisers working on this looked at rendition. It is controversial in
some circles. ? But if done within certain parameters, it is an
acceptable practice."

The decision to preserve the program didn't draw major protests, even
among some human rights groups.

"Under limited circumstances, there is a legitimate place" for
renditions, said Tom Malinowski, the Washington advocacy director for
Human Rights Watch.

But Malinowski said he has urged the Obama administration to require
that prisoners be transferred to other countries only when there is a
guarantee they will get a public hearing in an official court.
"Producing a prisoner before a real court is a key safeguard against
torture, abuse and disappearance," Malinowski said.

Republished: http://nasir-khan.blogspot.com/2009/02/obama-to-let-cia-use-controversial.html


From markalause at gmail.com  Mon Feb  2 12:33:59 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 14:33:59 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Seattle General Strike 1919: from H-Labor
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0902021133k28251a70m69f168e9983fc624@mail.gmail.com>

From: James N Gregory <gregoryj at u.washington.edu>

This week marks the 90th anniversary of the Seattle General Strike of 1919,the
struggle that kicked off the big strike wave of 1919. To commemorate the six
day strike, the Harry Bridges Center for Labor Studies has upgraded the Seattle
General Strike Project. This online resource now includes oral histories,
original film footage, a day-by-day archive of newspaper articles, photographs,
a map of strike events, and detailed research reports on the strike and Pacific
Northwest labor history.

             http://depts.washington.edu/labhist/strike

Saturday we are holding a community event?"Celebrating Seattle's Striking
History"?at the Seattle Labor Temple to explore the legacy of the strike in
words and music.

The program includes presentations by labor scholars Howard Kimeldorf
(University of Michigan) and Robert Cherny (San Francisco State University)and
musical performances by the Seattle Labor Chorus and Rob Rosenthal doing
selections from Seattle 1919, a musical account of the strike. The Anti-Fascist
Marching Band and Jess Grant also will perform.

      Saturday, February 7
      Location: Seattle Labor Temple (2800 First Ave)
      Time: Doors at 12:30pm, Program 1 to 5pm


Sponsored by the Harry Bridges Center for Labor Studies, ML King County Labor
Council, the Pacific Northwest Labor History Association, Center for
the Study of the Pacific Northwest, Amalgamated Transit Union Local
587. For moreinformation, the Bridges Center at (206)543-79467 or
pcls at washington.edu.


From durable at earthlink.net  Sun Feb  1 23:21:14 2009
From: durable at earthlink.net (Barry Brooks)
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 14:21:14 +0800
Subject: [Marxism] Stiglitz: is the entire bailout strategy flawed?
In-Reply-To: <498703C5.2050505@panix.com>
References: <498703C5.2050505@panix.com>
Message-ID: <498690DA.8060302@earthlink.net>


> There is an alternative. We should begin
> to consider it.

Alternatives exist. Make a list.

If we must choose only one alternative is 
should be socialism.

Another alternative would be a stimulus to 
people instead of business.

Stimulus money for workers is off the table. 
Stimulus to banks is all Stiglitz dares to 
mention. He should begin to consider taking 
off the gloves and throwing a few real punches.

His big idea, singular alternative, is to 
make a one-time profit by nationalization of 
the banks, then
> ...we can once again privatize the failed 
> banks.

What's wrong with Nationalizing the banks and 
never privatizing them again?

Why do I bother thinking about Stiglitz?

Barry



From mikedf at amnh.org  Mon Feb  2 13:23:31 2009
From: mikedf at amnh.org (Michael Friedman)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 15:23:31 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Marxism]  re Sweezy
In-Reply-To: <mailman.6696.1233585269.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
References: <mailman.6696.1233585269.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <49533.216.73.248.166.1233606211.squirrel@webmail.amnh.org>

With all due respect to Dick Levins (who has been an inspiration to me), I
would say it depends on whether or not the "part" has an organic
connection to the whole. To use an analogy from another ongoing discussion
on this list, simply because working class people pick up xenophobic and
racist ideologies does not give them "new properties". Or another, if I
transplant a pig's heart into a human, it won't become a human heart, nor
will the "whole" human function properly. And the idea of a "whole" is,
itself, relative and conditional. The whole working class? The whole
capitalist system? Just because Sweezy was a Marxist, doesn't transform
his Keynesian "part" into Marxism. Doesn't make him less of one, but he
could've been wrong, you know...


> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 21:20:21 -0430
> From: "michael a. lebowitz" <mlebowit at sfu.ca>
> Subject: [Marxism] re Sweezy
> To: marx <marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu>
> Message-ID: <4986515D.9010405 at sfu.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> because he drew upon some of Ricardo's insights. What some who view
> themselves as untainted by Keynes and thus the only true Marxists may
> not understand is the basic principle of a dialectical worldview that
> [in the words of listmember Richard Levins] 'parts acquire properties by
> virtue of being parts of a particular whole, properties they do not have
> in isolation or as parts of another whole.' So, the question is what was
> the whole in which those parts were situated. As for Kalecki's
> influence, that came later--- but both he and Sweezy were influenced by
> Rosa Luxembourg [and the former's obscure essays working through the 2
> Dept model in the 30s preceded Keynes and, in my view, were superior].
>             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
> www.centrointernacionalmiranda.gob.ve
> mlebowit at sfu.ca



-- 
Michael Friedman
Ph.D. in Biology
City University of New York

Sackler Institute for Comparative Genomics
American Museum of Natural History
79th Street and Central Park West
New York, NY 10024
Office: 212-313-8721
Cell: 718-812-4246
Alternative e-mail: lycophidion at gmail.com



From poeticaleconomy at yahoo.com  Mon Feb  2 13:23:55 2009
From: poeticaleconomy at yahoo.com (Max Clark)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 12:23:55 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] GUADELOUPE United General Strike Since January 20, 2009
Message-ID: <438961.40950.qm@web45013.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

All-- Big tings a gwan! Haven't seen anything here yet on the situation detailed below. Also, my first post on this list. The very best --Max Clark

--------------------
Subject: FYI: GUADELOUPE United General Strike Since January 20, 2009

(Contributed by B. Ross Ashley)

A collective of 47 organizations constituted at the initiative of the UGTG trade union confederation has established a platform of 120 demands

Since January 20, 2009, Guadeloupe has been paralyzed by a general strike called by a collective of 47 organizations constituted at the initiative of the UGTG (the biggest union confederation), which has brought together all the workers and peasants unions, as well as political parties. This collective has established a platform of 120 demands "against over-exploitation."

Guadeloupe has been ravaged by the capitalist crisis, which is aggravated by the colonial domination of the French state. To give one example: A liter of gasoline is 50% more expensive than in the mainland because of the special taxes established by the French state, which implements the EU directives.

On December 16 and 17, 2008, mobilizations took place. It was after this that the collective called for a general strike beginning on January 20 because the demands were not met. Obviously, the strike has tapped into the aspirations of the workers faced with the same policies and offers the path of struggle for unity around this platform of demands.

This mobilization in a Caribbean island on the American continent joined the deep movement of workers and peasant masses of Latin America and the Caribbean in their struggle against the neo-colonial oppression. It is no coincidence that, at the rally held on Saturday January 24 in the streets of Pointe-?-Pitre, one of the most applauded messages was sent by the union and political organizations of Haiti, including the Autonomous Confederation of Haitian Workers (CATH), which said: "We give our support to the fight you are organizing in your country for change, for the decline in the price of gasoline at the pump and against the precariousness of wages. This struggle is that of all the peoples of the Caribbean and that of our country, Haiti, a country ravaged by American capitalism and French colonialism... "
As stated by the Secretary General of the UGTG, Elie Domota, "The UGTG is not the only organization involved. We felt it necessary to go all the way by inviting all political and cultural organizations to struggle alongside the workers."

* * * * *
The platform of the collective of 47 organizations formed at the initiative of the UGTG (excerpts)

- The immediate drop of 50 cents in fuel prices.
- The decline in prices of all essential goods and all taxes.
- An increase in the minimum wage to 200 euros.
- The decline in the price of water and transport of passengers.
- Contracts for all precarious workers, public and private (...).
- The development of production to meet the needs of the population.
- The right to education and training for youth and workers of our country.
- Priority in hiring and positions of responsibility for Guadeloupeans and end of racism in hiring (...).
- Freezing rents for an indefinite period and for the year 2009, canceling the increase of 2.98%.
- Set aside 50,000 hectares of agricultural area as a protected agricultural zone and setting up a committee for its annaul evaluation.
- Exemption from taxes for the benefit of farmers throughout the country.
- Representation of trade unions in Guadeloupe in all companies and joint bodies (ASSEDIC, Social Security, CAF, AGEFOS, SME, Fong, CIF ...).
- Commencement of proceedings for the reconstruction of the hospital.
- The urgent development of transport networks ?
- Taking into account in the media the language and culture Guadeloupe through the presence of representatives of cultural associations in the boardroom (...).
ADIM - AFOC - AGPIHM - Akiyo - AN BOUT'AY - ANG - ANKA - ASSE - ASS. Farmers in northern Basse-Terre - Ass. Liberty, Equality, Justice - CFTC - CGTG - CNL - Combat ouvrier - Water Committee - Convention for a new Guadeloupe - COPAGUA - CSFG - CTU - Esp?rance environment - Faena SNCL - FOR - FSU - GIE SBT - Kamodjaka - KAP Gwadloup - The Greens - MADIC - MAS KA KLE - Mouvman NONM - PCG - SGEP / SNEC / CFTC - SOS Low-Earth environment - SPEG - SUD PTT GWA - SUNICAG - SYMPA CFDT - travay ? Peyizan - UDCLCV - UIR CFDT - UNSA - UGTG - UPG - UPLG - UMPG - VOUKOUM.
********************


APPEAL by the UGTG to the International Democratic and Workers' Movements

Dear comrades, dear friends,

The French colonial power is preparing to punish the workers, youth, and people of Guadeloupe and their organizations.
In response to the call of 47 trade unions, political organizations, consumer associations, popular cultural associations, a general strike began on January 20, 2009 ..., and a march was attended by more than 25,000 people in streets of Pointe-?-Pitre.

In the platform of demands to the employers, the elected representatives of the State, the workers and people demand, among other things:

- The immediate increase in wages, pensions, and social benefits. In Guadeloupe over 100,000 people live below the poverty line in a population of about 450,000 inhabitants;
- Defense and the creation of jobs, including training for youth;
- Defense and the development of production;
- The protection and improvement of union rights;
- The drop in rents.

The bosses and elected officials have already expressed their desire not to meet the demands even before opening negotiations..

They want the workers to "be reasonable and to return to work."
The employers will start a lockout, aiming to push people toward confrontations and then ask the colonial power to suppress them. Thus, several hundred members of law enforcement arrived in Guadeloupe a few days ago, armed to the teeth.

Dear comrades, dear friends,

This situation was seen in May 1967, when the French government killed more than 100 Guadeloupeans in response to a strike in the building trades. Always the same thing: they asked the striking workers to be reasonable, to return to work.

On behalf of the rights of workers and the people of Guadeloupe to fight for their legitimate demands, we call for international solidarity.

Pointe-?-Pitre, on January 26, 2009

signed/

Elie Domota
Secretary-General,
UGTG

-----

Send your messages to:

Collectif des 47 organisations
UGTG, Rue Paul Lacav? 97 110 Point-?-Pitre Guadeloupe
Fax : International : 00 335 90 89 08 70
France : 05 90 89 08 70
Email : ugtg at wanadoo.fr

With a copy to:

Pr?fet de Guadeloupe
Rue Lardenoy 97 100 Basse Terre
Fax :
International : 00 335 90 81 58 32
France : 05 90 81 58 32

M. Yves Jego Secr?taire d'Etat charg? de l'Outre-Mer
27, Rue Oudinot 75 007 Paris
Fax :
International : 00 331 53 69 28 04
France : 01 53 69 28 04



      

From farmelantj at juno.com  Mon Feb  2 14:06:25 2009
From: farmelantj at juno.com (farmelantj at juno.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 21:06:25 GMT
Subject: [Marxism] re Sweezy
Message-ID: <20090202.160625.16605.0@webmail22.vgs.untd.com>


The issue becomes a bit complicated when
one reflects on the fact that while Keynes,
by his own admission, never read much Marx,
he was surrounded by (and indeed surrounded
himself with) people who most certainly knew 
their Marx (i.e. Sraffa, Robinson, Kalecki),
and of course Maurice Dobb was at Cambridge too.
So I think that indirectly, Keynes was influenced by Marxism,
although Keynes was certainly no socialist.
If Keynes was, as many people have thought,
one of the foremost, if not the foremost bourgeois
economist of the 20th century, then it would
certainly have behooved an economist like Sweezy
to make a careful study of his work and see what
could be incorporated into Marxism, much as Marx
had done with the work of Smith and Ricardo.
Presumably, in the process, Sweezy would have have
found himself critiquing Keynesian ideas, and 
reformulating them in new ways, much as Marx had
done with many of Ricardo's ideas, since as a
Marxist one would reject the assumption that
capitalism was grounded in the requirements of an
unchanging human nature which Keynes embraced.

That is certainly not a denigration of Sweezy's
work IMO, although as I noted before, it has
been a source of controversy among Marxists, and people
like Mattick, Linder, and James Heartfield have all
taken him to task for it, but then what else is
new?

Jim F.

-- "Michael Friedman" <mikedf at amnh.org> wrote:

With all due respect to Dick Levins (who has been an inspiration to me), I
would say it depends on whether or not the "part" has an organic
connection to the whole. To use an analogy from another ongoing discussion
on this list, simply because working class people pick up xenophobic and
racist ideologies does not give them "new properties". Or another, if I
transplant a pig's heart into a human, it won't become a human heart, nor
will the "whole" human function properly. And the idea of a "whole" is,
itself, relative and conditional. The whole working class? The whole
capitalist system? Just because Sweezy was a Marxist, doesn't transform
his Keynesian "part" into Marxism. Doesn't make him less of one, but he
could've been wrong, you know...


> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 21:20:21 -0430
> From: "michael a. lebowitz" <mlebowit at sfu.ca>
> Subject: [Marxism] re Sweezy
> To: marx <marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu>
> Message-ID: <4986515D.9010405 at sfu.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> because he drew upon some of Ricardo's insights. What some who view
> themselves as untainted by Keynes and thus the only true Marxists may
> not understand is the basic principle of a dialectical worldview that
> [in the words of listmember Richard Levins] 'parts acquire properties by
> virtue of being parts of a particular whole, properties they do not have
> in isolation or as parts of another whole.' So, the question is what was
> the whole in which those parts were situated. As for Kalecki's
> influence, that came later--- but both he and Sweezy were influenced by
> Rosa Luxembourg [and the former's obscure essays working through the 2
> Dept model in the 30s preceded Keynes and, in my view, were superior].
>             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
> www.centrointernacionalmiranda.gob.ve
> mlebowit at sfu.ca



-- 
Michael Friedman
Ph.D. in Biology
City University of New York

Sackler Institute for Comparative Genomics
American Museum of Natural History
79th Street and Central Park West
New York, NY 10024
Office: 212-313-8721
Cell: 718-812-4246
Alternative e-mail: lycophidion at gmail.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/farmelantj%40juno.com


____________________________________________________________
Can't pay your bills on time?? Click for quick cash with a payday loan.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw2P9vPivPPgWSFQ9GVaqZSb7Ktl67XRyuhwuIKIEwyX3khHp/


From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Feb  2 14:21:14 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 16:21:14 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Examined Life
Message-ID: <498763CA.2080600@panix.com>

?Examined Life: Philosophy is in the Streets? is very much a follow-up 
to Astra Taylor?s ?Zizek!,? a 2005 documentary that allowed the Lacanian 
cultural theorist to hold forth on a variety of topics. Not being 
particularly enamored of Zizek?s thought, I passed on this movie. I 
couldn?t resist the temptation to watch ?Examined Life? since I heard 
good things about Taylor?s film-making skills even though I have to 
confess that I am no more eager to hear from the latest batch of 
subjects, which is heavily tilted in the postmodernist direction (Cornel 
West, Avital Ronell, Peter Singer, Kwame Anthony Appiah, MarthaNussbaum, 
Michael Hardt, Slavoj Zizek, Judith Butler and Sunaura Taylor). Zizek 
makes another appearance but mercifully for only 10 minutes as is the 
case with the rest of the cast.

full: http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2009/02/02/examined-life/


From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Feb  2 14:34:55 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 16:34:55 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Doug Henwood interviews James Howard Kunstler
Message-ID: <498766FF.7040500@panix.com>

BEHIND THE NEWS with Doug Henwood

podcast:
  <http://shout.lbo-talk.org/lbo/radio-feed.php>
iTunes:
 
<http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=73801817>
or
  <http://tinyurl.com/3bsaqb>

opening commentaries now at:
  <http://doughenwood.wordpress.com/>

"Best Music on an Economics & Politics Radio Show"
Village Voice Best of NYC 2005

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

Just posted to my radio archive
<http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Radio.html>:

January 29, 2009 James Howard Kunstler, author most recently of World 
Made By Hand, on the decline of oil-based civilization, the horrors of 
suburbia, and the sickness of tattooing * Jeffrey Perry, biographer of 
Hubert Harrison, on the forgotten black radical who should be remembered

it joins:
--------

January 22, 2009 Stephen Mihm, author of A Nation of Counterfeiters, on 
the giant role of fakery and fraud in American financial history * Sean 
Jacobs (his blog is here) on South Africa and the ANC's fall from grace

January 15, 2009 Michael Lighty of the California Nurses Association on 
the economic impact of health care and a wished-for transition to 
single-payer * Nomi Prins and Max Fraad Wolff on the economic crisis

January 10, 2009 David Bacon, author of Illegal People, and Michelle 
Wucker, author ofLockout (and director of WPI) on immigration * Sara Roy 
on the horrors of Gaza (KPFA version, includes commentary on December 
employment)

December 11, 2008 Charlie Komanoff on a plan to make NYC transit nearly 
free (by soaking cars) * Yanis Varoufakis on the Greek riots and Greek 
neoliberalism (This show was patched together from a two-hour WBAI 
fundraiser. Please contribute.)
December 4, 2008 Preston Smith on "racial democracy" vs. social 
democracy, in 1940s Chicago and Obama's America * Anthony D'Costa on the 
Mumbai bombings and Indian neoliberalism

November 27, 2008 Richard Seymour, keeper of the Lenin's Tomb blog and 
author of The Liberal Defense of Murder, on liberal imperialism * Bill 
Ayers, author of Fugitive Days and Barack Obama's old pal, on 
revolution, education, and social change

November 20, 2008 Dan La Botz (author of this article) on the crisis in 
the auto industry - and the UAW * Reihan Salam, co-author of Grand New 
Party, great hope of the right, on the conservative movement's future

November 13, 2008 Forrest Hylton on Obama's likely Latin American policy 
(and his top advisor on the area, Dan Restrepo) * Kate Gordon, 
co-director of the Apollo Alliance, on green jobs

November 6, 2008 Adolph Reed on Obama's election * Maliha Safri on 
immigrants in the U.S. labor market - especially one that's shrinking

October 16, 2008 ?gmundur J?nasson, head of the Left Green delegation in 
the Icelandic parliament, on that country's financial crisis * Martin 
Wolf, Financial Times columnist and author of Fixing Global Finance, on 
The Crisis

---

Doug Henwood
Left Business Observer
38 Greene St - 4th fl.
New York NY 10013-2505 USA
<dhenwood at panix.com>
<http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com>

voice  +1-212-219-0010
cell   +1-917-865-2813

producer, Behind the News
Thursdays, 5-6 PM, WBAI, New York 99.5 FM
Saturdays, 10-11 AM, KPFA, Berkeley 94.1 FM
<http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Radio.html>
podcast: <http://shout.lbo-talk.org/lbo/radio-feed.php>
iTunes: 
<http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=73801817>
or <http://tinyurl.com/3bsaqb>

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

download my book Wall Street (for free!) at
<http://www.wallstreetthebook.com>


From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Feb  2 14:45:57 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 16:45:57 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Pajamas Media folds
Message-ID: <49876995.3060807@panix.com>

Hat tip to Doug Henwood on this:

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/02/pajamas_media_r.php

This was a rightwing website that included Marc Cooper and David Corn on 
the editorial board. Cooper eventually cut his ties. Not sure about 
Corn. Good riddance to bad medicine.


From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Mon Feb  2 14:59:32 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 13:59:32 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Further thoughts on the British refinery strike
Message-ID: <49876CC4.9000803@gmail.com>

This is no doubt this is causing a crisis for 'the left' in Britain and 
the UK. It's also causing a crisis for the union movement and the 
question of workers solidarity.

Again, this situation is almost unique to Europe that I'm aware of since 
it's temporary non-native labor, not immigrant labor, generally, which 
is a world wide phenomenon.

I would be more sympathetic to these strikers if they had gone out on 
strike over the issue of non-union, lower-wage contractors in Britain 
which is a *regular problem* there, and, almost everywhere there is a 
unionized work force up against increasing unemployment. In other words, 
these workers picked Italian nationals to be pissed at, and, the British 
government for allowing this to happen under EU rules (which permits 
this) instead of the *greater* threat of mass unemployment and the use 
of non-union, *British* contractors who exist all over the UK and are 
growing in percentage.

But these refinery workers did not. And therein lies a problem.

David


From davidrail68 at yahoo.com  Mon Feb  2 15:35:00 2009
From: davidrail68 at yahoo.com (David Walsh)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 14:35:00 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strikes pose Challenges to Socialists
Message-ID: <308186.24680.qm@web45313.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

This report from the British Trotskyist website called Permanent Revolution points to an important challenge for our movement that hold important lessons for U.S. Socialists. - Dave Walsh (please circulate to your lists)

http://www.permanentrevolution.net/entry/2544





      


From michael at ecst.csuchico.edu  Mon Feb  2 15:59:13 2009
From: michael at ecst.csuchico.edu (Michael Perelman)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 14:59:13 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] re Sweezy
In-Reply-To: <20090202.160625.16605.0@webmail22.vgs.untd.com>
References: <20090202.160625.16605.0@webmail22.vgs.untd.com>
Message-ID: <20090202225913.GA12016@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu>

Keynes began the General Theory inspired by Marx -- indirectly:

Keynes, John Maynard. 1933. "The Distinction Between a Co-Operative Economy 
and an Entrepreneur Economy." in Donald Moggridge, ed., The Collected 
Writings of John Maynard Keynes (London: Macmillan): xxix, pp. 76-87,
 
81: The distinction between a co-operative economy and an entrepreneur 
economy bears some relation to a pregnant observation made by Karl Marx,- 
though the subsequent use to which he put this observation was highly 
illogical.  He pointed out that the nature of production in the actual 
world is not, as economists seem to suppose, a case of C-M-C', i.e. of 
exchanging commodity (or) effort for money in order to obtain another 
commodity (or effort).  That may be the standpoint of the private consumer. 
But it is not the attitude of <business>, which is a case of M-C-M'... [but 
he cites not Marx but H. L. McCracken, Value Theory and Business Cycles.




-- 
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 jwebbp at gmail.com  Mon Feb  2 16:18:54 2009
From: jwebbp at gmail.com (Julie Webb)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 18:18:54 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Obama and Cuba article in SCOOP
In-Reply-To: <65537c690902021457t75fa7899yeb31b763d9935911@mail.gmail.com>
References: <65537c690902021457t75fa7899yeb31b763d9935911@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <65537c690902021518k7049244dyca591925654a1a0@mail.gmail.com>

*http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0902/S00015.htm*
<http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0902/S00015.htm>

From marvgandall at videotron.ca  Mon Feb  2 16:52:11 2009
From: marvgandall at videotron.ca (Marvin Gandall)
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:52:11 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Bolivia's promising lithium reserves
Message-ID: <06C5CCF267F340F68263F80D49510403@MARV>

February 3, 2009
In Bolivia, a Tight Grip on the Next Big Resource
By SIMON ROMERO
New York Times

UYUNI, Bolivia ? In the rush to build the next generation of hybrid or 
electric cars, a sobering fact confronts both automakers and governments 
seeking to lower their reliance on foreign oil: almost half of the world?s 
lithium, the mineral needed to power the vehicles, is found here in 
Bolivia ? a country that may not be willing to surrender it so easily.

Japanese and European companies are busily trying to strike deals to tap the 
resource, but a nationalist sentiment about the lithium is building quickly 
in the government of President Evo Morales, an ardent critic of the United 
States who has already nationalized Bolivia?s oil and natural gas 
industries.

For now, the government talks of closely controlling the lithium and keeping 
foreigners at bay. Adding to the pressure, indigenous groups here in the 
remote salt desert where the mineral lies are pushing for a share in the 
eventual bounty.

?We know that Bolivia can become the Saudi Arabia of lithium,? said 
Francisco Quisbert, 64, the leader of Frutcas, a group of salt gatherers and 
quinoa farmers on the edge of Salar de Uyuni, the world?s largest salt flat. 
?We are poor, but we are not stupid peasants,? he said. ?The lithium may be 
Bolivia?s, but it is also our property.?

The new Constitution Mr. Morales managed to pass handily last month bolsters 
such claims. One of its provisions could give Indians control over the 
natural resources in their territory, strengthening their ability to win 
concessions from the authorities and private companies, or even block mining 
projects.

None of this is dampening efforts by foreigners, including the Japanese 
conglomerates Mitsubishi and Sumitomo and a group led by a French 
industrialist, Vincent Bollor?. In recent months all three have sent 
representatives to La Paz, the capital, to meet with Mr. Morales?s 
government to gain access to the lithium, a critical component for the 
batteries that power cars and other electronics.

?There are salt lakes in Chile and Argentina, and a promising lithium 
deposit in Tibet, but the prize is clearly in Bolivia,? Oji Baba, an 
executive in Mitsubishi?s Base Metals Unit, said in an interview in La Paz. 
?If we want to be a force in the next wave of automobiles and the batteries 
that power them, then we must be here.?

Mitsubishi is not alone in planning to produce cars using lithium-ion 
batteries. Ailing carmakers in the United States are pinning their hopes on 
lithium, including General Motors, which next year plans to roll out its 
Volt, a car using a lithium-ion battery along with a gas engine. Nissan, 
Ford and BMW, among other carmakers, have similar projects.

Demand for lithium, long used in small amounts in mood-stabilizing drugs and 
thermonuclear weapons, has climbed as makers of batteries for BlackBerrys 
and other electronic devices use the mineral. But the automotive industry 
holds the biggest untapped potential for lithium, analysts say. Since it 
weighs less than nickel, also used in batteries, it would allow electric 
cars to store more energy and be driven longer distances.

With governments, including the Obama administration, seeking to increase 
fuel efficiency and reduce their dependence on imported oil, private 
companies are focusing their attention on this desolate corner of the Andes, 
where Quechua-speaking Indians subsist on the remains of an ancient inland 
sea by bartering the salt they carry out on llama caravans.

The United States Geological Survey says 5.4 million tons of lithium could 
potentially be extracted in Bolivia, compared with 3 million in Chile, 1.1 
million in China and just 410,000 in the United States. Independent 
geologists estimate that Bolivia might have even more lithium at Uyuni and 
its other salt deserts, though high altitudes and the quality of the lithium 
reserves could make accessing the mineral difficult.

While estimates vary widely, some geologists say electric-car manufacturers 
could draw on Bolivia?s lithium reserves for decades to come.

Amid such potential, foreigners seeking to tap Bolivia?s lithium reserves 
must navigate the policies of Mr. Morales, 49, who has clashed repeatedly 
with American, European and even South American investors.

Mr. Morales shocked neighboring Brazil, with whom he is on friendly terms, 
by nationalizing its natural gas projects here in 2006 and seeking a sharp 
rise in prices. He carried out his latest nationalization before the vote on 
the Constitution, sending soldiers to occupy the operations of British oil 
giant BP.

At the La Paz headquarters of Comibol, the state agency that oversees mining 
projects, Mr. Morales?s vision of combining socialism with advocacy for 
Bolivia?s Indians is prominently on display. Copies of Cambio, a new 
state-controlled daily newspaper, are available in the lobby, while posters 
of Che Guevara, the leftist icon killed in Bolivia in 1967, appear at the 
entrance to Comibol?s offices.

?The previous imperialist model of exploitation of our natural resources 
will never be repeated in Bolivia,? said Sa?l Villegas, head of a division 
in Comibol that oversees lithium extraction. ?Maybe there could be the 
possibility of foreigners accepted as minority partners, or better yet, as 
our clients.?

To that end, Comibol is investing about $6 million in a small plant near the 
village of Rio Grande on the edge of Salar de Uyuni, where it hopes to begin 
Bolivia?s first industrial-scale effort to mine lithium from the white, 
moon-like landscape and process it into carbonate for batteries. Mr. Morales 
wants the plant finished by the end of this year.

Workers here were in a frenzy to meet that goal during late January, 
laboring under the sun around half-finished walls of brick. Over a meal of 
llama stew and a Pepsi, Marcelo Castro, 48, the manager overseeing the 
project, explained that along with processing lithium, the plant had another 
objective.

?Of course, lithium is the mineral that will lead us to the post-petroleum 
era,? said Mr. Castro. ?But in order to go down that road, we must raise the 
revolutionary consciousness of our people, starting on the floor of this 
very factory.?

Beyond the tiny plant, lithium analysts say Bolivia, one of Latin America?s 
least developed nations, needs to be investing much more to start producing 
carbonate. But with economic growth slowing and a decline in oil prices 
limiting the reach of its top patron, Venezuela, it remains unclear how 
Bolivia can achieve this on its own.

At a lithium conference last week in Chile?s capital, Santiago, Bolivia?s 
government confounded the mining industry further. Bolivia?s mining 
minister, Luis Alberto Echaz?, attended and was an eagerly anticipated 
speaker, but he canceled his talk at the last minute, according to 
attendees.

Still, even though Mr. Morales is asserting greater control of the economy 
and taking over oil and gas projects, optimistic industry analysts point out 
that he allowed some foreign companies to remain in the country as minority 
partners.

Mining lithium in Bolivia has its own history of fits and starts. In the 
early 1990s, nationalist opposition reportedly led by Gonzalo S?nchez de 
Lozada, a wealthy holder of mining concessions who later became Bolivia?s 
president, thwarted a plan by Lithco, an American company, to tap the 
lithium deposits here.

That history, coupled with Mr. Morales?s current tensions with Washington, 
might help explain why American companies appear to be on the sidelines as 
others seek lithium deals here. Mr. S?nchez de Lozada was ultimately forced 
to resign as president in 2003 after Mr. Morales led protests against his 
efforts to export another natural resource, natural gas, with the help of 
foreign capital.

As Bolivia ponders how to tap its lithium, nations with smaller reserves are 
stepping up. China has emerged as a top lithium producer, tapping reserves 
found in a Tibetan salt flat.

But geologists and economists are fiercely debating whether the lithium 
reserves outside of Bolivia are enough to meet the climbing global demand.

Lithium experts like Keith Evans, a California-based geologist, reckon that 
accessible lithium resources outside Bolivia are significantly larger than 
estimates by the United States Geological Survey.

Juan Carlos Zuleta, an economist in La Paz, said: ?We have the most 
magnificent lithium reserves on the planet, but if we don?t step into the 
race now, we will lose this chance. The market will find other solutions for 
the world?s battery needs.?

On the flat salt desert of Uyuni, such debate seems remote to those still 
laboring as their ancestors did, scraping salt off ground into the 
cone-shaped piles that line the horizon like some geometric mirage. The 
lithium found under the surface of this desert seems even more remote for 
these 21st-century salt gatherers.

?I?ve heard of the lithium, but I only hope it creates work for us,? said 
Pedro Camata, 19, his face shielded from the unforgiving sun by a ski mask; 
cheap sunglasses covered his eyes. ?Without work out here, one is dead.?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/03/world/americas/03lithium.html?pagewanted=print 




From cdb1003 at prodigy.net  Mon Feb  2 17:06:53 2009
From: cdb1003 at prodigy.net (Charles Brown)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 16:06:53 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] White workers make history,
	proletarian internationalist formula
Message-ID: <5544.28608.qm@web180106.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

The history made in O's election was not made by
?Obama, and it was not made by Black people.?
?It was made by the masses ( although minority) 
of White working people who voted for? Obama.? 
The majority of white people did not vote for Obama, 
but the minority who voted for him was critical
?to victory. More White people voted for Obama 
than Black people. There were appeals to
?racism made by the Republicans and 
rightwingers in the election. The sufficiently 
large White vote for Obama amounts to a 
historic repudiation of this racism , and the 
larger racist legacy of American history.
If Obama had lost, I would have been attributing 
it to racism. Since he won, 
I have got to say "it" was anti-racism. 
The division of the US working class by racism
?is the main division of it. The history in the 
election of Obama is especially that masses
?of White working class people voted for a Black 
candidate for President. Glory to the White
?American anti-racist spirit and sentiment.
John Brown's soul is marching on !
?
Charles

From pt_costello at yahoo.com  Mon Feb  2 17:56:33 2009
From: pt_costello at yahoo.com (Pat Costello)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 16:56:33 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Davos-ites admit to intellectual bankruptcy
Message-ID: <749998.24623.qm@web63104.mail.re1.yahoo.com>

http://davos.blogs.time.com/2009/01/31/the-good-news-is-that-nobody-thinks-they-know-anything-anymore/



Davos 2009 - World Economic Forum - TIME.com
Saturday, January 31, 2009 at 11:17 am
The good news is that nobody thinks they know anything anymore
  It may be the first well-informed panel I've ever moderated, in the sense that you all know you don't know anything.

The FT's Martin Wolf, midway through a discussion with Montek Ahluwalia, deputy chairman of the Indian Planning Commission; Mark Carney, governor of the Bank of Canada; Christine LaGarde, finance minister of France; John Lipsky, chief economist of the IMF; and Peter Sands, group chief exceutive of Standard Chartered Bank.


And that this may be the last Davos:

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1876422_1876426_1876421,00.html


but they had a jolly time in spite of it all by pretending to be refugees

http://blogs.nyu.edu/fas/dri/aidwatch/2009/01/and_now_for_something_complete.html


followed by a fabulous catered lunch. 





      


From tcod at hotmail.com  Mon Feb  2 18:03:19 2009
From: tcod at hotmail.com (Tom Cod)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 01:03:19 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Seattle General Strike 1919: from H-Labor
In-Reply-To: <b16d8daf0902021133k28251a70m69f168e9983fc624@mail.gmail.com>
References: <b16d8daf0902021133k28251a70m69f168e9983fc624@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W25CE4BCF7B1844B6479B4CD3C20@phx.gbl>


Thanks for bringing this up.  When I lived in Seattle I used to pass this plaque
to the site where the first daily labor paper was printed during that strike.
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live?: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect. 
http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t2_allup_howitworks_012009

From csoc21 at btinternet.com  Mon Feb  2 18:26:26 2009
From: csoc21 at btinternet.com (noah tucker)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 01:26:26 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Marxism] Did China cause the crisis?
Message-ID: <964688.10845.qm@web87106.mail.ird.yahoo.com>

My evaluation of the issues re: the new Treasury Secretary's proposal for a US trade war against China:

http://21stcenturysocialism.com/article/did_china_cause_the_crisis_01808.html

Comments would be appreciated.

Ta,

Noah


From markalause at gmail.com  Mon Feb  2 18:29:31 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 20:29:31 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] White workers make history,
	proletarian 	internationalist formula
In-Reply-To: <5544.28608.qm@web180106.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <5544.28608.qm@web180106.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0902021729g3b874f61wdfbbf9bcc11621e2@mail.gmail.com>

i'm not sure how you're distinguishing between white working class
people and white voters generally. Is there a mechanism for doing
this?

ml


From farmelantj at juno.com  Mon Feb  2 18:40:57 2009
From: farmelantj at juno.com (Jim Farmelant)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 20:40:57 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] re Sweezy
Message-ID: <20090202.204058.3504.1.farmelantj@juno.com>

 
On Sun, 01 Feb 2009 21:20:21 -0430 "michael a. lebowitz"
<mlebowit at sfu.ca> writes:
> Jim,
>     You asked for some specifics. Ok, you begin by saying 'Sweezy in 
> 
> fact was one of the pioneer Keyensian
> economists in the US, right alongside his more famous colleagues 
> like 
> Paul Samuelson..' Aside from the fact that Samuelson wasn't a 
> colleague 
> [maybe a student in the socialism class-- I can't recall; remember 
> that 
 
Paul Samuelson, Paul Sweezy, and J.K. Galbraith
were all graduate students under Joseph Schumpeter
within roughly the same time period.  Sweezy and
Samuelson were by no means strangers to each other.
In fact many years later Samuelson wrote a rather
glowing tribute to Sweezy & Schumpeter in his Newsweek column.
 ------------------------------------------------
 When Diaghilev revived his ballet company he had the original Bakst sets

redone in even more vivid colors, explaining, "so they would be as
brilliant 
as people remember them." Recent. events on college campuses have 
recalled to my inward eye one of the great happenings of my own lifetime.

It took place at Harvard back in the days when giants walked the earth
and Harvard Yard.

Joseph Schumpeter, Harvard's brilliant economist and social prophet, 
was to debate with Paul Sweezy on "The Future of Capitalism." 
Wassily Leontief was in the chair as moderator, and the Littauer 
Auditrium could not accommodate the packed house.

Let me set the stage. Schumpeter was a scion of the aristocracy of 
Franz Josef's Austria. It was Schumpeter who had confessed to three 
wishes in life: to be the greatest lover in Vienna, the best horseman in
Europe, a
nd the greatest economist in the world. "But unfortunately," as he used
to 
say modestly, "the seat I inherited was never of the topmost caliber."

Half mountebank, half sage, Schumpeter had been the enfant terrible 
of the Austrian school of economists. Steward to an Egyptian princess, 
owner of a stable of race horses, onetime Finance Minister of Austria, 
Schumpeter could look at the prospects for bourgeois society with the 
objectivity of one whose feudal world had come to an end in 1914. 
His message and vision can be read in his classical work of a
quarter-century 
ago, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy.

Whom the Gods Envy

Opposed to the foxy Merlin was young Sir Galahad. Son of an executive 
of J.P. Morgan's bank, Paul Sweezy was the best that Exeter and Harvard 
can produce ... [and] had early established himself as among the most
promising 
economists of his generation. But tiring of the conventional wisdom of
his age, 
and spurred on by the events of the Great Depression, Sweezy became one
of 
America's few Marxists. (As he used to say, you could count the noses of
U.S. 
academic economists who were Marxists on the thumbs of your two hands: 
the late Paul Baran of Stanford; and, in an occasional summer school of 
unwonted tolerance, Paul Sweezy.)

Unfairly, the gods had given Paul Sweezy, along with a brilliant mind, a
beautiful 
face and wit. With what William Buckley would desperately wish to see in
the 
mirror, Sweezy laced the world. If lightning had struck him that night,
people 
would truly have said that he had incurred the envy of the gods.

So much for the cast. I would have to be William Hazlitt to recall for
you the 
interchange of wit, the neat parrying and thrust, and all made more
pleasurable 
by the obvious affection that the two men had for each other despite the
polar 
opposition of their views.

From
Paul Samuelson, ?Memories,? Newsweek, June 2, 1969, as quoted in
"Remarks On Paul Sweezy On The Occasion Of His Receipt Of The
Veblen-Commons Award"
Monthly Review ,  Sept, 1999   by John Bellamy Foster 

> Sweezy was denied a job at Harvard], 

In fact both Sweezy and Samuelson were denied
jobs at Harvard:  Sweezy for being a red,
and Samuelson, apparently, for being a Jew,
even though Schumpeter had gone to bat for
both men.  Samuelson was, however, able to land a job
across the river at MIT, which at that time
didn't have much of an economics department,
but which in time would become famous
because of Samuelson.  Sweezy, on the other
hand was not to land a permanent position
in the academy, despite his great gifts
(while both Sweezy and Samuelson were
Schumpteter's favorites:  of the two, as
Samuelson conceded, Sweezy was 
THE favorite of Schumpeter).

Now a days, Harvard apparently no
longer discriminates against Jews, but
it still holds the line against reds.

Jim F.
____________________________________________________________
Get everything you need to hook up your own wireless network by clicking now!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw3CXgvL5YPLR6rRPhewbxIpS8Qt8C3fUWMX14jygzG3E2Pq3/

From nchamah at gmail.com  Mon Feb  2 19:13:18 2009
From: nchamah at gmail.com (nchamah miller)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 21:13:18 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Attaching letter received from Walter Lippmann
Message-ID: <a8cb7b970902021813p10c1b74fsc5b372bd72295956@mail.gmail.com>

I hope posting this will not get me banned.

You will recall I was dismayed at Walter's expulsion from the list and
while   I do not share all of his views or positions, I  am enclosing
his letter  in order to afford him  the opportunity to  reply directly
to the group. The fact that his articles are available in other
sources does  seem to me  irrelevant to the conditions of
participation in these Marxist debates, since the material written by
most other thinkers and writers here is also available elsewhere. But
the point is participation in this  forum, and what is even more
necessary, is that  controversial   views be allowed expression, given
that if they are infantile or not within the stream of our interests,
they can of  course be ignored and exterminated by the DELETE button
without further ado.

And if I get banned you can access my material at the web site below.


I repeat I am not a friend of Walter's and have not met him.

nchamah miller
Red de Investigadores Latinoamericanos por la Democracia y la Paz
www.insumisos.com

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Walter Lippmann <walterlx at earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 7:11 PM
Subject: Marxmail
To: nchamah miller <nchamah at gmail.com>


Dear nchamah -

I don't have internet access at home here in Cuba,
so have to work in hotels, offices and the homes
of friends. It's not like LA where I'm "always on"
with DSL. We in the so-called advanced capitalist
countries take many things for granted which just
can't be assumed in Third World countries today.

I'd like very much to be back on Marxmail. I did not
choose to unsubscribe, so since I did not ask to be
unsubscribed, I'd like to be re-subscribed as soon as
possible.

However, since I haven't changed my political stand,
and Louis clearly removed me for political reasons,
it's clear he really has to decide if he is going to
let me back on Marxmail. I never wanted to leave,
and I did not violate either the frequency nor the
subject-line rules. I was removed because of my
political position. What more can I say?

Naturally, the world revolution will not be in any
way affected by my presence or absence from Marxmail.

The whole discussion about me was a diversion from a
discussion of really important political issues about
which Marxists genuinely do disagree, from the recent
Bolivian referendum to the meaning of the election of
the first Black president of the United States of
America. Fidel has his point of view on it. Others who
are also Marxists clearly disagree. What more can be
said other than Obama's presidency should be a topic
open for discussion on a Marxist e-mail list?

Somewhere on Marxmail it was claimed that I supported
the US bombing of Pakistan. How silly a notion there!

I'm against ANY US military activity anywhere outside
of the legal boundaries of the United States of America,
regardless of who is Commander-in-Chief, including even
the first Black president, Barack Hussein Obama.


Best wishes,


Walter Lippmann

p.s., It would be great if you'd post this to Marxmail
since I'm not able to so at this time.

=========================================
    WALTER LIPPMANN
    Havana, Cuba
    Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/
    "Cuba - Un Para?so bajo el bloqueo"
=========================================


From Waistline2 at aol.com  Mon Feb  2 19:28:27 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 21:28:27 EST
Subject: [Marxism] White workers make history,
	proletarian  internationalist formula
Message-ID: <bd1.4a7a04ab.36b905cb@aol.com>

Comment 
 
The explanatory power of Marxism is its insistent on class and property as  
the foundation and pivot of social life; trying to unravel any social process 
on  the basis of the history one that being examined, the environment in which  
social relations (production relations) are played out, the contending and  
intersection of class with their invisible connections and so forth.   
President Obama like all presidents represent a class and through the capitalist  
class, represents all classes as understood and governed by the capitalist  class. 
Individuals and even classes tend to see themselves and their  aspirations, 
to one degree or another, in the leader. When leaders or the  supreme leader 
speaks of the concerns of the lower classes and then promise to  help them in 
their economic and political struggles, the masses listen. 

I listened and followed the Obama campaign and did not believe he  could win 
Iowa, but he did to my amazement. I did not believe that a black man,  no 
matter what his politics could win even a Senate seat, much less President,  
unless they were the kind of person that kicked boots or something like a male  
Condelezza Rice. Talk about being wrong . . . .again. 

I did  not believe that Obama could win the Democratic Party nomination for a 
complex  of reasons of which white supremacy ideology was an important 
factor, but only  one of many factors. For instance, his appeal to broad sections of 
voting  America - (not the real proletariat or the lowest wage workers), on 
the matter  of a "National Health Care" package seemed out of alignment, with 
voting  America. Voting America and even big and smaller employers want the 
economic  burden of health care to be shifted on to the back of government for 
sound  economic reasons; profits. 
 
Then Obama's public talk about killing an individual in the war against  
terrorism seemed to violate the protocols of even bourgeois politics. Then  I felt 
that the Clinton machine and the undeserved adulation voting black  American 
felt towards the Clinton machine was to strong for them to break.  

Although Clinton did what no Republican President could -  (changing welfare 
as we know it, economically hurting blacks and all poor, while  lowering the 
bottom rung of the economic ladder by which the working class could  be 
pushed), blacks struck with Clinton through thick and thin. I understand why.  
President Clinton was by no stretch of imagination a white supremacists in any  
aspect of his life and personality. Yet, he did to the workers - NAFTA, what no  
Republican President could do. 

Then I also felt that voting  America was not ready for a women President and 
most certainly not more of the  Clinton machine. A huge section of white 
voting America had enough of the  Clinton's. 
 
Wrong, wrong wrong!

In May of last I went to Detroit to take  part in my brothers retirement 
Party - 40 years employed by Chrysler and an  International representative of the 
UAW. All the big muckity mucks were present  from the company and union as 
well as the top layer union reps from a dozen or  so Chrysler facilities. 
Momentarily I buried by deep distrust and dislike for  many of these folks, 
especially from the Chrysler section of the union. Much of  this dislike is from 
experiencing their ignorance and contempt for reading books  and staying abreast of 
issues. Sadly, many of the top leaders cannot read and  comprehend the union 
contract, which is a legal and complex document. Still one  should educate 
themselves when given the opportunity. Yet, virtually all of  these folks have an 
acute understanding of the feelings of the members and  intimately understand 
how the workers think things out. 

I asked  "what the story with Obama?" 

Several of them - mostly black, and  in the case of the white reps all of 
them, repeatedly stated that Obama was  going to win everything because a clear 
majority of white workers in the plants,  concentrated amongst the skilled 
workers in particular, were openly siding with  Obama. The skilled workers 
generally carried the unskilled in their wake due to  their superior organization and 
compactness. 

Still  . . . I  did not believe Obama,a black guy with an Arabic/African name 
could win.  I  privately pondered what a vote for Hillary Clinton would mean 
to  myself and not the working class as a whole, that happens not to vote at  
all. 

Likening the act of the voting section of the working  class to the 
revolutionary memory of John Brown, who with arms in hand attack  outpost of slavery, 
under the concept of "anti-racism" is to liken Obama to the  election of 
Lincoln and then the emancipatory actions of Lincoln. Lincoln spoke  of ending 
slavery during his campaign and was driven by social forces unleashed  when the 
South or rather most of the South left the union and established the  Confederate 
States of America. This act -  dissolving the Union, caused a  profound 
realignment of social forces in America and created the conditions for  the 
internal class struggle within the CSA to ignite. Studying American history  had 
informed me that huge segments of the white population hated the Slave  Oligarchy 
and one should not lump all white people  together. 

There is something unsettling about likening the  election of Obama to John 
Brown. . 

Yet, Obama election is a profound step in the voting section of the  working 
class proving to all segments of American society that the color factor  in 
our history is being further annihilated. This annihilation happens to  coincide 
with the general shift in official American ideology. This ideology for  all 
of our lives was an aggression anti-communism wedded to white chauvinism.  
With the collapse of Soviet Power an ideological shift began under Bush 1 and  
was completed by Clinton and then remastered - like a recording, by Bush W. as  
an expanded version of Clinton's war against terrorism. White chauvinism as  
official ideology given a series of death blows with the overthrow of Jim  
Crow. Jim Crow is not the meaning of white chauvinism. White chauvinism was the  
modern rationale for Jim Crow. 

Actually, the voting white workers  did in fact close a chapter in our 
history with the cross of the color line,  which Dubois predicted would remain the 
paramount question in 20th century  America. 

This crossing of the color line means different things to  different people 
and different classes. For the black bourgeoisie, the real  black bourgeoisie, 
it means the sky is the limit. For a generation of black  leaders carrying the 
burden of a long and tortured history, Obama means their  role as leaders of 
black people has ended. Yea, there will be leaders of  different genders and 
colors, but that peculiar phenomenon of the black leader,  a product of Jim 
Crow has come to an abrupt end. 
 
Here is a story that I believe all communists and Marxists in America  should 
know. White supremacy still exists and there is much of it still  poisoning 
the political landscape. What has been wiped from history is Jim Crow.  The 
material step taken by the voting section of the working class, crossing the  
color line, is one of the landmarks in American history that will live forever,  
but hardly a sign of proletarian internationalism. Proletarian 
internationalism  today means the unity of the fighting section of capital in the working 
class  battle for final emancipation. Obama promised no one emancipation.  

I am glad to be a part of the voting section of the workers  crossing this 
line. Crossing this line in the current political environment of  America, does 
mean the opening a of opportunity for communists to openly  champion our 
views. 
 
This also means an increase in danger in the form of the fascist movement. 
 
If anything I liken the crossing of the color line, at this moment in  time, 
to the historically specific alignment - intersection, of class  forces that 
existed during the original Populist Movement in America. An  intersection of 
class forces, with the middle class in the lead, ushered Obama  into office. 
 
All such non-class movements possess the danger of being co-opted by the  
fascist movement. Moving into the 1890's, at a higher level is the historical  
likening I see. 

This time the fascist movement has no need for the  ideology of white 
supremacy.  

WL.











In  a message dated 2/2/2009 6:45:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
_cdb1003 at prodigy.net_ (mailto:cdb1003 at prodigy.net)  writes:
The history  made in O's election was not made by
Obama, and it was not made by  Black people. 
It was made by the masses ( although minority) 
of  White working people who voted for  Obama.  
The majority of white  people did not vote for Obama, 
but the minority who voted for him was  critical
to victory. More White people voted for Obama 
than Black  people. There were appeals to
racism made by the Republicans and  
rightwingers in the election. The sufficiently 
large White vote for  Obama amounts to a 
historic repudiation of this racism , and the 
larger  racist legacy of American history.
If Obama had lost, I would have been  attributing 
it to racism. Since he won, 
I have got to say "it" was  anti-racism. 
The division of the US working class by racism
is the  main division of it. The history in the 
election of Obama is especially that  masses
of White working class people voted for a Black 
candidate  for President. Glory to the White
American anti-racist spirit and  sentiment.
John Brown's soul is marching on  !

Charles  


ml
 
**************Stay up to date on the latest news - from sports scores to 
stocks and so much more. (http://aol.com?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000022)


From markalause at gmail.com  Mon Feb  2 19:38:02 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 21:38:02 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Attaching letter received from Walter Lippmann
In-Reply-To: <a8cb7b970902021813p10c1b74fsc5b372bd72295956@mail.gmail.com>
References: <a8cb7b970902021813p10c1b74fsc5b372bd72295956@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0902021838y72d16710v11f99f1c8079b3d3@mail.gmail.com>

Walter's note says, "Louis clearly removed me for political reasons'
and "Obama's presidency should be a topic open for discussion on a
Marxist e-mail list."

Obama has never not been open for discussion here and the first
assertion is patently untrue, as is, I think, the assumption that
someone might be unsubbed for passing on Walter's untruthfulness.

I suppose that several days without getting any attention proved too much....

ML


From meisner at xs4all.nl  Mon Feb  2 19:53:14 2009
From: meisner at xs4all.nl (Jeff)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 03:53:14 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Attaching letter received from Walter Lippmann
In-Reply-To: <a8cb7b970902021813p10c1b74fsc5b372bd72295956@mail.gmail.co
 m>
Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.20090203035314.0287bda0@pop.xs4all.nl>

At 21:13 02/02/09 -0500, you wrote:
>I hope posting this will not get me banned.
>
>You will recall I was dismayed at Walter's expulsion from the list and
>while   I do not share all of his views or positions

You speak for the overwhelming majority of the list. I'm sure Louis knows
that. Although he is not obligated to, I expect Louis to yield to that
sentiment. Just because it's the right thing to do. The hurt caused by what
happened surely outweighs any negative effect (annoyance) due to whatever
might be posted by Walter.
- Jeff


From Waistline2 at aol.com  Mon Feb  2 20:55:59 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 22:55:59 EST
Subject: [Marxism] White workers history,
	proletarian internationalist formula (sorry
Message-ID: <be0.4ff6a886.36b91a4f@aol.com>

(sorry wrong version; rough draft, previously sent) 
 
The explanatory power of Marxism is its insistent on class and property as  
the foundation and pivot of social life. Marx method informs one that all 
social  movement and motion of classes requires studying their history; the 
economic,  social and political environment in which social relations (production  
relations) are played out; the contending and  intersection of class with  their 
invisible connections and so forth.  Even the personality of  individuals is 
considered to the degree that their personality expresses the  mood of the 
moment and becomes a material forces is guiding the masses along  what ever path 
they are following. 
 
President Obama like all presidents represent a class that has political  
representatives writing the national and international agenda for their classes  
behavior in the political sphere. The capitalist class represents all classes 
in  America, as understood and governed by the capitalist class policy and 
agenda,  and that in a nutshell is the problem. 
 
In moments of exuberate enthusiasm, individuals and even classes tend to  see 
themselves and their  aspirations, to one degree or another,  represented in 
the popular leader. When the popular leader or the supreme  popular leader 
speaks of the concerns of the lower classes and then promise  to  help them in 
their economic and political struggles, the masses  rightfully sing and dance 
and listen. 
 
I listened and followed the Obama campaign and did not believe he could win  
Iowa, but he did to my amazement. I did not believe that a black man,  no  
matter what his politics could win even a Senate seat, much less President,  
unless they were the kind of person that licked boots - including the sole/soul,  
of our bourgeois masters; or a black man had to be something like a male  
Condelezza Rice. Talk about being wrong . . . .again. 
 
I did  not believe that Obama could win the Democratic Party  nomination for 
a complex  of reasons of which white supremacy ideology was  an important 
factor, but only  one of many factors. For instance, his  appeal to broad sections 
of voting  America - (not the real proletariat or  the lowest wage workers), 
on the matter  of a "National Health Care"  package seemed out of alignment 
with voting  America. Voting America, big  and smaller employers alike wanted 
the economic  burden of health care to  be shifted on to the back of government 
for sound  economic reasons;  profits. 
 
Then Obama's public talk about killing an individual in the war against  
terrorism seemed to violate the protocols of even bourgeois politics. Talk of  
murder and assassinations is generally left to the fanatic religious like  
lapdogs of capital in the mode of  . . . you know who. Then  I felt  that the 
Clinton machine and the undeserved adulation voting black America felt  towards the 
Clinton machine was to strong for them to break. "Clinton was the  man." 
"Clinton was really the first Black President." 
 
Although Clinton did what no Republican President could -  (changing  welfare 
as we know it, economically hurting blacks and all poor, while   lowering the 
bottom rung of the economic ladder by which the working class  could  be 
pushed), blacks struck with Clinton through thick and thin. As a  black man - old 
school Negro meaning I ain't like that Obama, I understood why  the love 
affair with Clinton, but it would piss me off. 
 
President Clinton was by no stretch of imagination a white supremacists in  
any aspect of his life and personality and the personal charisma - juice, was  
overwhelming. Yet, he did to the workers - NAFTA, what no  Republican  
President could do, and proven in the flesh he was not hung up on color. 
 
Then a part of me also felt that voting  America was not ready for a  women 
President and most certainly not more of the Clinton machine. A huge  section 
of white voting America had enough of the  Clinton's, even while  the blacks 
clung to his legs. 
 
Wrong, wrong wrong! 
 
In May of last year I went to Detroit to take part in my brothers  retirement 
Party - 40 years employed by Chrysler and an  International  representative 
of the UAW. 
 
All the big "muckity mucks" were present  from the company and union  as well 
as the top layer union reps from a dozen or so Chrysler facilities. You  
know, the guys and dolls with perfect teeth from using dental plan and  politician 
hand shakes that  pulled you up close, only to be overwhelmed  with genuine 
bears hugs that bent ones back in the most uncompromising position.  
Momentarily I buried a deep distrust and dislike for some of these folks,  especially 
from the Chrysler section of the union. Much of  this dislike is  from 
experiencing their ignorance and contempt for reading books and staying  abreast of 
issues. Sadly, many of the top leaders cannot read and   comprehend the union 
contract, which is a legal and complex document. Privilege  in the way of higher 
paychecks and excess time the ordinary worker will never  receive in his work 
life, should mean one should educate themselves when given  the opportunity 
and now and again give out copies of the Communist Manifesto. 
 
"Yea, that his communist fucking brother he's been saving all his life."  
"Don't day that shit so loud, y'all know how he is about his brother." 
 
Yea, brother was the man with acute political instinct and an encyclopedic  
knowledge of the contract compelling the two Presidents of the union Chrysler  
division to ask him what everything meant. Of course many were glad he was  
retiring because they hated him and his arrogant and demanding ways. 
 
Yet, virtually all of  these folks have an acute and profound  understanding 
of the feelings of the membership and  intimately understand  how the workers 
think things out. 
 
I asked  "what the story with Obama?" 
 
Several of them - mostly black, and in the case of the white reps all of  
them, repeatedly stated that Obama was going to win everything because a clear  
majority of white workers in the plants, concentrated amongst the skilled  
workers in particular, were openly siding with Obama. The skilled workers  
generally carried the unskilled in their wake due to their superior  organization, 
greater literacy and compactness. 
 
Still  . . . I  did not believe Obama, a black guy with an  Arabic/African 
name could win President of the United States of America. I   privately pondered 
what a vote for Hillary Clinton would mean to myself; not the  working class 
as a whole, that happens not to vote at all. I understood - I mean  really 
understood, these guys and dolls are extremely accurate in their gage of  the 
pulse, mood and striving of the organized - trade union, section of the  working 
class and what this meant. Generally, where every the organized section  of 
the labor movement went, the vast majority that constitute the meaning of  
"labor' must follow due to their lack of organization and a coherent voice. The  
labor movement is spontaneous and unarticulated masses; all those who must sell  
their labor for wages. The union is the organized (trade union) section of 
the  labor movement. One confuses the one with the other at their own peril. 
Voting  America is likewise one section of the working class, with the majority  
perpetually revolving outside the electoral arena. 
 
I danced, shook hands, pressed flesh and as the evening progressed proposed  
marriage to two or three women. 
 
Still, I could not make myself believe a black man - name Obama, which  
rhymes with "your momma," could win President. 
 

Likening the action of the voting section of the working class to the  
revolutionary memory of John Brown, who with arms in hand attack outpost of  
slavery,  under the concept of "anti-racism" seems like some kind of  blasphemy. Yet, 
there is no denying that millions came out in rallies and  celebrations of 
the Obama victory. 
 
What? 
 
Is one suppose to liken Obama election to the  election of Lincoln and  then 
the emancipatory actions of Lincoln. 
 
Pleaseeeeeeeeessse. 
 

Not withstanding his detractors on the left and right, Lincoln did in  fact 
speak out early against slavery during his campaign and then . . . . then,  was 
driven by social forces unleashed with the South or rather most of the  
Southern states, leaving the Union establishing the  Confederate States of  
America. This act -  (dissolving the Union), in turn caused a   profound realignment 
of social forces in America and also created the conditions  for sharpening of 
the internal class struggle within the CSA. The Civil War is  and remains the 
only blueprint for class intersection available to communists  historians and 
remains the starting point frame of reference in discussing real  life class 
interactions. None of this history can be gleamed from Lenin. Some  from Marx 
and Engels letters. 
 
Studying American history  had informed me that huge segments of the  
Southern white population hated the Slave Oligarchy and one should not lump all  
white people  together. 
 
There is something unsettling about likening the  election of Obama to  John 
Brown. . 
 
Yet, Obama election is a profound step in the voting section of the   working 
class proving to all segments of American society that the color  factor  in 
our history is being further annihilated. This annihilation  happens to 
coincide with, and collapse into a general shift in official American  ideology. 
Class intersection and policy shifts is the watchword. 
 
For all of our lives official American policy and ideology was a complex of  
extremely aggression anti-communism wedded to white chauvinism.  With the  
collapse of Soviet Power an ideological and policy shift began under the CIA's  
public spokesperson Bush 1. This shift was completed was completed by Clinton  
and then remastered - like a recording, by Bush W. as an expanded version of  
Clinton's war against terrorism. 
 
White chauvinism as official ideology was delivered a series of death  
strokes with the overthrow of Jim Crow. Jim Crow is not the meaning of white  
chauvinism. White chauvinism was the modern rationale for Jim Crow. 
 
Actually, the voting white workers did in fact close a chapter in our  
history with the crossing of the color line,  which Dubois predicted would  remain 
the paramount question in 20th century  America. There is no one  single reason 
for the closing of a chapter of our history, only class  intersection. 
 
This crossing of the color line means different things to different people  
and different classes. Not in the subjective sense of each "individual head"  
having a distinct personality and opinion. For the black bourgeoisie, (the  
real  black bourgeoisie rather than the petty bourgeoisie or intelligentsia  that 
is black), it means the sky is the limit. For a generation of black leaders  
carrying the burden of a long and tortured history, Obama means their role as  
"black leaders," leaders of black people has ended. 
 
Yea, there will be leaders of different gender and colors, but that  peculiar 
phenomenon of the black leader, a product of Jim Crow has come to an  abrupt 
end. 
 
Here is a story all communists and Marxists in America  should know.  White 
supremacy still exists and there is much of it still  poisoning the  political 
landscape. What has been wiped from history is Jim Crow. The material  step 
taken by the voting section of the working class, crossing the color line,  is 
one of the landmarks in American history that will live forever, but hardly a  
sign of proletarian internationalism. Proletarian internationalism today means 
 the unity of the fighting section of the workers in their battle against  
capital. 
 
Emancipation. Obama of course, promised no one emancipation. 
 
I am glad to be a part of the voting section of the workers crossing this  
line. Crossing this line in the current political environment of  America  does 
mean the opening a of opportunity for communists to openly champion our  
views. 
 
This also means an increase in danger in the form of the fascist movement. 
 
If anything I liken the crossing of the color line, at this moment in   time, 
to the historically specific alignment - intersection, of class   forces that 
existed during the growth of the original Populist Movement in  America. An  
intersection of class forces, with the middle class in the  lead, ushered 
Obama  into office. 
 
All such non-class movements possess the danger of being co-opted by the  
fascist movement. Non-class movement means an intersection of classes, in  
motion, that lacks an awareness that the working class fight is to be able to  write 
the economic and political agenda for the entire country. Moving into the  
1890's, at a higher level is the historical likening I see, with the last period 
 roughly mirroring 1865 - 1880. Roughly. 
 
This time the fascist movement has no need for the  ideology of white  
supremacy. 
 
WL. 
 
 
In  a message dated 2/2/2009 6:45:31 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
__cdb1003 at prodigy.net_ (mailto:_cdb1003 at prodigy.net) _ (_mailto:cdb1003 at prodigy.net_ 
(mailto:cdb1003 at prodigy.net) )  writes:  The history  made in O's election was not 
made by Obama, and it was not  made by  Black people. It was made by the 
masses ( although minority)  of  White working people who voted for  Obama. The 
majority of  white  people did not vote for Obama, but the minority who voted for 
him  was  critical to victory. More White people voted for Obama than  Black  
people. There were appeals to racism made by the Republicans and  
rightwingers in the election. The sufficiently large White vote for  Obama  amounts to a 
historic repudiation of this racism , and the larger  racist  legacy of 
American history. If Obama had lost, I would have been   attributing it to racism. 
Since he won, I have got to say "it" was   anti-racism. The division of the US 
working class by racism is the  main  division of it. The history in the 
election of Obama is especially that   masses of White working class people voted 
for a Black candidate  for  President. Glory to the White American anti-racist 
spirit and  sentiment.  John Brown's soul is marching on  ! 
 
Charles 
 
**************Stay up to date on the latest news - from sports scores to 
stocks and so much more. (http://aol.com?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000022)


From ccarrico at temple.edu  Mon Feb  2 21:24:22 2009
From: ccarrico at temple.edu (Christopher Carrico)
Date: Mon,  2 Feb 2009 23:24:22 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Marxism] New film: Zizek, Hardt,
 Judith Butler et al (Louis Proyect)
Message-ID: <20090202232422.DSC80578@po-f.temple.edu>

>   If   "Zizek is: an anally expulsive hysteric
>   who is acting out in public."
>
>   Then Freud must be "anally retentive" because he was
>   full of shit.  And please don't use the term
>   "retarded".  I find it offensive.
>
>   P. S. Which Freudian stage do you think you are
>   stuck at?  If you don't know but have lots of money
>   you can pay a shrink to tell you.
>
>   Friendly Duen de Canada

Dear Duen De.  Your point is taken: I didn't mean to insult
people borne with mental disabilities by comparing them with
Michael Hardt.     



From charles1848 at sbcglobal.net  Mon Feb  2 22:28:10 2009
From: charles1848 at sbcglobal.net (Charlie)
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 21:28:10 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Did China cause the crisis?
Message-ID: <4987D5EA.7030803@sbcglobal.net>

There are two key points on the China aspect of the current depression.

1) In the 1930s the Soviet Union, pursuing domestic industrialization, 
had almost no exposure to the Great Depression of the capitalist world. 
The Chinese rulers' strategy of selling cheap labor to global 
corporations has entangled the country in the current depression.

2) The real barrier that capitalism has run into lies deep in its use of 
labor power. The real wage of U.S. workers has not budged from 1973 
(with minor cyclical ups and downs) and China's manufacturing 
employment, after exploding with Deng Xiao-ping's introduction of the 
sell-cheap-labor policy, leveled off and declined. Capitalist industrial 
development, while it will limp along in narrow ruts of high technology, 
is basically over.

Charles Andrews



From markalause at gmail.com  Mon Feb  2 22:37:10 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 00:37:10 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Attaching letter received from Walter Lippmann
In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.20090203035314.0287bda0@pop.xs4all.nl>
References: <3.0.3.32.20090203035314.0287bda0@pop.xs4all.nl>
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0902022137u72ed03a8m8536a5c96f27d246@mail.gmail.com>

Has Walter even asked to subscribe to the list?   If he's asked and
being kept out is one thing.  If he's not asked and just saying that
he wants to be on the list, is he waiting to be conscripted to it?

ML


From lueko.willms at t-online.de  Mon Feb  2 23:49:42 2009
From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (Lueko Willms)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 07:49:42 +0100 (MEZ)
Subject: [Marxism] "Anarchists against the wall" (Israel/Palestine) North
	American Speaking-Tour
Message-ID: <300.d89a0a0006e98749.007.lueko.willms.dialin@t-online.de>

Forwarded from <http://www.awalls.org/tour>

------ cut -------------------------------
AATW North American Speaking-Tour

Anarchists Against the Wall is a direct action group that fights
against Israeli apartheid and oppression in all its forms, most
recently also the atrocities in Gaza. For five years the group has
waged a constant struggle against Israel's Wall. The work on the
ground in the West Bank, alongside the Palestinian popular movement
is breaking new ground in the joint struggle for Palestinian
liberation. In December 2008, Anarchists Against the Wall and the
Bil'in Village Committee were jointly awarded the prestigious Carl
von Ossietzky Medal---an award given annually by the Berlin-based
International League of Human Rights, named after German Nobel Peace
Prize winner Carl von Ossietzky who died in a Nazi concentration
camp.

Now more than ever, it is critical to support the Israeli resistance
movement against the state's attempted repression of our work.
Members of Anarchists Against the Wall continually pay the price for
our activism, including being shot, beaten, arrested and indicted. We
desperately need funding for legal support for both Palestinian and
Israeli activists who are arrested and charged in the course of the
struggle.

Schachaf Polakow, a member of Anarchists Against the Wall, will be
touring the U.S. and Canada from February 1st to March 9th. His
presentation will include film and photos, and will focus both on
AATW's recent work in solidarity with Gaza and our ongoing work in
the West Bank. Please see the tour schedule below, and help us get
the word out. A highlight of the tour is bound to be a special
evening with Noam Chomsky at Harvard Square, February 17th.

For more information questions about the tour, please email aatwtour
( from ) gmail.com. 


Tour dates
========


Feb 1st-8th
California
Regional coordinator: Rebecca - rvilkomerson ( from ) gmail.com

Feb 1st - Los Angeles
An event sponsored by LA Jews for Peace and American Friends Service
Committee
Levantine Cultural Center Studio
5998 W. Pico Blvd., LA (street parking available)
Time TBA
Contact:  PatnJeff ( from ) keyway.net

Feb 4th - Sacramento
Sponsored by Sacramento Peace Action
Davis University
the Quad of the UC campus
12 noon
Contact: David Mandel - dlmandel ( from ) pacbell.net; Jessica Gray -
jessicadgray ( from ) msn.com; Issam Hararah - iahararah ( from )
ucdavis.edu

Feb 4th - Sacramento 
Sponsored by Sacramento Jewish Voice for Peace and Sacramento Peace
Action
The Peace Action Conference Room,
909 12th St.
7 PM
David Mandel - dlmandel ( from ) pacbell.net; Jessica Gray -
jessicadgray ( from ) msn.com; Issam Hararah - iahararah ( from )
ucdavis.edu

Feb 5th - Berkeley
An event sponsored by JVP Bay Area
Unitarian Hall, 1924 Cedar St.
JVP Bay Area
7:30-9:30 PM
Contact: bayarea ( from ) jewishvoiceforpeace.org

Feb 6th - UC Berkeley
An event sponsored by Students for Justice in Palestine, Berkeley
Berkeley campus:
Time TBA
Contact: Yaman Salahi - ysalahi ( from ) gmail.com

Feb 7th - Marin
An event sponsored by 14 Friends of Palestine, and Keep Hope Alive
First Presbyterian Church of San Anselmo
72 Kensington Road, Anselmo
4 PM
Contact: 14friendsofpalestine ( from ) gmail.com

Feb 8th - South Bay 7-9 PM
An event sponsored by South Bay JVP, Pilgrims of Ibillin, San Jose
Peace and Justice Center, South Bay Mobilization
Sunnyvale Presbyterian Church, Fellowship Hall
W. Fremont Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94087 (Exit Fremont Ave off of Hwy 85.
Between Mary and Hollenbeck)
Time TBA
Contact: southbay ( from ) jewishvoiceforpeace.org

Feb 1st-8th
Seattle region
Regional coordinator: Judith Kolokoff - jkolokoff ( from )
hotmail.com

Feb 11th - Seattle
Details TBA

Feb 12th - Portland OR
Details TBA

Feb 13/14 - Vancouver/Bellingham
Details TBA

Feb 15th-20th
Boston and New England region
Regional coordinators: noam - Noambahat ( from ) yahoo.com; matan
kohen - matankohen2 ( from ) gmail.com

Feb 15th - Boston
Details TBA

Feb 17th - Boston Feb 17
An event featuring Noam Chomsky
Unitarian Church,Church St. Harvard Square
7 PM
Contact: Jean Entine - jeanentine ( from ) igc.org

More Boston events TBA

Feb 21st - Montreal
Comit? Sociale Centre-Sud
1710 Beaudry
6 pm
Contact: info ( from ) tadamon.ca

Feb 22nd - Montreal
Caf? Cagibi
5490 St-Laurent.
1 PM
Contact: info ( from ) tadamon.ca

Feb 22nd - Ottawa
Details TBA
Contact: abla abdelhadi - abla_a76 ( from ) hotmail.com

Feb 23rd - Kingston Ontario
AKA Autonomous Social Centre
75 Queen Street, Kingston, Ontario
Time TBA
Contact: Avi - grandfunk.cfrc ( from ) gmail.com

Feb 24th - Toronto
Details TBA
Contact: Sue Goldstein - nyinmind ( from ) yahoo.com

Feb 25th - London Ontario
empowerment infoshop
636 Queens Ave. London
Time TBA
Contact: Darius Mirshahi - info ( from ) empowermentinfoshop.com

Feb 26th - Detroit
Barbara Harvey Jewish Voice for Peace Detroit and American Jews for
Just Peace, Detroit
Details TBA

Feb 27th - Oberlin Oh
Details TBA
Contact: sam.cassanos ( from ) gmail.com

Feb 28th - Pittsburgh
Hosted by University of Pittsburgh Students for Justice in Palestine
Endorsed by Pitt Muslim Student Association and Pittsburgh Palestine
Solidarity Committee
University of Pittsburgh
David Lawrence Hall Room 121
7pm
Contact: Jonas - joeskillet ( from ) riseup.net

March 1st - Philadelphia
Details TBA

March 2nd - Washington, DC
Details TBA

March 3rd-5th - NYC  and Hudson Valley
Details TBA
Contact: Patrick Conners - ConnorsPatrick1 ( from ) aol.com

March 5th - Ithaca College
Details TBA

March 6th - Cornell University
Details TBA

March 7th - Syracuse
Details TBA

March 8th - Rochester
An event sponsored by SDS
Details TBA

March 9th - Binghamton NY
An event sponsored by Binghamton Education Workers Union (I.W.W.) and
Binghamton Political Initiative
Binghamton University
Time TBA
Contact: Joe Golowka - jgolowk1 ( from ) binghamton.edu

------------- off ------------------

   When I attended an event with one of them here in Frankfurt, I
wanted to ask, if they think it indispensable that there is a state
with a government not of the people, by the people and for the
people, but with a government of Jews, by Jews and for Jews.
Unfortunately the idea for that question came too late. Maybe some of
the list participants in North America can do it for me...


Comradely yours, 
L?ko Willms 
Frankfurt/Main 
/ Lueko.Willms at T-Online.de 




From sartesian at earthlink.net  Tue Feb  3 01:01:05 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 09:01:05 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Bolivia's promising lithium reserves
References: <06C5CCF267F340F68263F80D49510403@MARV>
Message-ID: <C2434039C35C42B79AEDF79179D1BC2B@dmsthinkpad>

Same response here:  Next Saudi Arabia? Sure, with its own supply of guest 
workers? Bet on it. Bet on it never happening.   Next Iraq or Afghanistan is 
more likely.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Marvin Gandall" <marvgandall at videotron.ca>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 12:52 AM
Subject: [Marxism] Bolivia's promising lithium reserves




From sartesian at earthlink.net  Tue Feb  3 01:03:50 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 09:03:50 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Attaching letter received from Walter Lippmann
References: <3.0.3.32.20090203035314.0287bda0@pop.xs4all.nl>
Message-ID: <CCB97D7C59714FA39ABF39A729118BDE@dmsthinkpad>

The overwhelming majority of the list has remained silent on this question. 
Speak for yourself.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jeff" <meisner at xs4all.nl>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 3:53 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Attaching letter received from Walter Lippmann
share all of his views or positions
>
> You speak for the overwhelming majority of the list. I'm sure Louis knows
> that. Although he is not obligated to, I expect Louis to yield to that
> sentiment. Just because it's the right thing to do. The hurt caused by 
> what
> happened surely outweighs any negative effect (annoyance) due to whatever
> might be posted by Walter.
> - Jeff



From versomail at verso.co.uk  Tue Feb  3 04:05:07 2009
From: versomail at verso.co.uk (Verso Mail)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 11:05:07 -0000
Subject: [Marxism] Independent Jewish Voices Event POSTPONED
Message-ID: <A8EC603BE258E44680633A63466ACA405F791E@versonlrserver.VersoNLR.local>

 

 

 

Due to adverse weather conditions this evening's Independent Jewish
Voices has been postponed until further notice. Apologies for any
inconvenience caused. I will keep you informed of the new date and any
changes to venue, etc. 

 

 

 

 

 

Verso and the SOAS Jewish Society

invite you to celebrate the publication of

A Time to Speak Out: Independent Jewish Voices on Israel, Zionism and
Jewish Identity

on the occasion of the second anniversary of

INDEPENDENT JEWISH VOICES

 

Please join us for a panel discussion featuring:

Eyal Weizman, Antony Lerman, Francesca Klug, Howard Cooper and Gabriel
Josipovici

with Jacqueline Rose as chair.

The discussion will be followed by a reception.

 

Junior Common Room, Main Building, SOAS

February 3rd at 6:30pm

 

A Time to Speak Out: Independent Jewish Voices on 

Israel, Zionism and Jewish Identity 

is edited by Anne Karpf, Brian Klug, 

Jacqueline Rose, and Barbara Rosenbaum.

 

Available at all good bookshops and online.

 

 


From davidrail68 at yahoo.com  Tue Feb  3 06:13:03 2009
From: davidrail68 at yahoo.com (David Walsh)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 05:13:03 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Interview with China's Wen
Message-ID: <9361.26394.qm@web45309.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

from 'The Financial Times'

Wen Jiabao: does not see it as China?s role to save capitalism from itself
Wen Jiabao is on the fifth leg of what he calls his ?Journey of Confidence? in Europe and he has been up since before dawn jogging in London?s Hyde Park. But the 67-year-old Chinese premier looks sprightly and dapper as he raises his index finger, looks his interviewers in the eye and says: ?I am ready to be open and sincere.?

His European trip might come as a welcome relief from political pressures at home. Mr Wen is under fire because of the slump in the Chinese economy ? which, he acknowledges, slowed sharply in the period after the August Olympics in Beijing.

But in London he is the man of the moment. Tony Blair, former UK prime minister, and David Cameron, leader of the opposition Conservative party, are both waiting in the wings at the Mandarin Oriental hotel for an audience, while at Davos, Switzerland, last week the delegates hung on his every word.

In a rare interview, Mr Wen outlined in forceful terms Beijing?s approach to dealing with the global financial crisis ? frenetic activity at home, cautious engagement abroad. International expectations of China are intense ? almost on the same scale as those facing US president Barack Obama. But Mr Wen does not see China?s role as saving capitalism from itself.


Hopes in London and elsewhere that China would hand over a large chunk of its near $2,000bn (?1,560bn, ?1,380bn) foreign reserves to help recapitalise the International Monetary Fund are likely to be disappointed. Mr Wen also plays down the idea of signing up to a new environmental treaty at the talks in Copenhagen later this year that would place limits on the country?s carbon emissions.

Asked if China bore any responsibility for causing the financial crisis, as a number of economists believe, he stiffens and says in a low voice: ?It is a ridiculous view.?

EDITOR?S CHOICE
Video: ?The mandarins? mandarin? - FT editor, Lionel Barber, profiles Wen Jiabao - Feb-02

China to go on European spending spree - Feb-02

Lex: Asian lenders - Feb-02

Downturn causes 20m job losses in China - Feb-02

Wen looks at fresh Chinese stimulus - Feb-01

Full transcript: Wen Jiabao - Feb-02

For the full transcript of this interview, click here

But he makes it clear that Beijing will do whatever is needed to maintain growth at ?about 8 per cent? this year. ?Running our own affairs well is our biggest contribution to mankind,? he says. If necessary, some of the country?s huge stash of foreign currency reserves could be put towards this endeavour ? a new plan to enable the use of reserves for domestic purposes is under discussion, he says.

Even before the crisis, 2009 was going to be another big year for China. It is laden with important and potentially controversial anniversaries, from the 60th anniversary of the foundation of the People?s Republic of China to the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square protests. The economy is slowing sharply ? the 6.8 per cent growth in the fourth quarter of last year represented the country?s poorest economic performance in a decade. Chinese exports have started to shrink and tens of thousands of manufacturers have gone bankrupt, sending 12m redundant migrant factory workers tramping home to their villages. Mr Wen, who was the visible face of the government during the earthquake last year and has intimate knowledge of rural China, is facing his sternest test since taking the helm as premier in 2003.

?We must take forceful steps. Under special circumstances, necessary and extraordinary measures are required,? he says. ?We should not be restricted by conventions. Success or failure depends on the pace and intensity of those measures.?

Stimulating growth before the current slowdown deepens into a prolonged slump is the top priority. Referring to a raft of initiatives that the government has already announced, including a Rmb4,000bn ($585bn, ?460bn, ?400bn) fiscal spending package aimed mainly at infrastructure spending, Mr Wen says that further efforts may be required.

The government intends to fight on several fronts. Most important is the infrastructure spending and this, he says, is already well under way. But also key is a long list of measures aimed at providing the softer context to a comprehensive stimulus effort ? including initiatives to boost consumer spending and welfare.

The sales tax on vehicles with small engines has been halved. Meanwhile, 74m low-income people have received lump-sum spending subsidies. Former employees of state-owned enterprises received pension supplements, there have been subsistence allowances for vulnerable groups, and Beijing has significantly increased the salaries of 12m primary and middle school teachers in the state system.



The trick in spurring consumer spending is not to engage in sloganising, Mr Wen says, but actually to put money into people?s pockets. ?We do believe that consumer spending is vital in boosting economic development.?

Several commentators in the west have called upon China to overhaul its economic model by rebalancing away from its current heavy reliance on investment, savings and exports and embrace a more consumer-oriented system instead. Most observers agree that such a shift would require Beijing to relieve pressure on consumers by beefing up social welfare, healthcare and education provisions.

Mr Wen reiterates his pledge to put in place a ?fairly comprehensive social safety net?. He adds that Beijing has already announced an Rmb850bn medical care spending plan and would spend Rmb600bn on unspecified technological upgrading.

The rural economy, which offers a livelihood to more than 700m Chinese, is also in for a boost, says Mr Wen, with the recapitalisation of the Agricultural Bank of China, the last of the big five state-owned banks to receive a large injection of state funds. The ABC is receiving an injection of $30bn, he says.

If Mr Wen expresses confidence in the government?s ability to weather the challenge to the domestic economy, he strikes a more defensive note about some of the international questions raised by the crisis.

Shortly before he left office, Hank Paulson, former US Treasury secretary, said in an interview with the Financial Times that the huge volume of savings in countries such as China had been one of the root causes of the crisis because it reduced risk premiums around the world.

Mr Wen is having none of it. ?I think the main reason for this global financial crisis is the imbalances of some of the economies themselves. For a long time they have had double [fiscal and current account] deficits and kept up high consumption based on massive borrowing.? Banks used excessive leverage to reap huge profits. ?And when such a bubble bursts, the whole world has been exposed to a big disaster,? he says.

Path to power: a mandarin?s mandarin

When Wen Jiabao took over as Chinese premier in 2003, one of the few things that people outside of China knew about the former geologist was a famous photograph taken in Tiananmen Square at the height of the 1989 protests.

As a high-ranking official in the Communist party apparatus, Mr Wen worked closely with the reformist general-secretary Zhao Ziyang, and he was with Mr Zhao on the evening he went to the square for a tearful talk with some of the students.

When Mr Zhao and most of his reformist allies were purged, Mr Wen managed to keep his job. The skills that saved his career were a keen attention to detail and a reputation for unswerving loyalty to his superiors. He was the mandarin?s mandarin.

Since becoming premier, he has shown a different side that has won him considerable popular support. In a political system where the top leaders wear the same suits and dye their hair the same colour, Mr Wen ? the son of rural teachers ? has demonstrated a populist touch. He spends Chinese New Year in poor rural areas and is often photographed visiting hospitals or schools.

Within hours of the May earthquake in Sichuan, Mr Wen was on an plane to the disaster zone to direct operations, with television cameras covering his every move. ?This is Grandpa Wen here,? he called down to one child trapped in the rubble. Authoritarianism for a new media age.

?It is completely confusing right and wrong when some countries that have been overspending then blame those that lend them money for their spending,? he argues. Mr Wen points to a famous proverb in China about Zhu Ba Jie, a fictitious character in the 16th-century Chinese fable, Journey to the West , who always blames others who try to help him. ?When I shared this view at Davos with the world business leaders, they all agreed with me on that,? he says.

He gives equally short shrift to the argument put forward by Timothy Geithner, the new US Treasury Secretary, that China is ?manipulating? its currency. ?Completely unfounded,? he says: the renminbi had appreciated 21 per cent since China adopted a managed float of its currency in 2005.

Mr Wen refuses to make an explicit commitment not to devalue the Chinese currency during the crisis ? as the government did after the Asian financial crisis in 1997, a pledge that helped engineer the eventual recovery and won China a lot of prestige. But he does rule out any big shifts in the value of the Chinese currency.

?I want to make it very clear that maintaining the stability of the renminbi at a balanced and reasonable level is not only in the interests of China but also the interests of the world,? he says. ?Many people have not yet come to see this point that if we have drastic fluctuation in the exchange rate of the renminbi, it would be a big disaster.?

Mr Wen says that Hu Jintao, China?s president, and Mr Obama spoke late last week on the telephone, but would not confirm reports in the US that Mr Obama had told his Chinese counterpart that the new administration would not take a confrontational approach over the currency issue. He expresses a hope for ?increased co-operation? with the US, but says that there are a lot of different ?voices? in the US debate.

Mr Wen says China, which is the largest foreign holder of US Treasury bonds, would continue to be an active participant in the market. ?We believe that it is important to stabilise the current Treasury bond market. To do so will be in the interest of shoring up market confidence, overcoming the global financial crisis and facilitating the early recovery of international markets,? he says.

But he also issues a veiled warning that China might rethink its long-term investment strategy for its reserves once the immediate crisis is over, when some economists believe the huge borrowing the US is undertaking could lead to a slump in the value of the dollar. ?We will take into account China?s own needs to maintain the safety and good value of our foreign exchange reserves,? he says.

. . .

China?s new prominence is coming with new responsibilities, yet Mr Wen is keen not to be pushed into too many expensive commitments. He plays down any idea that China will use a large slice of its reserves to recapitalise international financial institutions, notably the IMF. Any process of reforming the IMF should start not with capital injections but with reorganising its voting rights to give developing countries a bigger role. Mr Wen also stresses that China is still a relatively poor nation with huge development challenges ahead, which will limit its generosity.

He uses the same argument to push back against pressure to sign up for carbon emission cuts under the negotiations for the revised Kyoto treaty, which are due to be completed at Copenhagen later this year. China will continue to set itself targets for improving its energy efficiency, he says. But it would be difficult for a developing nation ?to undertake quantified quotas to reduce our emissions?.

The Chinese government is equally nervous that the crisis will spur calls for swifter political reform and challenge its monopoly on power. That anxiety has been evident in the arrest and harassment of some of the backers of Charter 08, a manifesto that calls for direct elections, the rule of law and an end to the one-party state.

Mr Wen is accustomed to fending off questions about the pace of political reform in China, with broad-brush statements about eventual liberalisation. ?Many people in the west think that China is afraid of elections and democracy. Only if you have the trust of your people will they be willing to keep you in power,? he says. But he provides little detail about any time table for expanding direct elections beyond villages and the few townships where experiments have been held.

An eclectic reader, Mr Wen says that when he travels he always carries a copy of The Theory of Moral Sentiments by Adam Smith, the Scottish economist, which lays out the moral underpinnings for governing societies ? and market economies.

?Adam Smith wrote that in a society if all the wealth is concentrated and owned by only a small number of people, it will not be stable,? he says. It is an observation that holds just as well for the crisis-ridden US as it does for China, with its skewed model of development and rising inequality.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009


      


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Tue Feb  3 06:17:58 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 14:17:58 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcat Strike Wave?
References: <4985DB07.3070100@igc.org>
Message-ID: <B6D3C5308D2D4E4FB8204FB81F9A6B95@dmsthinkpad>

Found this on the libcom.org website:


From skeyesvogt at gmail.com  Tue Feb  3 06:31:32 2009
From: skeyesvogt at gmail.com (Sky Keyes)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 08:31:32 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuba distributes more than 45,000 land parcels
Message-ID: <de3b89110902030531t63acb387pbfaffddd218e7fb4@mail.gmail.com>

Cuba distributes more than 45,000 land parcels

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2009/02/02/business/CB-Cuba-Land-Reform.php

*HAVANA<http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2009/02/02/business/CB-Cuba-Land-Reform.php#>
:* Communist Cuba has distributed more than 45,000 parcels of unused state
land to private farmers and other citizens, asking them to revitalize an
agriculture sector crippled by decades of government mismanagement, state
news media said Monday.

The government had received 96,416 requests for fallow state land as of Jan.
22, encompassing more than 1.6 million acres (658,000 hectares), Deputy
Agriculture Minister Alcides Lopez told provincial legislators, according to
the Communist Party newspaper Granma.

A total of 45,518 of those requests were approved, the newspaper added,
without specifying the total amount of land turned over.

Under an agriculture-reform program begun in September, the state retains
its title to the land but leases it to approved individual farmers,
cooperatives and other Cubans who want to try farming.

Landless Cubans can apply for about 33 acres (13 hectares), while
established farmers can increase current holdings to 100 acres (40
hectares). Private citizens qualify for leases of up to 10 years, renewable
for 10 more, while cooperatives and companies can seek 25-year
renewable terms.

The Ministry of Agriculture and the National Center for Land Control, which
has offices in 169 cities and towns across Cuba, decide who receives land
and which plots are eligible for redistribution.

About a third of the 96,416 land requests were denied because petitioners
had sought use of land "not classified as idle," Lopez said, according
to Granma.

Thousands of small farmers kept their plots after Fidel Castro took power in
1959 and still grow much of Cuba's food. But at large farms taken over by
state planners, output has dwindled. About half of the country's arable land
is now underused, according to the government, and just 29 percent is fully
exploited on state farms.

The land reform is Cuba's biggest in decades, and was designed by the
government of Raul Castro, who succeeded Fidel as head of state nearly a
year ago. He is under increasing pressure to slash food imports, which cost
the island more than $2 billion in 2008.

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

Sky Keyes

www.malcolm-che.com

From sabocat59 at mac.com  Tue Feb  3 07:02:28 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (Greg McDonald)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 09:02:28 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuba Distributes more than 45,000 land parcels
Message-ID: <AEBE1F4E-5469-4669-8523-BD3A16A20526@mac.com>

<HAVANA<http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2009/02/02/business/CB-Cuba- 
Land-Reform.php#>
:* Communist Cuba has distributed more than 45,000 parcels of unused  
state
land to private farmers and other citizens, asking them to revitalize an
agriculture sector crippled by decades of government mismanagement,  
state
news media said Monday.>

Has Raul been reading Proudhon, or what?

Greg McD


From farmelantj at juno.com  Tue Feb  3 07:08:15 2009
From: farmelantj at juno.com (farmelantj at juno.com)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 14:08:15 GMT
Subject: [Marxism] Interview with China's Wen
Message-ID: <20090203.090815.13346.1@webmail03.vgs.untd.com>



An interesting choice of reading matter on
the Chinese premier's part.

Marxmail and Marxism-Thaxis member,Dogan  Gocmen,
has written a book on Adam Smith that attempts to
analyze the relationship between Smith's
*Wealth of Nations* and his *The Theory of
Moral Sentiments*.  See:
http://www.mail-archive.com/marxism-thaxis at lists.econ.utah.edu/msg03928.html


-- David Walsh <davidrail68 at yahoo.com> wrote:
from 'The Financial Times'
. . . 

An eclectic reader, Mr Wen says that when he travels he always carries a copy of The Theory of Moral Sentiments by Adam Smith, the Scottish economist, which lays out the moral underpinnings for governing societies ? and market economies.

?Adam Smith wrote that in a society if all the wealth is concentrated and owned by only a small number of people, it will not be stable,? he says. It is an observation that holds just as well for the crisis-ridden US as it does for China, with its skewed model of development and rising inequality.



      



____________________________________________________________
Click for online loan, fast & no lender fee, approval today
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw2P5sYxakrlKp5AAtb575I5boRed1uLWIKSaW2rB5jcsD8Uf/


From davidrail68 at yahoo.com  Tue Feb  3 07:16:58 2009
From: davidrail68 at yahoo.com (David Walsh)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 06:16:58 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcats Rightist website
Message-ID: <242532.99930.qm@web45310.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

This website reflects the nationalist far-right intervention into the real crisis faced by all workers in Britain. Real fascist type rhetoric. Very deadly.
Dave Walsh
www.socialistviewpoint.org

http://www.britishwildcats.com/


      


From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Feb  3 07:32:56 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 09:32:56 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Lenin's Tomb on the British strikes
Message-ID: <49885598.6050006@panix.com>

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2009/02/begging-to-differ.html


From ajamieson at vtown.com.au  Wed Feb  4 00:31:14 2009
From: ajamieson at vtown.com.au (jammo)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 23:31:14 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] South African unions to ban Israeli ship
Message-ID: <00eb01c9869a$90717510$5543a97c@jammo>

Hi all,

This is one of the latest postings from Links - http://links.org.au/node/888 - with a statement (unsourced) from COSATU concerning the decisions of waterside workers in Durban to ban unloading an Israeli ship this Sunday, 8 February. That is exciting news!

It appears this action is in part inspired by the resolutions adopted by the WA MUA at a monthly meeting that has been reported on this list. You have just got to love international solidarity and the power of the internet!

These resolutions are to be debated at our MUA state conference in two weeks time. There will be hundreds of MUA delegates from around the state and nationally, national officials and delegations from other unions in Australia and internationally. A very big conference considering the WA MUA is only a fighting force of 3,000 in this state. This is a far more authoritative body than our monthly meetings.

We are excited about these developments in South Africa. Both COSATU and SATAWU are sending delegations to our conference and it will certainly strengthen our hand in launching a BDS campaign through the Australian union movement.

And, of course, we aren't frightened about belting the boss even in this current economic climate.

Comradely, Jammo



From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Feb  3 07:45:04 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 09:45:04 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Glenn Greenwald on Obama's "cuts" in military spending
Message-ID: <49885870.60703@panix.com>

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/02/03/kagan/


From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Feb  3 07:48:36 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 09:48:36 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Esquire Magazine: What's So Bad About Socialism Anyway?
Message-ID: <49885944.5030608@panix.com>

http://www.esquire.com/print-this/obama-socialist-connections-0209
What's So Bad About Socialism Anyway?

Just like they don't really know what the Che T-shirt means, Generation 
O doesn't really care if you call them ? or their new president ? 
socialist. They want answers beyond the message.

By: Stephen Marche

Roland Barthes, the French theorist and semiotician, once wrote that sex 
is everywhere in America, except in sex. For the past 40 years, the same 
has been true for socialism, which has been simultaneously nowhere and 
everywhere in America, falsely denied by its politics and falsely 
claimed by its popular culture. As the federal government puts the 
finishing touches on its plan to effectively nationalize America's 
banking system, Steven Soderbergh's four-and-a-half-hour epic Che is 
opening in select theaters, and its hero could have scarcely imagined 
that it would be America's first M.B.A. president who would oversee the 
proletariat's glorious march to the workers' control of the means of 
production. Alan Greenspan, meanwhile, the prophet of capitalism, has 
traded his coat of many colors for Job's sackcloth and ashes ("I found a 
flaw in the model that I perceived is the critical functioning structure 
that defines how the world works"), and though Obama spent the month of 
October denying that he is a socialist, his inauguration is upon us and 
the point is moot. Socialism, real, perceived, or simply misunderstood, 
has shit-blossomed to new prominence, and Americans are scrambling to 
make sense of it in this new age of Obama.

Since the '60s, the Hollywood Left has preferred its socialism vague and 
mushy ? a feel-good unattainable ideal, preferably starring Warren 
Beatty ? rather than a system of government that can actually be put 
into practice (as it is in Europe). And though Soderbergh has made a 
movie that even Castro likes ? El Jefe approved it for screening at the 
Festival of New Latin American Cinema in Havana ? Che will hopefully 
cause people to ask themselves whose face they're wearing. If you 
believe in the freedom of the press, the right to belong to a political 
party of your choice, the due process of law, and/or private property, 
then Che Guevara was a monster, plain and simple. But even with that 
knowledge, it's unlikely that Johnny Depp will get rid of his Che 
medallion. And it's unlikely that all the pseudo-hipsters who buy their 
Che T-shirts at Urban Outfitters will stop wearing them. No. These 
T-shirts send a message, which effectively boils down to this: I have 
vague left-wing sympathies but don't read history. I am educated enough 
to want nonconformity but not intelligent enough to avoid conformity. I 
believe in supporting the wretched of the earth but happily purchase 
products from multinational corporations.

It's all part of a long history of reducing the genuine struggles of 
peoples around the world for social justice to pretty baubles, from Jane 
Fonda's Radio Hanoi broadcasts to Madonna mugging in guerrilla gear to 
TV personality Tim Vincent wearing a hammer-and-sickle shirt on Access 
Hollywood. In 2007, Cameron Diaz carried a Maoist messenger bag while 
sightseeing in Peru and was forced to apologize ? 70,000 Peruvians were 
murdered by the Maoist Shining Path in the '80s and '90s. At least with 
Che chic, the idiocy is dreamy and romantic and you can pretend that 
wearing his face is all about being young, riding motorcycles, and 
having South American ? level sex; Mao was responsible for the death of 
60 million people ? he makes Hitler look like an amateur.

Cameron Diaz is not, of course, a communist. She's a ditz ? that's her 
ideology. Her Mao bag was tasteless, not evil. And she's far from alone 
in her tastelessness. The coolest literary bar in New York is KGB in the 
East Village ? the 92nd Street Y for young writers ? and it's full of 
Soviet propaganda. In Toronto, I was once in a bar called Pravda that 
had, alongside Lenin and Che, a picture of Felix Dzerzhinsky on the 
wall: He founded the Cheka, Lenin's secret police, and described his own 
job as "organized terror." There are communist-chic bars and restaurants 
in Melbourne, Australia, and Singapore, too, and the trend has recently 
returned to its birthplace. In Berlin, the hotel Ostel re-creates, in 
minute detail, the experience of living under Soviet rule in the GDR. 
You check in at "Border Control." Images of party leaders stare down 
from the walls like the Big Brothers of yore, and Ostel even has a roll 
of GDR-era toilet paper under glass in the lobby. Hilarious. Nothing 
shows the defeat of tyranny more thoroughly than its reclamation by 
nostalgia.

And so dead politics return as public dreams, with the same process 
neutering the kaffiyeh, the cooling head scarf traditionally worn by 
Palestinian peasants that now warms the necks of trust-fund kids. Here's 
how this erstwhile symbol of solidarity with the downtrodden became a 
status totem: Yasir Arafat sympathetic old-lady professors at Berkeley 
their worshipful students the guys they go to Sam Roberts concerts with 
Rachael Ray in a Dunkin' Donuts ad. With each exposure, the political 
symbol loses meaning. Which is why Che's face isn't appropriate for 
community organizers anymore; it suits pro poker players at Vegas 
nightclubs much better.

Obama has promised fresh politics, new in substance, new in style. We'll 
see. Like FDR and LBJ before him, he has had to reject the title of 
"socialist." But let's face it: McCain was on to something back in 
October when he croaked in a radio address, "At least in Europe, the 
socialist leaders who so admire my opponent are up-front about their 
objectives." (Obama was busy texting his supporters.) BHO's predecessors 
cloaked their agendas with camouflage terminology, the "New Deal" and 
the "Great Society," and Obama may yet find some similarly palatable 
euphemism for his attempt to strengthen the core of the federal 
government through massive infrastructure overhaul, universal health 
care, and, yes, higher taxes and redistribution of wealth. But already 
the way we perceive and process world events is changing. Shepard 
Fairey's Obama posters have been the most successful political art in 
half a century ? the grimy, brutalist images reminiscent of nothing so 
much as the socialist-realist propaganda from World War II and the 
Spanish civil war, the era when America crushed fascism and built the 
strongest middle class in the world. What the Fairey posters show is 
that Generation O is embracing the political aesthetics of their 
grandparents, and like many of their grandparents, they don't really 
care what you call them. Socialist, pragmatist, vegetable, mineral: 
Obama's followers want results, on the financial crisis, the 
environment, and the war in Iraq. Who has time to watch 
four-and-a-half-hour movies about dead guerrillas?


From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Feb  3 07:55:57 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 09:55:57 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Iraqi heavy metal
Message-ID: <49885AFD.8000903@panix.com>

NY Times, February 3, 2009
One Band Moves Its Metal Out of Iraq
By BEN SISARIO

It was a heavy metal miracle.

Acrassicauda had been through hell as a rock band in wartime Baghdad. 
Its practice space was bombed. Its members were branded Satan worshipers 
and received death threats for making Western-style music. Then they 
suffered through two purgatorial years as refugees in Syria and Turkey, 
killing time and dreaming of rocking out in the land of the free.

And on Sunday night, two days after the last of the band?s four members 
was resettled in the United States, they enjoyed what any metal fan 
would have to call heaven: bearhugs and ?Wow, dude? heart-to-hearts 
backstage with Metallica at the Prudential Center in Newark. It probably 
wasn?t necessary for James Hetfield, Metallica?s lead singer, to 
surprise them after the show by handing over one of his guitars, a black 
ESP, and signing it ?Welcome to America?; their minds were already blown.

?That?s for keeping the faith,? Mr. Hetfield said, adding as he 
disappeared with his entourage down a corridor, ?Write some good riffs.?

Acrassicauda?s rock ?n? roll faith was traced in a documentary, ?Heavy 
Metal in Baghdad,? released in 2007. 
(http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2008/06/05/heavy-metal-in-baghdad/) 
That film portrayed the members as ordinary if tenacious rock Joes amid 
the most extraordinary circumstances, and they continue to embody those 
roles in their new lives.

The United States government has granted them refugee status, which 
allows them to apply for green cards in a year, and the International 
Rescue Committee has placed them in a modest one-bedroom apartment in 
Elizabeth, N.J., where there are as yet no Metallica or Slayer posters 
on the walls but a bundle of guitars are piled in one corner.

?This is more than we ever could have expected or dreamed of,? said 
Firas Al-Lateef, 27, the bassist, who arrived four months ago.

Backstage after the Metallica show, Mr. Al-Lateef giggled in disbelief 
along with two of his band mates, Faisal Talal, 25, the lead singer and 
rhythm guitarist, and Marwan Riyadh, the drummer, who was the last to 
arrive. (The lead guitarist, Tony Aziz, who will turn 30 on Wednesday, 
was in Michigan working to bring over family from Iraq; heads were 
shaken gravely over his unfortunate timing.) It was only the second full 
rock concert they had ever attended, after seeing the venerable 
Testament in Turkey.

But they say they are acutely aware that another set of challenges lies 
before them, as they set out to make good on their commitment to play 
music and compete in the open marketplace of metal.

?We?re good at process,? said Mr. Riyadh, 24, who has previously used 
the name Marwan Hussain. ?Going to the U.N.H.C.R.,? he said, referring 
to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, ?standing in a 
queue for three or four hours. We?re good at that. But musically, we 
need to practice.?

There may not be many metal bands from Baghdad, but as refugees the 
members of Acrassicauda (pronounced ?a-crass-a-COW-da? and derived from 
the name of a species of black scorpion) are far from alone, and not all 
have made it through the same hoops.

Of as many as two million Iraqi refugees around the world, only 13,000 
were admitted to the United States in fiscal year 2008, which ended on 
Sept. 30, and another 17,000 are scheduled for fiscal 2009. An official 
at the State Department said that in the last 18 months, 47 of the Iraqi 
refugees admitted to the United States have been musicians.

?They were very fortunate to make it through the system,? Bob Carey, the 
vice president for resettlement and migration policy at the 
International Rescue Committee, said of the band. ?Some of that is due 
to perseverance, some of it is advocacy and some of it is luck.?

Acrassicauda?s primary advocate has been Vice, the Brooklyn-based 
magazine and media company that made ?Heavy Metal in Baghdad.? Vice is 
better known for wisecracking pop-culture commentary than humanitarian 
aid, but it has been working tirelessly on the band?s behalf for a year 
and a half.

Vice tried to help resettle the members to Canada and Germany, and kept 
them afloat with cash ? as much as $40,000 paid from Vice?s own coffers, 
sponsors and donations collected online, according to Suroosh Alvi, a 
founder of the company and one of the directors of the film.

?We had outed them and endangered their lives,? Mr. Alvi said on the way 
to the Prudential Center, where a small Vice crew was filming every 
handshake and wide-eyed glimpse of Metallica?s mountains of equipment. 
?They were receiving threats from Iraq while they were in Syria.? He 
added, ?We had a responsibility.?

The band members insist that they received no special treatment from any 
government agency. The United States Citizenship and Immigration 
Services, a unit of the Department of Homeland Security, does not 
comment on specific cases, but to qualify for refugee status all 
applicants must demonstrate that they face persecution on the basis of 
race, religion, nationality, political opinion or social group.

For these musicians, playing metal could be enough to make them a target 
for extremists, and they still fear for the safety of their families in 
Iraq.

?Sometimes I feel kind of guilty, because I am in a safe place and they 
are not, just because of me,? said Mr. Al-Lateef. ?I am risking their 
lives to be in a heavy metal band.?

But a heavy metal band is what they are committed to be, and they chafe 
at the idea that too much attention is being paid to their being 
refugees and not enough to the music they have risked their lives and 
fled their homeland to make.

?What I want to be is a musician,? Mr. Riyadh said. ?I want to release 
an album. But you feel all this pressure by the media. It?s like, do you 
care about me because I?m a musician or do you care about me because you 
think my story is interesting??

Evidently Metallica finds Acrassicauda very interesting, and on Sunday 
Acrassicauda did not seem to mind. Before the show, the three band 
members were ushered through the production labyrinth backstage, where 
they were showered with attention from their heroes. Each of the four 
members of Metallica came separately ? attended by numerous handlers ? 
to pay respects, talk shop and hold up the devil horns for photo after 
photo.

Kirk Hammett, the lead guitarist, came by last, diligently warming up 
his fingers on his unplugged guitar as he talked. ?You guys represent 
the passion that comes along with playing this music,? he said.

The members of Acrassicauda arrived back at their apartment in Elizabeth 
well past midnight with armfuls of Burger King food for their dinner, 
but Mr. Talal went straight for the new guitar he had just received from 
Mr. Hetfield and plugged it into a tiny Peavey amplifier on the floor. 
With the volume low, he started playing Metallica riffs, and looked up.

?Wow,? he beamed, and then went back to the guitar.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Feb  3 08:12:57 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 10:12:57 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Irving Feiner
Message-ID: <49885EF9.602@panix.com>

NY Times, February 3, 2009
Irving Feiner, 84, Central Figure in Constitutional Free-Speech Case, Is 
Dead
By DOUGLAS MARTIN

Irving Feiner, who played a significant role in the Constitutional 
debate over free speech when the Supreme Court upheld his conviction on 
charges of disorderly conduct for dangerously provoking a crowd as he 
spoke from a soapbox in Syracuse in 1949, died on Jan. 23 in Valhalla, 
N.Y. He was 84.

The cause was a ruptured cerebral aneurysm, a ballooning blood vessel in 
the brain, his daughter Emily said.

Mr. Feiner said years after his conviction that he was ?a contentious 
young man? when, as a Syracuse University student, he mounted the 
soapbox at South McBride and Harrison Streets around 6:30 p.m. on March 
8, 1949, to promote a leftist rally to be held at a hotel in Syracuse. 
The police said he urged blacks to take up arms against whites. Among 
other targets, he castigated the Syracuse mayor, the local political 
system and the American Legion.

(He always denied widespread reports that he called President Harry S. 
Truman a bum, saying that if he had meant to insult the president, he 
would have used an earthier phrase.)

The police estimated that 75 to 80 whites and blacks ? 25 or 30, 
according to Mr. Feiner?s side ? had gathered and were blocking the 
sidewalk and becoming restive. People heckled Mr. Feiner, and at least 
one man threatened him.

Saying he feared a riot, a police officer at least twice asked Mr. 
Feiner to get down from the box. Mr. Feiner refused and was arrested on 
the misdemeanor charge of disorderly conduct, found guilty by a judge 
and sentenced to 30 days in jail.

The conviction was upheld by two New York State appellate courts, and on 
Jan. 15, 1951, the United States Supreme Court followed suit by a 6-to-3 
vote. Writing for the majority in Feiner v. New York, Chief Justice Fred 
M. Vinson said that he had no objection to the content of Mr. Feiner?s 
remarks, but that the reaction they engendered justified his arrest and 
conviction.

A dissenting opinion by Justice Hugo Black said that Mr. Feiner?s arrest 
resulted from his ?deliberate defiance? of an arbitrary command and 
nothing else.

?I understand that people in totalitarian countries must obey arbitrary 
orders,? Justice Black wrote. ?I had hoped that there was no such duty 
in the United States.?

The legal principle involved came to be known as the ?heckler?s veto,? 
meaning that a disruptive listener could effectively stop a 
controversial speaker by threatening havoc. Over time, the Supreme 
Court?s 1951 decision, which put public peace ahead of freedom of 
expression, was superseded by nearly opposite judgments in later cases.

?The court abandoned the approach that the expression of mere ideas 
themselves could be punished as fighting words leading to breaches of 
the peace,? Jack Levin and Gordana Rabrenovic wrote in the journal 
American Behavioral Scientist in 2001.

Irving Hyman Feiner was born in Brooklyn on Nov. 23, 1924, to immigrants 
from Poland who ran a candy store. He grew up in Harlem and the Bronx 
and dropped out of high school to serve in the Army in Europe in World 
War II. After the war, he attended Syracuse University on the G.I. Bill.

He was a junior, and active in a leftist organization called the Young 
Progressives of America, when the group invited O. John Rogge, a former 
United States assistant attorney general, to speak. Mr. Rogge was part 
of the defense team for a group of black men accused of killing an 
elderly white shopkeeper in Trenton.

Called the Trenton Six, they were first sentenced to death by an 
all-white jury on the basis of confessions that later proved to be 
false. They became a celebrated cause of the left and civil rights 
groups. Eventually, four were acquitted, and two were convicted and 
sentenced to life imprisonment.

Mr. Rogge and the folk singer Pete Seeger were scheduled to appear in a 
public school auditorium in Syracuse, but at the last moment Mayor Frank 
J. Costello revoked the permit. Mr. Feiner and others took to the 
streets with loudspeakers to promote attendance at the new location, the 
Hotel Syracuse.

After his arrest, Mr. Feiner was expelled from Syracuse University, and 
his admission to several law schools was revoked. He went on to success 
in the printing, movie exhibition and tropical-fish businesses. He ran 
unsuccessfully for offices that included Rockland County executive, 
state assemblyman and mayor of Nyack, N.Y., where he lived. He wrote 
more than one cantankerous letter to newspapers.

Mr. Feiner is survived by his wife of 58 years, the former Trudi Kramer; 
his daughters Susan Feiner and Emily Feiner; and five grandchildren. 
Another daughter, Rachael, died in 1971.

He returned to Syracuse and finished the work for his undergraduate 
degree, which he received in 1984. In 2007, the university invited him 
back to lecture on free speech.


From marlavk at yahoo.com  Tue Feb  3 08:44:51 2009
From: marlavk at yahoo.com (Marla Vijaya kumar)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 07:44:51 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Attaching letter from XXXXX
Message-ID: <461557.87064.qm@web50004.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

  S. Artesian declares: "The overwhelming majority of the list has remained silent on this question.Speak for yourself."
Artesian, you are doing exactly what you have already accused Walter of doing.
I sam sure your are not sitting in judgement and this is not his inquisition. Please desist from attacking a comrade in this fashion.
Many people have expressed their views against his expulsion from the list. So speak for yourself.
Vijaya Kumar Marla

  
       

From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Tue Feb  3 09:02:11 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 11:02:11 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Attaching letter received from Walter Lippmann
Message-ID: <375555158A9B43CAA71B73C3267444D4@office1pc>

Mark Lause wrote"
Walter's note says, "Louis clearly removed me for political reasons'
and "Obama's presidency should be a topic open for discussion on a
Marxist e-mail list."

Obama has never not been open for discussion here and the first
assertion is patently untrue, as is, I think, the assumption that
someone might be unsubbed for passing on Walter's untruthfulness.

Fred comments:

I certainly agree with Mark that no one should "be unsubbed for passing on
Walter's untruthfulness." However, since Walter was truthful and not
untruthful and Mark is inaccurate and not accurate (also not an unsubbing
offense), I want to set the facts straight.

This can be done quite simply. Following is the entire statement Louis made
in unsubbing Walter. As you see, the criteria is exclusively political from
start to finish and it centrally includes alleged "apologetics for Obama"
which in the specific case consisted of citing two Obama measures that most
list members no doubt agree were positive for our team. It was because of
the exclusively political character of his action, I think, that Louis used
the term "removal" rather than "unsubbing" to describe his action, although
in practice it amounts to the same thing. 

Given the debate over Obama that has been and is taking place on the list,
this sounded an alarm bell to those of us who were in the considered --
among the supposedly "orthodox" (I basically consider myself as orthodox as
all getout) to be "Obamaphiliac" ("Obama-lovers"), "apologists for Obama,"
and "Marxists for Obama."

The best summation of the problem that I have seen on the list is nothing
that I have written but Joaquin Bustelo's "Self=criticism and criticism"
(shorthand title) submission, available at.

And since then, Louis has stressed that Walter's unsubbing need not be
permanent, though he has not yet made it clear if Walter changing his
politics to approach closer to Louis' is a precondition. I hope not.

Anyway, here, in full, is is Louis' exclusively political justification for
unsubbing Walter

Louis wrote:

"Walter Lippmann wrote:
> More changes under the Obama administration:
> The family planning gag rule is gone and now
> stem cell research has been approved.
> 

"I have decided to remove Walter Lippmann from the Marxism list. After 
having 4 years worth of sterile debate about supporting Thabo Mbeki or 
Lula, the terrain has now switched apparently to apologetics for Barack 
Obama. Walter can join the people at Portside if those are his politics. 
This mailing list has to be a forum for people with a different kind of 
politics. We have far too many serious differences within our 
neighborhood of the left to waste time replying to troll bait over 
family planning gag rules, stem cell research, etc. You can read this 
kind of crap on Huffingtonpost or the Nation Magazine. We need to focus 
on what the working class and its allies have to do to challenge the new 
administration that is a continuation of the evils that came before it 
going all the way back to George Washington and Thomas Jefferson."





From sartesian at earthlink.net  Tue Feb  3 09:26:04 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 17:26:04 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Attaching letter received from Walter Lippmann
References: <375555158A9B43CAA71B73C3267444D4@office1pc>
Message-ID: <E8A7F477027041128F8930BE087EE675@dmsthinkpad>

Louis attacked not the support for Obama but the fact that the terrain 
switched to "apologetics."  That is to say when Eli posted about the missile 
strike in Pakistan that killed 18, Walter attacked Eli for sounding 
"pleased"  that he, Eli, could blame Obama for this.  Note Fred, no one here 
said Walter was pleased or displeased about the missile attack, only that he 
had the arrogance and ignorance to accuse somebody against these attacks of 
being positively happy about them.

Walter than distinguished himself  from Eli by not being quite so negative 
about Obama, by having a nuanced understanding that the glass was half full, 
as Fidel, had probably indicated to him in a seance when discussing which 
Kool-Aid to drink; that Fidel was trying to connect to all those who find, 
and accurately find in Walter's stated submissions, positive things in 
Obama, enough to make the glass half-full even when the glass is, as I said 
earlier, being filled with blood.

Go ahead and dissemble all you want.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Fred Feldman" <ffeldman at bellatlantic.net>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 5:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Attaching letter received from Walter Lippmann




From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Feb  3 09:27:12 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 11:27:12 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Moderator's note
In-Reply-To: <E8A7F477027041128F8930BE087EE675@dmsthinkpad>
References: <375555158A9B43CAA71B73C3267444D4@office1pc>
	<E8A7F477027041128F8930BE087EE675@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <49887060.8060603@panix.com>

The next person who posts about Walter Lippmann will be put on moderation.


From phantasmagorias at yahoo.com  Tue Feb  3 09:31:20 2009
From: phantasmagorias at yahoo.com (Debordagoria)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 08:31:20 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] request
In-Reply-To: <E8A7F477027041128F8930BE087EE675@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <249865.30868.qm@web30108.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Cockburn writes

"In the current issue of our newsletter you?ll find a detailed and unsparing review by your CounterPunch editors of Obama?s cabinet and subcabinet picks. Alas, the news is mostly bad. The Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture were are far worse than Clinton?s."

Could someone with access to the newsletter be so kind as to send this to me?
Michael D.




      


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Tue Feb  3 09:32:06 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 17:32:06 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Attaching letter from XXXXX
References: <461557.87064.qm@web50004.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BEA46AD37C624117822AF83064895C7C@dmsthinkpad>

Excuse me.  I'm doing no such thing.  The list comprises well over 1000 
subscribers.  How many took a position on this issue?  How many bemoaned 
WL's fate? Do the math.

I certainly did judge Walter.  I wrote the first response, that I know of, 
pointing out that he was dissembling a murderous imperialist attack, and 
that if that's his orientation he should get off the list, as his 
apologetics have nothing in come with Marxism except its distortion as has 
been practiced throughout the years by a long line of "Marxists."


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Marla Vijaya kumar" <marlavk at yahoo.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 4:44 PM
Subject: [Marxism] Attaching letter from XXXXX




From sartesian at earthlink.net  Tue Feb  3 09:32:46 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 17:32:46 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Moderator's note
References: <375555158A9B43CAA71B73C3267444D4@office1pc><E8A7F477027041128F8930BE087EE675@dmsthinkpad>
	<49887060.8060603@panix.com>
Message-ID: <2DC8A42710D04A78A2EC55BF3027F4A1@dmsthinkpad>

Damn that would be me.  Accepted, with apologies.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Louis Proyect" <lnp3 at panix.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 5:27 PM
Subject: [Marxism] Moderator's note


> The next person who posts about Walter Lippmann will be put on moderation.
>
> ________________________________________________
> 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 jjonas at nic.fi  Tue Feb  3 09:39:38 2009
From: jjonas at nic.fi (Joonas Laine)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 18:39:38 +0200
Subject: [Marxism] Iraqi heavy metal
In-Reply-To: <49885AFD.8000903@panix.com>
References: <49885AFD.8000903@panix.com>
Message-ID: <4988734A.9040602@nic.fi>

Louis Proyect wrote:
> NY Times, February 3, 2009
> One Band Moves Its Metal Out of Iraq
> 
> Acrassicauda had been through hell as a rock band in wartime Baghdad. 
> Its practice space was bombed. Its members were branded Satan worshipers 
> and received death threats for making Western-style music. Then they 
> suffered through two purgatorial years as refugees in Syria and Turkey, 
> killing time and dreaming of rocking out in the land of the free.
> 
> And on Sunday night, two days after the last of the band?s four members 
> was resettled in the United States, they enjoyed what any metal fan 
> would have to call heaven: bearhugs and ?Wow, dude? heart-to-hearts 
> backstage with Metallica at the Prudential Center in Newark. It probably 
> wasn?t necessary for James Hetfield, Metallica?s lead singer, to 
> surprise them after the show by handing over one of his guitars, a black 
> ESP, and signing it ?Welcome to America?; their minds were already blown.

The November 21 2004 St. Petersburg Times Floridian reports:

James Hetfield who co-founded Metallica said the military hadn't asked 
his permission or paid him royalties to blast his band's music in Iraq. 
But he's proud he said that his tunes are culturally offensive to the 
Iraqis. "For me the lyrics are a form of expression a freedom to express 
my insanity" Hetfield told radio host Terry Gross last week. "If the 
Iraqis aren't used to freedom then I'm glad to be part of their exposure."

http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2005/01/23/two-rock-and-roll-band-documentaries/


From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Feb  3 09:42:34 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 11:42:34 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Iraqi heavy metal
In-Reply-To: <4988734A.9040602@nic.fi>
References: <49885AFD.8000903@panix.com> <4988734A.9040602@nic.fi>
Message-ID: <498873FA.3040705@panix.com>

Joonas Laine wrote:
> The November 21 2004 St. Petersburg Times Floridian reports:
> 
> James Hetfield who co-founded Metallica said the military hadn't asked 
> his permission or paid him royalties to blast his band's music in Iraq. 
> But he's proud he said that his tunes are culturally offensive to the 
> Iraqis. "For me the lyrics are a form of expression a freedom to express 
> my insanity" Hetfield told radio host Terry Gross last week. "If the 
> Iraqis aren't used to freedom then I'm glad to be part of their exposure."


http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2005/01/23/two-rock-and-roll-band-documentaries/

?Metallica: Some Kind of Monster? ... details a bitter personality 
conflict between two members of a rock-and-roll band. Unlike the Ramones 
who learned to play together despite acrimony Metallica was on the verge 
of breaking up until a psychotherapist by the name of Phil Towle came 
into help them manage -if not overcome conflict to the tune of $40000 
per month. Towle had been employed by professional sports teams in the 
same capacity in the past. The film consists of him conducting therapy 
sessions with the band during the course of their uphill battle to come 
up with a groundbreaking new record.

Like the Ramones Metallica was held in thrall to their own rigidly 
defined artistic self-image. During one particularly nasty confrontation 
between Jim Hetfield the lead singer and drummer and co-founder Lars 
Ulrich Ulrich kept referring to Hetfield?s guitar riffs as ?stock.? 
Since the band operated within metal?s strict conventions this tendency 
toward stale repetition would appear ineluctable.

During this period Hetfield checked himself into rehab for more than six 
months to overcome alcoholism. Early clips of Metallica in performance 
show Hetfield toasting cheering fans with a glass of beer and inviting 
them to get drunk like him. Twenty years of maintaining this kind of 
public image on stage takes its toll. Although Hetfield manages -at 
least temporarily to go on the wagon there are other forms of 
rebelliousness that he cannot or will not overcome. He is addicted to 
fast cars motorcycles and tattoos. Now in his middle age and a family 
man with a young daughter he struggles to balance the need to develop 
and mature as a human being while catering to the male adolescent 
fantasies of his fans.

Lars Ulrich is a much more sophisticated and urbane personality than 
Hetfield. Born in Denmark to a professional tennis player who once owned 
a jazz club he collects modern art. A scene in the film depicts him 
putting the work up for auction at Sotheby?s including an enormous 
Basquiat painting. The sale netted him millions of dollars.

As a careful investor -he explains that the paintings were a kind of 
savings account that allowed him to have his cake and eat it too and 
successful entrepreneur -Metallica has sold over 80 million records one 
can easily imagine why he would get into a fight over Napster. Ulrich 
was one of the highest profile opponents of free downloaded music. In 
testimony to Congress Ulrich said ?My band authored the music which is 
Napster?s lifeblood. We should decide what happens to it not Napster ? a 
company with no rights in our recordings which never invested a penny in 
Metallica?s music or had anything to do with its creation. The choice 
has been taken away from us.?

The film shows Metallica fans smashing their CD?s on the ground and 
vowing never to buy another.

Perhaps it is just a function of my musical tastes but I never felt as 
engaged with the personalities in the Metallica film as I did with the 
Ramones. The psychobabble that dominates the scenes with the 
psychotherapist put me off as well as perhaps they were intended to. The 
general picture that emerges is that of a typical bunch of California 
narcissist superstars seeking ?personal growth? in a narrow careerist 
vein. For these rock stars psychotherapy would fill the same need that 
Scientology fills in the lives of Tom Cruise or John Travolta. By 
contrast the Ramones were operating on a deeper level of introspection 
and self-awareness. They are also more complex personalities.

In either case the films yield deeper insights into the rock and roll 
business and are well worth watching. In keeping with their respective 
commercial fates the Ramones film is not available in DVD while the 
Metallica film is.

Although it is beyond the purview of either film to address the deeper 
questions of the social role of punk and metal they do deserve some 
comment. Punk has really had a major impact on American society. In a 
profile on Jay Bakker -the son of disgraced televangelist Jim Bakker in 
today?s NY Times Magazine titled ?The Punk-Christian Son of a Preacher 
Man? we learn that he has formed something called Revolution Ministries 
that caters to troubled youth who feel alienated by traditional 
churches. The Times reports:

?Revolution is one of several thousand alternative ministries that have 
emerged in the last decade meeting in warehouses bars skate parks punk 
clubs private homes or other spaces in a generational rumble to rebrand 
the faith outside of what we think of as church. To travel among them is 
to feel returned to the alternative-rock scene of 15 years ago just 
before Nirvana and Lollapalooza put it on the map. Instead of 
criticizing major record labels these ministries criticize megachurches; 
instead of flattening the status of the rock star they flatten the 
status of the pastor. They cluster in cells rather than in denominations 
or arenas and connect through D.I.Y. zines online. They are a 
counterculture on two fronts: at odds with both their secular peers and 
conventional churches.?

So one might ask how punk rock can be deployed on behalf of such a 
conservative mission namely convincing the young drug user or alcoholic 
that heaven is their salvation. The answer perhaps can be found 
partially in Johnny Ramone?s conservative politics and his appetite for 
beating up hippies. In a very real sense the decision to take a 
radically different direction from mid-1970s progressive rock implicitly 
involved a rejection of the counter-culture that spawned it. The groovy 
?peace and love? zeitgeist of the 1970s was replaced by ?Blitzkreig Bop? 
irony and political nihilism. Despite the obvious political commitment 
of groups like The Clash it would seem that the overwhelming drift of 
punk rock is against idealism and against collective action. In this 
light the convergence between the punk rock lifestyle and the skinhead 
scene is no accident.

Metal would appear to be even one step removed from politics beyond 
punk. Groups such as Metallica Megadeath -started by somebody drummed 
out of Metallica AC-DC et al seem to exist mainly to provide a raw 
testosterone injection to their youthful male fans.

This does not prevent its message from being deployed however in a 
context that is highly political. When the US Marines went into Fallujah 
they played heavy metal music including AC/DC?s ?Shoot to Thrill? to 
energize themselves:

I?m gonna take you down - down down down
So don?t you fool around
I?m gonna pull it pull it pull the trigger

Shoot to thrill play to kill
Too many women with too many pills
Shoot to thrill play to kill
I got my gun at the ready gonna fire at will

In addition Iraqi prisoners are forced to listen to heavy metal for 
hours on end at high volume as a kind of torture. Apparently Metallica?s 
?Enter Sandman? is a favorite of the torturers.

The November 21 2004 St. Petersburg Times Floridian reports:

James Hetfield who co-founded Metallica said the military hadn?t asked 
his permission or paid him royalties to blast his band?s music in Iraq. 
But he?s proud he said that his tunes are culturally offensive to the 
Iraqis. ?For me the lyrics are a form of expression a freedom to express 
my insanity? Hetfield told radio host Terry Gross last week. ?If the 
Iraqis aren?t used to freedom then I?m glad to be part of their exposure.?


From nmgoro at gmail.com  Tue Feb  3 11:10:45 2009
From: nmgoro at gmail.com (Nestor Gorojovsky)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 15:10:45 -0300
Subject: [Marxism] Attaching letter from XXXXX
In-Reply-To: <461557.87064.qm@web50004.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
References: <461557.87064.qm@web50004.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <498888A5.2010506@gmail.com>

And, BTW, most, overwhelmingly most, list members usually remain silent 
on these issues. Their single opinion lies in remaining on the list or 
quitting it.

Marla Vijaya kumar escribi?:
>   S. Artesian declares: "The overwhelming majority of the list has remained silent on this question.Speak for yourself."
> Artesian, you are doing exactly what you have already accused Walter of doing.
> I sam sure your are not sitting in judgement and this is not his inquisition. Please desist from attacking a comrade in this fashion.
> Many people have expressed their views against his expulsion from the list. So speak for yourself.



From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Feb  3 11:20:45 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 13:20:45 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Rendition Lite
Message-ID: <49888AFD.2070909@panix.com>

On February first, the Los Angeles Times reported that renditions will 
continue under the Obama administration:

	The CIA?s secret prisons are being shuttered. Harsh interrogation 
techniques are off-limits. And Guantanamo Bay will eventually go back to 
being a wind-swept naval base on the southeastern corner of Cuba.

	But even while dismantling these programs, President Obama left intact 
an equally controversial counter-terrorism tool.

	Under executive orders issued by Obama recently, the CIA still has 
authority to carry out what are known as renditions, secret abductions 
and transfers of prisoners to countries that cooperate with the United 
States.

Not long after the article appeared, it was discredited as a hoax by 
Obama supporters Hilzoy at Obsidian Wings and Harper?s Magazine Scott 
Horton, an expert on extralegal abuses during the Bush administration, 
who wrote:

	The Los Angeles Times just got punked? It misses the difference between 
the renditions program, which has been around since the Bush 41 
Administration at least (and arguably in some form even in the Reagan 
Administration) and the extraordinary renditions program which was 
introduced by Bush 43 and clearly shut down under an executive order 
issued by President Obama in his first week.

	There are two fundamental distinctions between the programs. The 
extraordinary renditions program involved the operation of long-term 
detention facilities either by the CIA or by a cooperating host 
government together with the CIA, in which prisoners were held outside 
of the criminal justice system and otherwise unaccountable under law for 
extended periods of time. A central feature of this program was 
rendition to torture, namely that the prisoner was turned over to 
cooperating foreign governments with the full understanding that those 
governments would apply techniques that even the Bush Administration 
considers to be torture. This practice is a felony under current U.S. 
law, but was made a centerpiece of Bush counterterrorism policy.

	The earlier renditions program regularly involved snatching and 
removing targets for purposes of bringing them to justice by delivering 
them to a criminal justice system. It did not involve the operation of 
long-term detention facilities and it did not involve torture. There are 
legal and policy issues with the renditions program, but they are not in 
the same league as those surrounding extraordinary rendition. Moreover, 
Obama committed to shut down the extraordinary renditions program, and 
continuously made clear that this did not apply to the renditions program.

Horton?s reassurances to the contrary, I for one would not use Bush 41?s 
renditions program as a benchmark for human rights.

full: http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2009/02/03/rendition-lite/


From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Feb  3 11:45:12 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 13:45:12 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Nine-and-a-half hour on Marx's "Kapital" now available
Message-ID: <498890B8.3030604@panix.com>

http://print.signandsight.com/features/1815.html
Features ? Film
19/01/2009
Marx: the quest, the path, the destination

Alexander Kluge's nine-and-a-half hour long film of Marx's "Kapital" is 
not a minute too long says Helmut Merker

What is a revolutionary? The writings of Marx and Engels both use the 
metaphor of revolution as the "locomotive of history". Is, then, the 
revolutionary a standard bearer of progress, a pace setter, a frontrunner?

None of the above, because in a world ruled by a turbo "devaluation" 
where only the new has market value, where commodity production spirals 
out of control, the "train of time" is a deadly trend. Alexander Kluge 
instead opts for Walter Benjamin's idea of the revolution as mankind 
"pulling the emergency brake". We must hold up the torch of reason to 
the problems at hand, and the true revolutionary is therefore the one 
who can unite future and past, merging two times, two societies, the 
artist who montages stories and history. And so we come to Alexander 
Kluge and his art.

Kluge's monumental "News from Ideological Antiquity. Marx ? Eisenstein ? 
Das Kapital" is a 570-minute film available only on DVD which is based 
on the work of two other montage artists, James Joyce and Sergei 
Eisenstein. These two met in 1929 to discuss filming Marx's "Kapital" 
which had been written 60 years beforehand. Now, eighty years on, 
Alexander Kluge joins the party and takes up where Eisenstein failed, 
because neither Hollywood's capitalists nor Moscow's Communists were 
prepared to send the necessary funds his way.

Most of the film consists of involved discussions between Alexander 
Kluge and other Marx-savvy writers and artists. Poet and essayist Hans 
Magnus Enzensberger compares the soul of man with the soul of money, 
author Dietmar Dath explains the meaning of the hammer and sickle on the 
Soviet flag and, from the standpoint of the Stoics, leaps (rather than 
marches at an orderly pace) into industrialisation, the actress Sophie 
Rois makes an impassioned appeal for Medea, differentiating between 
additive and subtractive love, filmmaker Werner Schroeter stages a 
Wagner opera featuring the "rebirth of Tristan in the spirit of 
battleship Potemkin", philosopher Peter Sloterdijk talks about Ovid and 
the metamorphosis of added value, a man at the piano analyses the score 
of a strike song while workers and factory owners face off in an opera 
by Luigi Nono, the poet D?rs Gr?nbein interprets Bert Brecht's 
aesthetisation of the Communist manifesto in swinging oceanic hexameter, 
cultural scientist Rainer Stollmann emphasises the myriad meanings of 
Marx's writings as science, art, story telling, philosophy, poetry. And 
social theorist and philosopher Oskar Negt looks sceptical when asked 
whether it's possible to find the right images for all this stuff when 
you're less interested in pedagogical content than the encompassing theory.

Scholarly stuff, wide and deep in scope, yet bold and playful. But even 
if your own study of Marx is no more than a faded memory, it is hugely 
enjoyable to watch and listen to these experts as their "thinking 
gradually deepens through talking" and to watch Kluge interject, hopping 
adroitly from one thought to the next, surprising his interlocutors, 
catching them off balance, sending them off on new trajectories. We 
never know how much agreement and variance is hidden in Kluge's 
objections. His a Socratic approach to questioning, curious, open to 
everything, and so wonderfully subtle that at the end always find 
yourself wondering whether he had been driving at a particular target 
all along. Alexander Kluge is a great manipulator, an industrious loom, 
who weaves the most far-flung observations into his system.

He is not filming "Das Kapital" but researching how one might find 
images to make Marx's book filmable. The quest is the way is the 
destination. The model for his underlying structure is Joyce's "Ulysses" 
where the entire history of the world is packed into a day in the life 
of his hero, Bloom. In Kluge's hands this becomes a collage of 
documentary, essayistic and fictional scenes, interviews and still 
photos, archive images of smoking factory chimneys, time-lapse footage 
of pounding machines and mountains of products, diary entries and 
blackboards scribbled with quotes referencing constructivism and 
concrete poetry.

Coincidences, collisions. Back to back with a short film in which 
director Tom Tykwer stirs things up in a Berlin street, two readers 
struggle to recite the following sentence, slipping in and out of synch 
with increasing desperation: "Whenever real, corporeal man, man with his 
feet firmly on the solid ground, man exhaling and inhaling all the 
forces of nature, posits his real, objective essential powers as alien 
objects by his externalisation, it is not the act of positing which is 
the subject in this process: it is the subjectivity of objective 
essential powers, whose action, therefore, must also be something 
objective."

No sooner are we shown "how the history of industry and the established 
objective existence of industry are the open book of man's essential 
powers, the perceptibly existing human psychology" than we have the 
history of capitalism is explained to us as a giant extension of the 
fairytale about the devil with the three golden hairs ? every thing is a 
human being being cast under a spell. And the beginning of Mae West's 
film career runs parallel to the leap into industrialisation ? a form of 
aesthetic slapstick in which not cream pies fly through the air but 
ideas and concepts.

Unlike Eisenstein, who was driven to desperation by the herculean task 
of cutting the 29 hours of "October" into a 90-minute film version and 
turned to drugs into the process which left him temporarily blind, Kluge 
cooly sticks to his guns and his nine hours. And it's not a minute too long.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Feb  3 11:54:19 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 13:54:19 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Can We Transform the Auto-Industrial Society?
Message-ID: <498892DB.2090109@panix.com>

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/22333
Volume 56, Number 3 ? February 26, 2009
Can We Transform the Auto-Industrial Society?
By Emma Rothschild

The cataclysm of the American automobile industry has been an odd 
combination, so far, of immediate and historical anxieties. The 
government loan of $13.4 billion to General Motors and Chrysler in 
December 2008 was presented by the outgoing administration as an 
unsolicited gift, lest a "disorderly liquidation of American auto 
companies" should "leave the next President to confront the demise of a 
major American industry in his first days of office." It was restricted 
explicitly to the very short term: "The firms must use these funds to 
become financially viable.... In the event that firms have not attained 
viability by March 31, 2009, the loan will be called."[1]

But there are also intimations of the deep past and the distant future. 
The present and impending disorder of the automobile companies is a 
reminder, even more than the decline of the housing and banking 
industries, of the desolation of the Great Depression. It is a reminder, 
too, of economic history, or of the rise and decline of industrial 
destinies. When the listing of the "Fortune 500" began in 1955, General 
Motors was the largest American corporation, and it was one of the three 
largest, measured in revenues, every year until 2007.[2] GM was the 
"largest industrial corporation in the world," in its own description of 
1989, and it was engaged, at the time, in "the most massive 
reindustrialization program ever attempted."[3] It was an incarnation of 
American economic change, as a GM vice-president suggested during the 
earlier automotive crisis of 1973: "To say that a company that has 
successfully grown over a period of 65 years?a period marked by two 
world wars and a major economic depression?will suddenly be unable to 
adapt to the changing challenge...flies in the face of common sense"; it 
"denies history."[4]
NYR Subscriptions

The distant future, in these frightening times, includes the prospect of 
a low-carbon economy. According to the energy plan outlined by the 
Obama-Biden campaign, overall US emissions of carbon dioxide and other 
greenhouse gases will by 2050 have been reduced by 80 percent, from more 
than twenty tons per person per year in 1990 to some 2.6 tons per 
person.[5] Cars and light trucks now account for about 20 percent of US 
greenhouse gas emissions, or more than four tons per person per year, 
and more than 40 percent of US oil consumption.[6] "The UAW shares the 
growing national concern about climate change," the president of the 
United Auto Workers union told a congressional committee in 2007; even 
the president of GM said that "GM is willing to engage in discussions on 
carbon constraints on the US economy."[7]

The initial challenge for the new administration, like the earliest work 
of the New Deal, in Edmund Wilson's description, is likely to consist in 
"the stocktaking of the country's resources, the inquiry into the 
condition of the people and the development of some equitable plan for 
enabling the people at large to get the benefit of these resources."[8] 
In a stocktaking of recent economic history, and of the thirty-year 
experiment in market ideology that began with the Thatcher and Reagan 
revolutions of the 1970s, the evolution of the automobile industry, of 
energy use in transportation, and of American land use has led to a 
peculiarly bitter destiny.

(clip)


From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Feb  3 12:08:41 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 14:08:41 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Bill Moyers interviews Pierre Sprey and Marilyn Young on
 Obama's Wars
Message-ID: <49889639.7060001@panix.com>

http://www.counterpunch.org/moyers02032009.html


From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Tue Feb  3 12:08:56 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 11:08:56 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] The latest on UK Refinery strike demands
Message-ID: <49889648.6090402@gmail.com>

Update on the spreading strikes by construction engineers in the 
refinery and power industry
Report by phone from Alistair Tice (Yorkshire Socialist Party) on the 
mass picket at the Lindsey total refinery North Lincolnshire. Monday 2 
February 2009
 
"The strike committee accepted the main demands of Keith Gibson and John 
Mckewan to put to the mass meeting today.
 
Keith is a Socialist Party member and on the strike committee and John 
is a Socialist Party supporter and victimised worker from the refinery.
 
The strike committee added an extra demand, calling for John to be 
reinstated into his job.
 
The demands were
No victimisation of workers taking solidarity action.
All workers in UK to be covered by NAECI Agreement.
Union controlled registering of unemployed and locally skilled union 
members, with nominating rights as work becomes available.
Government and employer investment in proper training / apprenticeships 
for new generation of construction workers - fight for a future for 
young people.
All Immigrant labour to be unionised.
Trade Union assistance for immigrant workers - including interpreters - 
and access to Trade Union advice - to promote active integrated Trade 
Union Members.
Build links with construction trade unions on the continent.
 
The mass meeting overwhelmingly voted for the demands put to them by the 
strike committee.
 
Prior to the meeting Keith and John (and their wives who had came to 
support the strikers) had seen some BNP members in the car park and told 
them that they were not welcome, with that the BNP cleared off.
 
Socialist Party members gave out over 700 leaflets putting our position 
(which was now the position of the strike committee) and the leaflet was 
welcomed. One worker (before he read the leaflet) thought that were 
giving out BNP leaflets and protested that he was not a racist and 
didn't support the BNP and was relieved when it was explained to him 
that they were Socialist Party leaflets and supported workers unity.
 
Keith is part of the negotiating committee that is now in discussions 
with the management at the refinery. The strike is continuing and looks 
as if it is spreading throughout the country at the time of writing with 
Sellafield and Heysham nuclear plants out. Workers at other plants, 
according to the BBC, have also decided to stay out, these include 
Grangemouth and Longannon in Scotland. Warrington and Staythope in 
Newark are also out as well.
 
The strikes are spreading from fiddlers ferry in Warrington to the Drax 
power station in Yorkshire."


From christopher.hutch at gmail.com  Tue Feb  3 12:47:16 2009
From: christopher.hutch at gmail.com (Christopher Hutchinson)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 14:47:16 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] General Strike: Europe in Revolt
Message-ID: <c81bf1a60902031147y5405b108t6d807e2b39886d43@mail.gmail.com>

Hey everyone,

The visual portion of General Strike is up and running.

www.GeneralStrikeComics.com <http://www.generalstrikecomics.com/>

keep well,

christopher

From larrydamms at yahoo.com  Tue Feb  3 13:29:19 2009
From: larrydamms at yahoo.com (Larry Damms)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 12:29:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Did China cause the crisis?
Message-ID: <325437.31773.qm@web58503.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

Noah Tucker:
?
>My evaluation of the issues re: the new Treasury Secretary's proposal for a US trade war >against China:
>
>http://21stcenturysocialism.com/article/did_china_cause_the_crisis_01808.html
>
>Comments would be appreciated.

Larry Damms:
?
I thought for the most part it was very, very?good.
?
One thing you could have mentioned: the wholly disingenuous Sebastian Mallabys of the world fail to recognize that if the PRC did indeed move away from export dependent development, the PRC would gain another reason to not buy US T-Bills to the same extent it has in the?recent?past, as?well as to diversify its currency reserves. Thus the myopic schemes of the Mallabys actually undercut the goal of propping up US financial and geopolitical primacy. 
?
But Mallaby is just a hack op-ed writer, changing his ideological stripes (from neo-lib to neo-con) according?to who is signing his paycheck. More important is the statement by Geithner.?I don't think he nor the Wall Street interests he?represents want a heightened trade war with China. He's?simply serving?up the usual helping of demagoguery, palliating and distracting the nativist-protectionist?crowd that pass for "populists" in the US?so that the Obama?Administration can?continue handing?out TARP money unimpeded, with no strings?attached. The problem (from the point of view of the Obama Admin and?Wall Street)?is?that indulging right-wing populist sentiment might inflame said sentiment?and put pressure?on the Obama?Admin to?actually sanction China for the "currency manipulation" which the likes of Geithner know to be a fiction.
?
And on the flip side, the dominant wing of the CCP does not want the world slump and tensions with the US to force China to adopt wholesale an internal accumulation regime, because that might?independently empower the Chinese working class a bit too much for comfort.?
?
All of this of course (by necessity) ignores the bigger question of the ecological limits of global capitalism... and the China produces and lends and the US borrows and spends engine of global capitalism's most recent incarnation, and whatever is to soon follow it.
?
?


      

From lueko.willms at t-online.de  Tue Feb  3 13:20:14 2009
From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (=?iso-8859-1?q?L=FCko_Willms?=)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 21:20:14 +0100 (MEZ)
Subject: [Marxism] Cuba Distributes more than 45,000 land parcels
In-Reply-To: <AEBE1F4E-5469-4669-8523-BD3A16A20526@mac.com>
References: <AEBE1F4E-5469-4669-8523-BD3A16A20526@mac.com>
Message-ID: <300.90c40500fea68849.114@lws-media.de>

On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 09:02:28 -0500, Greg McDonald wrote:

> :* Communist Cuba has distributed more than 45,000 parcels of unused  
> state land to private farmers and other citizens, 
> asking them to revitalize an agriculture sector crippled by decades of 
> government mismanagement,  state news media said Monday.
> 
> Has Raul been reading Proudhon, or what?

  Maybe, but why do you ask? 

  Do you think that the land should continue to lay idle, unused? 

  Do you think the land should not stay nationalised but handed over as 
tradeable private property? 

  Or what?


Comradely yours, 
L?ko Willms
Frankfurt, Germany
--------------------------------
visit http://www.mlwerke.de Marx, Engels, Luxemburg, Lenin, Trotzki in Ge

From lueko.willms at t-online.de  Tue Feb  3 13:30:04 2009
From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (=?iso-8859-1?q?L=FCko_Willms?=)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 21:30:04 +0100 (MEZ)
Subject: [Marxism] Moderator's note
Message-ID: <300.20120a004ca98849.122@lws-media.de>

On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 11:27:12 -0500, Louis Proyect wrote:

> The next person who posts about Walter Lippmann will be put on 
moderation.

  Yeah, Walter Lippman is being declared to be an unperson, as that is called 
in George Orwell's 1984's "newspeak". 

   Interesting. 
   
   I already told you, Louis, right after your excommunication of your favorite 
enemy that by that action you made this your action the most discussed 
subject on this list, more than the savage attack on Gaza, the first steps of 
the new POTUS, the deepening economic crisis of capitalism, etc etc. 

   Do you want to destroy your list, Louis? 

   Better go on vacation for some weeks, stay away from Internet caf?s, and 
computers in general. Relax. 

   But: everyone has his favorite enemy without whom he would feel very 
lonely. 


Cheers, 
L?ko Willms
Frankfurt, Germany
--------------------------------
visit http://www.mlwerke.de Marx, Engels, Luxemburg, Lenin, Trotzki in 
German



From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Feb  3 13:55:21 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 15:55:21 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] William Blum proposes foreign policy changes to Obama
Message-ID: <4988AF39.3040203@panix.com>

http://killinghope.org/bblum6/aer66.html


From nmgoro at gmail.com  Tue Feb  3 14:59:09 2009
From: nmgoro at gmail.com (Nestor Gorojovsky)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 18:59:09 -0300
Subject: [Marxism] Moderator's note
In-Reply-To: <300.20120a004ca98849.122@lws-media.de>
References: <300.20120a004ca98849.122@lws-media.de>
Message-ID: <4988BE2D.8060702@gmail.com>

I guess we should leave him alone with his hatreds. What I sent to the 
list, in fact, pointed to the issue at stake, which is that almost 90?% 
or more of the suscribers don?t care a gram about this LP/WL match.



L?ko Willms escribi?:
> On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 11:27:12 -0500, Louis Proyect wrote:
> 
>> The next person who posts about Walter Lippmann will be put on 
> moderation.
> 
>   Yeah, Walter Lippman is being declared to be an unperson, as that is called 
> in George Orwell's 1984's "newspeak". 
> 
>    Interesting. 
>    
>    I already told you, Louis, right after your excommunication of your favorite 
> enemy that by that action you made this your action the most discussed 
> subject on this list, more than the savage attack on Gaza, the first steps of 
> the new POTUS, the deepening economic crisis of capitalism, etc etc. 
> 
>    Do you want to destroy your list, Louis? 
> 
>    Better go on vacation for some weeks, stay away from Internet caf?s, and 
> computers in general. Relax. 
> 
>    But: everyone has his favorite enemy without whom he would feel very 
> lonely. 
> 
> 
> Cheers, 
> L?ko Willms
> Frankfurt, Germany
> --------------------------------
> visit http://www.mlwerke.de Marx, Engels, Luxemburg, Lenin, Trotzki in 
> German
> 
> 
> ________________________________________________
> 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
> 


From david at miradoiro.com  Tue Feb  3 14:01:14 2009
From: david at miradoiro.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?David_Pic=F3n_=C1lvarez?=)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 22:01:14 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Cuba Distributes more than 45,000 land parcels
References: <AEBE1F4E-5469-4669-8523-BD3A16A20526@mac.com>
	<300.90c40500fea68849.114@lws-media.de>
Message-ID: <0F133390B02141D8A3E1EF067A28CE46@Nautilus>

From: "L?ko Willms" <lueko.willms at t-online.de>
>   Do you think that the land should continue to lay idle, unused?

>   Do you think the land should not stay nationalised but handed over as
tradeable private property?

I can of course speak only for myself, but how about wanting the land to be 
utilized in accordance to the needs of the planned economy instead of 
parcelling it out in some kind of emphyteusis, leaving its use up to private 
actors?

I don't think the whole spread of choice is to 1) privatize the land all the 
way, 2) leave it unused and 3) assign it to people for a limited term to 
produce according to market imperatives.

This said, there's probably a reason why this has been the choice taken, and 
if the Cuban leadership considers that it would be difficult or impossible 
to use the land within the state sector itself, I can see their case for 
trying to get something out of it in this way.

--David.



From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Feb  3 14:28:46 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 16:28:46 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Third Republican named to Obama cabinet
Message-ID: <4988B70E.1030504@panix.com>

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0209/18325.html



From pbond at mail.ngo.za  Tue Feb  3 15:31:07 2009
From: pbond at mail.ngo.za (Patrick Bond)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 00:31:07 +0200
Subject: [Marxism] South African unions to ban Israeli ship
In-Reply-To: <00eb01c9869a$90717510$5543a97c@jammo>
References: <00eb01c9869a$90717510$5543a97c@jammo>
Message-ID: <4988C5AB.5060901@mail.ngo.za>

jammo wrote:
> ... We are excited about these developments in South Africa. Both COSATU and SATAWU are sending delegations to our conference and it will certainly strengthen our hand in launching a BDS campaign through the Australian union movement.
>   

Same here in Durban, where on Sunday workers attempt to kick out the 
Israeli ship, as they did the one carrying weaponry for Mugabe last 
April. The local establishment paper was meant to carry this riff in our 
centre's fortnightly column today but I don't yet know if the editors 
chopped it:


Time now to boycott Israel
Patrick Bond reports on new pressures to free Palestine

Yesterday?s decision by dockworkers to boycott the handling of Israeli 
imports is of enormous importance, and will prod more Durban citizens ? 
including academics and cultural activists - to also raise concerns 
about institutional linkages that give the Israeli state legitimacy.

On Sunday, the SA Transport and Allied Workers Union aim to repeat last 
year?s feat of turning back a huge ship symbolizing and contributing to 
oppression. A protest with Congress of SA Trade Unions president Sdumo 
Dlamini will be held at the mouth of the port that day at 10am.

Recall last April that the contents of the Chinese ship ?An Yue Jiang? 
were destined for Robert Mugabe?s army, including three million bullets 
and sophisticated weaponry. The ship was repelled from a series of 
southern African ports by dockworkers once local Anglican Bishop Rubin 
Philip raised the alarm.

The ship scheduled to arrive Sunday, the ?Johanna Russ? (flying an 
Antigua flag), is owned by M.Dizengoff and Co., an established ?pioneer 
of the modern era of shipping business in the Middle East? and shipping 
agent for the ironically named Zim Israel Navigation Company. It 
probably does not have bullets in the hold, but does bring revenues to 
the Israeli economy.

The anti-apartheid movement?s success was due in part to economic pain 
inflicted on the racist state and English-speaking businesses by 
sanctions, leading to a partial break in August 1985 immediately 
following PW Botha?s ?Rubicon? speech here in Durban. That split in turn 
led to a nine-year process of power transfer and democratization.

Can local civil society activists promote a similar non-violent 
democratization of Israel/Palestine, by breaking relations between 
Israel and Durban importers? The SA Zionist Federation?s Bev Goldman 
warned the Daily News last week, ?A boycott would undermine relations 
between Israel and SA and result in a negative impact on the economy.?

An end to such relations is what the Cosatu demands, even if they 
themselves sacrifice some jobs in the process, on behalf of Gaza 
Palestinians suffering what are called by leading United Nations 
officials ? and will probably also be known in The Hague International 
Criminal Court - as Israel?s crimes against humanity.

Cosatu and the Palestine Support Committee remind us of the long history 
in which injustice travels to docks: ?In 1963, just four years after the 
Anti-Apartheid Movement was formed, Danish dock workers refused to 
offload a ship with South African goods. When the ship docked in Sweden, 
Swedish workers followed suit. Dock workers in Liverpool and, later, in 
the San Francisco Bay Area also refused to offload South African goods.?

Last week, Western Australian dockworkers announced a similar move 
against Israeli shipping.

And in spite of what is known as ?The Israel Lobby? that influences 
Washington?s foreign policy, more than 300 US academics pledged an 
Israel boycott last month, restarting a movement that has traveled from 
Britain to Canada with mixed results.

On January 14, the Israel Lobby ? especially the American Israel 
Political Action Committee (AIPAC) - was stupidly misnamed by SA?s 
deputy foreign affairs minister Fatima Hajaig as ?Jews? (there are 
plenty of right-wing Christian zealots who also support Israel?s 
barbaric policies): ?If Jewish money controls their country, you cannot 
expect anything else.?

Though she obviously should have used the adjective ?Zionist? not ?Jew?, 
Hajaig?s basic point is correct. Assuming she corrects the phraseology, 
she should not face discipline in the Human Rights Commission, 
especially if Hajaig can turn around SA foreign policy towards 
consistent solidarity with the oppressed, in view of Pretoria?s ?talk 
left, walk right? tendency and abominable recent record of 
oppression-nurture in the UN Security Council.

After all, as the two leading experts on the Israel Lobby ? the 
University of Chicago?s John Mearsheimer and Harvard?s Stephen Walt - 
pointed out in the London Review of Books, both Fortune magazine and the 
National Journal rated AIPAC in second place ?in the Washington ?muscle 
rankings?.?

How did AIPAC build its muscles? Just like Hajaig says: with money. 
According to Mearsheimer and Walt, ?Its success is due to its ability to 
reward legislators and congressional candidates who support its agenda, 
and to punish those who challenge it. Money is critical to US elections 
(as the scandal over the lobbyist Jack Abramoff?s shady dealings reminds 
us), and AIPAC makes sure that its friends get strong financial support 
from the many pro-Israel political action committees. Anyone who is seen 
as hostile to Israel can be sure that AIPAC will direct campaign 
contributions to his or her political opponents.?

As Mearsheimer and Walt conclude, ?The bottom line is that AIPAC, a de 
facto agent for a foreign government, has a stranglehold on Congress? 
The Lobby?s influence causes trouble on several fronts. It increases the 
terrorist danger that all states face ? including America?s European 
allies. It has made it impossible to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.?

Campaigning against apartheid for many years, many of us in 
international civil society found sanctions and divestment a useful tool 
under these conditions, so as to reduce the monetary incentive for 
ongoing racism.

The parallel is real. Remarks Harvard law professor Duncan Kennedy on 
the past month?s carnage: ?It is important to understand the 1,300 
Palestinian casualties, including 400 children as well as many, many 
women, versus 13 Israeli casualties, as typical of a particular kind of 
?police action? that Western colonial powers and Western ?ethnocratic 
settler regimes? like ours in the US, Canada, Australia, Serbia and 
particularly apartheid South Africa, have historically undertaken to 
convince resisting native populations that unless they stop resisting 
they will suffer unbearable death and deprivation.?

?What is to be done??, asks Kennedy. ?You might consider some small 
step, perhaps just a contribution to humanitarian relief for Gaza, or 
e-mailing the White House, or something more, like advocating for 
Harvard to divest.?

Fully aware of the role that progressive white SA academics played in 
the anti-apartheid struggle, including divestment/sanctions advocacy, we 
at the UKZN Centre for Civil Society are deep in debate on this matter.

Although CCS staff have conflicting views, four of our senior academics 
? myself and honorary professors Alan Fowler (former International 
Society for Third Sector Research president), Adam Habib (University of 
Johannesburg Deputy Vice Chancellor) and Dennis Brutus ? issued a 
statement this week to confirm our own concern about the Ben Gurion 
University Israeli Centre for Third Sector Research.

Our attempts last week to suggest that an international conference they 
are holding in Israel next month introduce meaningful Palestinian inputs 
on the incursion into Gaza were unsuccessful, so we simply cannot 
endorse attendance.

On the cultural front there is a similar debate. Three weeks ago, 
Israeli ambassador Dov Segev-Steinberg visited the Catalina Theatre at 
Wilson?s Wharf, where protesters from the Action Group for Palestine 
protesters demanded that the Musho festival cease Israeli-sponsored events.

The lead here comes from the UKZN Centre for Creative Arts, which since 
2001 has not accepted Israeli state cultural funding, according to the 
CCA?s Monica Rorvik.

It may be that some Israeli academic and cultural activities promote 
Palestinian liberation, and deserve exemption, although Brutus suggests 
a full boycott.

Regardless, the higher consciousness civil society activists seek by 
raising the ethics of SA-Israeli relationships can do some good. Just 
witness last week?s Mercury letter from well-known conservationist Ian 
Player in reference to the non-violent demonstration that Durban city 
manager Mike Sutcliffe squelched against last month?s Dusi canoe 
marathon: ?I cannot imagine that a single canoeist would have taken 
umbrage at the Qadi people making a silent protest [against land 
dispossession] by standing on the banks.?

I read the letter to Qadi leader O?Brien Gcabashe on the phone and he 
replied, ?We are going back to the next Dusi marathon at the Inanda Dam 
this Friday ? fewer than 15 of us so as to not violate the Gatherings 
Act ? and we expect the police to let us exercise our constitutional 
right to protest this time.?

Such a gesture - like boycotting Israeli economic, sporting, academic 
and cultural activities in solidarity with Palestinians ? may, to borrow 
Player?s words, ?highlight the critical importance of resolving their 
plight.?

(Patrick Bond directs the UKZN Centre for Civil Society.)



From mlebowit at sfu.ca  Tue Feb  3 15:39:19 2009
From: mlebowit at sfu.ca (michael a. lebowitz)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 18:09:19 -0430
Subject: [Marxism] re sweezy
Message-ID: <4988C797.6080803@sfu.ca>

Michael Friedman wrote:]
> With all due respect to Dick Levins (who has been an inspiration to me), I
> would say it depends on whether or not the "part" has an organic
> connection to the whole. To use an analogy from another ongoing discussion
> on this list, simply because working class people pick up xenophobic and
> racist ideologies does not give them "new properties". Or another, if I
> transplant a pig's heart into a human, it won't become a human heart, nor
> will the "whole" human function properly. And the idea of a "whole" is,
> itself, relative and conditional. The whole working class? The whole
> capitalist system? Just because Sweezy was a Marxist, doesn't transform
> his Keynesian "part" into Marxism. Doesn't make him less of one, but he
> could've been wrong, you know...
     I think the analogy is bad. My simple point was that insofar as 
Sweezy drew upon [as a part] Keynes, it did not make him a Keynesian  
[indeed, according to Jim F, 'one of the pioneer Keyensian
economists in the US, right alongside his more famous colleagues like 
Paul Samuelson'] --- any more than it made Marx a Ricardian because he 
drew upon [as a part] Ricardo. Or, for that matter, a human being into a 
pig if the recipient of some part from a pig. It's the
combination that matters, not the origin of the parts. Very simply, Jim 
begged the question.
       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
www.centrointernacionalmiranda.gob.ve
mlebowit at sfu.ca



From shmage at pipeline.com  Tue Feb  3 16:05:15 2009
From: shmage at pipeline.com (Shane Mage)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 18:05:15 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuba Distributes more than 45,000 land parcels
In-Reply-To: <0F133390B02141D8A3E1EF067A28CE46@Nautilus>
References: <AEBE1F4E-5469-4669-8523-BD3A16A20526@mac.com>
	<300.90c40500fea68849.114@lws-media.de>
	<0F133390B02141D8A3E1EF067A28CE46@Nautilus>
Message-ID: <5523EE6F-39A9-4848-9990-AC602BA0C94F@pipeline.com>


On Feb 3, 2009, at 4:01 PM, David Pic?n ?lvarez wrote:

> From: "L?ko Willms" <lueko.willms at t-online.de>
>>  Do you think that the land should continue to lay idle, unused?
>>  Do you think the land should not stay nationalised but handed over  
>> as
> tradeable private property?
>
> I can of course speak only for myself, but how about wanting the  
> land to be
> utilized in accordance to the needs of the planned economy instead of
> parcelling it out in some kind of emphyteusis [leaserhold in fee  
> simple], leaving its use up to private actors?
>
Once upon a time, communists advocated "land to the tiller." Now,  
after half a century of  disastrous Stalinist agricultural policy, the  
Cuban regime has awakened to the fact that farmers, not bureaucrats  
anointed as the machers of the "planned economy", know how to produce  
food, meat, and fiber.  So why the kvetching?

Shane Mage

> This cosmos did none of gods or men make, but it
> always was and is and shall be: an everlasting fire,
> kindling in measures and going out in measures."
>
> Herakleitos of Ephesos


From ccarrico at temple.edu  Tue Feb  3 16:14:20 2009
From: ccarrico at temple.edu (Christopher Carrico)
Date: Tue,  3 Feb 2009 18:14:20 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Marxism] Nine-and-a-half hour on Marx's "Kapital" now available
Message-ID: <20090203181420.DSD31135@po-f.temple.edu>


Does anybody have any idea about the availability of this with
English subtitles and in a Region 1 compatible DVD format?



From mqduck at sonic.net  Tue Feb  3 16:16:29 2009
From: mqduck at sonic.net (Jeffrey Thomas Piercy)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 15:16:29 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] British Wildcats Rightist website
In-Reply-To: <242532.99930.qm@web45310.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <242532.99930.qm@web45310.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4988D04D.7080009@sonic.net>

David Walsh wrote:
> http://www.britishwildcats.com/

That site would appear to be run by the BNP (no surprise there). Their 
map of strike sites is identical to the one on the BNP website, which 
also uses the same photo of a lion.
http://bnp.org.uk

-- 
Human: An animal so lost in loathing contemplation of what it thinks it 
is as to overlook what it ought to be.


From pbond at mail.ngo.za  Tue Feb  3 16:30:50 2009
From: pbond at mail.ngo.za (Patrick Bond)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 01:30:50 +0200
Subject: [Marxism] Nine-and-a-half hour on Marx's "Kapital" now available
In-Reply-To: <20090203181420.DSD31135@po-f.temple.edu>
References: <20090203181420.DSD31135@po-f.temple.edu>
Message-ID: <4988D3AA.9020004@mail.ngo.za>

Today I received my DVD version of another multi-hour video version of 
Das K - www.davidharvey.org - from the excellent filmmaker Dara Kell 
<dara_kell at yahoo.com>. I took this course with him 1985, and last year's 
version was just as terrific, a model of dialectics.

Christopher Carrico wrote:
> Does anybody have any idea about the availability of this with
> English subtitles and in a Region 1 compatible DVD format?
>   


From farmelantj at juno.com  Tue Feb  3 17:12:15 2009
From: farmelantj at juno.com (Jim Farmelant)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 19:12:15 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] re sweezy
Message-ID: <20090203.191216.5492.0.farmelantj@juno.com>

 
On Tue, 03 Feb 2009 18:09:19 -0430 "michael a. lebowitz"
<mlebowit at sfu.ca> writes:
> Michael Friedman wrote:]
> > With all due respect to Dick Levins (who has been an inspiration 
> to me), I
> > would say it depends on whether or not the "part" has an organic
> > connection to the whole. To use an analogy from another ongoing 
> discussion
> > on this list, simply because working class people pick up 
> xenophobic and
> > racist ideologies does not give them "new properties". Or another, 
> if I
> > transplant a pig's heart into a human, it won't become a human 
> heart, nor
> > will the "whole" human function properly. And the idea of a 
> "whole" is,
> > itself, relative and conditional. The whole working class? The 
> whole
> > capitalist system? Just because Sweezy was a Marxist, doesn't 
> transform
> > his Keynesian "part" into Marxism. Doesn't make him less of one, 
> but he
> > could've been wrong, you know...
>      I think the analogy is bad. My simple point was that insofar as 
> 
> Sweezy drew upon [as a part] Keynes, it did not make him a Keynesian 
>  
> [indeed, according to Jim F, 'one of the pioneer Keyensian
> economists in the US, right alongside his more famous colleagues 
> like 
> Paul Samuelson'] --- any more than it made Marx a Ricardian because 
> he 
> drew upon [as a part] Ricardo. Or, for that matter, a human being 
> into a 
> pig if the recipient of some part from a pig. It's the
> combination that matters, not the origin of the parts. Very simply, 
> Jim 
> begged the question.

Apparently, I have done so along with lots of other
people.  For one example see Robert Pollin's
tribute to Sweezy at:
http://www.counterpunch.org/pollin03062004.html

Likewise, see this Indian Maoist take on Sweezy at:
http://www.massline.org/PolitEcon/MR/Gupta_On_Sweezy.htm

Paul Mattick in his hostile take on Sweezy, placed
great emphasis on the Keynesian influence, for
example see:
http://www.marxists.org/archive/mattick-paul/1955/sweezy.htm

Michael apparently has a bee in his bonnet
about this issue.  If blending Keynesian
economic analysis with Marxism leads
to a deeper understanding of how
capitalist economies work and
how we can transform them into
socialist economies then so be it.
Yet even in his 2004 piece on
Sweezy, he still has to acknowledge
Sweezy's debt to Keynes.
http://www.monthlyreview.org/1004lebowitz.htm

Jim F.

>        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
> www.centrointernacionalmiranda.gob.ve
> mlebowit at sfu.ca
> 
> 
> _____________________________________________
> 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/farmelantj%40juno.com
> 
> 
 
____________________________________________________________
Get the word out. Click here for professional brochure production!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw3BY3ipG330ZZEudYs1Za6dd5RTSQZNk45GZWtshfWe8nHm3/


From david at miradoiro.com  Tue Feb  3 17:52:02 2009
From: david at miradoiro.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?David_Pic=F3n_=C1lvarez?=)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 01:52:02 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Cuba Distributes more than 45,000 land parcels
References: <AEBE1F4E-5469-4669-8523-BD3A16A20526@mac.com><300.90c40500fea68849.114@lws-media.de><0F133390B02141D8A3E1EF067A28CE46@Nautilus>
	<5523EE6F-39A9-4848-9990-AC602BA0C94F@pipeline.com>
Message-ID: <0E1E4810FBA5453F8BD6263B44023425@Nautilus>

From: "Shane Mage" <shmage at pipeline.com>
On Feb 3, 2009, at 4:01 PM, David Pic?n ?lvarez wrote:
[...]
> parcelling it out in some kind of emphyteusis [leaserhold in fee
> simple], leaving its use up to private actors?

I've no idea what leaserhold in fee simple means, common law is beyond me. 
As far as I understand this is an emphyteusis in that: the use and fruits of 
the land are granted, through the payment of a cannon and for a long but 
limited period, to someone with the obligation of conserving and potentially 
improving its state. If leaserhold in fee simple is that, all the better.

> Once upon a time, communists advocated "land to the tiller." Now,
> after half a century of  disastrous Stalinist agricultural policy, the
> Cuban regime has awakened to the fact that farmers, not bureaucrats
> anointed as the machers of the "planned economy", know how to produce
> food, meat, and fiber.  So why the kvetching?

I've nothing in principle against agricultural workers controlling what they 
do, I'm sure they know a lot more about growing crops than anyone else. It's 
the same principle with a factory though, the people who know best how it 
works are the people who work in it. That doesn't mean the ideal solution is 
to lease the factory in emphyteusis so the workers can manage it for profit. 
As far as I can see this entails a reintroduction of exchange-driven 
production, but I'm perfectly willing to have my mind change about it. So 
same as industrial production should be planned for use, agricultural 
production should be planned for use.

--David.
PS No idea what kvetching is either, but I gather it's uncomplimentary ;-)



From elishastephens at hotmail.com  Tue Feb  3 18:06:33 2009
From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 17:06:33 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Cuba Distributes more than 45,000 land parcels
Message-ID: <COL112-W70A0C0A7EE4CEE1654A2B5D7C30@phx.gbl>


David P.A.:
"I've no idea what leaserhold in fee simple means, common law is beyond me.  As far as I understand this is an emphyteusis in that: the use and fruits of  the land are granted, through the payment of a cannon and for a long but  limited period, to someone with the obligation of conserving and potentially  improving its state. If leaserhold in fee simple is that, all the better."

If I remember correctly from the excellent documentary "How Cuba Survived Peak Oil" (http://www.powerofcommunity.org/cm/index.php), the term the Cubans use (and others too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usufruct) is "usufruct". And such arrangements were a big part of the organic farming revolution described in that film.


Eli Stephens
 Left I on the News
 http://lefti.blogspot.com


_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail? goes where you go. On a PC, on the Web, on your phone. 
http://www.windowslive-hotmail.com/learnmore/versatility.aspx#mobile?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_WL_HM_versatility_121208 

From Paula_cerni at msn.com  Tue Feb  3 18:21:21 2009
From: Paula_cerni at msn.com (Paula)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 17:21:21 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Debunking Third World myths
In-Reply-To: <mailman.6411.1233395974.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
References: <mailman.6411.1233395974.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <BAY122-DS7A0C75B7022DBE5A4B21B80C30@phx.gbl>

The presentation highlights a trend much of the left has missed - that the 
so-called South is catching up with the North, at least in some respects. 
Instead of denying this fact (by now obvious to most of the world) we should 
come to terms with it, study the details and consider the implications - 
practical and theoretical.

Paula 



From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Feb  3 18:32:13 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 20:32:13 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Debunking Third World myths
In-Reply-To: <BAY122-DS7A0C75B7022DBE5A4B21B80C30@phx.gbl>
References: <mailman.6411.1233395974.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
	<BAY122-DS7A0C75B7022DBE5A4B21B80C30@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <4988F01D.8010605@panix.com>

Paula wrote:
> The presentation highlights a trend much of the left has missed - that the 
> so-called South is catching up with the North, at least in some respects. 
> Instead of denying this fact (by now obvious to most of the world) we should 
> come to terms with it, study the details and consider the implications - 
> practical and theoretical.

I am stunned to hear this at this point since BRIC is kaput.


From david at miradoiro.com  Tue Feb  3 18:40:31 2009
From: david at miradoiro.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?David_Pic=F3n_=C1lvarez?=)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 02:40:31 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Cuba Distributes more than 45,000 land parcels
References: <COL112-W70A0C0A7EE4CEE1654A2B5D7C30@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <E20D4DC50E9B42A78A73F1D5B6866F17@Nautilus>

Right, usufruct is probably a better word. Not that how it's called changes 
much what's actually going on.

--David.



From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Tue Feb  3 18:48:58 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 20:48:58 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Hundreds of Polish workers said to join UK wildcat strikes
Message-ID: <8147EC487A2F45FB84079F90F8CDF84A@office1pc>

The following was submitted to the UK_Left_Network list by one on the
socialists who has been regularly contributing on this. No source or URL was
given so I have not yet been able to confirm this report. Will be glad to
hear from any who find out more about this.
Fred Feldman




hundreds of polish workers join wildcat strikes

600 workers, including hundreds of Polish workers, have walked out
from Langage Power Station near Plymouth in solidarity with the
wildcat actions sweeping across Britain.

When five hundred site staff had failed to arrive by 10am, the small
group of other foreign labourers (mostly Polish) who had been bussed
in were sent home by management, deciding it was unsafe for them to
work by themselves.

Jerry Pickford, regional officer for Unite South West, said workers
had walked out in "general sympathy with what's happening in the
construction industry. all the Polish workers have walked out as well,
because this is not an issue against foreign workers.

"This is an issue against foreign employers using foreign workers to
stop British workers getting jobs. Once they do that they will try and
undermine the terms and conditions of employment in this country."

It would be illegal for the union to support the strike or even hold a
ballot, but workers are taking action off their own backs. Today
strike action also spread to the Sellafield nuclear plant, while 400
contractors at Scottish Power's Longannet power station in Fife (along
with 80 workers at an ExxonMobil plant there) and 130 at the Cockenzie
Power Station extended their action until Friday.







From jayroth6 at cox.net  Tue Feb  3 19:15:09 2009
From: jayroth6 at cox.net (J Rothermel)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 21:15:09 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] 75th Anniversary Minneapolis coal yard strike
Message-ID: <4988FA2D.2050808@cox.net>

http://www.laborstandard.org/New_Postings/Reprints_from_MRL_2009-1-29.pdf








From wsredden at gmail.com  Tue Feb  3 19:16:46 2009
From: wsredden at gmail.com (Shawn Redden)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 21:16:46 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Hundreds of Polish workers said to join UK wildcat
 strikes
In-Reply-To: <8147EC487A2F45FB84079F90F8CDF84A@office1pc>
References: <8147EC487A2F45FB84079F90F8CDF84A@office1pc>
Message-ID: <a06240801c5aeaa4688b7@[72.225.169.30]>

Same report here; it's not much better than an anonymous source, but 
it's something:

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/02/421170.html

Solidarity,
Shawn

>The following was submitted to the UK_Left_Network list by one on the
>socialists who has been regularly contributing on this. No source or URL was
>given so I have not yet been able to confirm this report. Will be glad to
>hear from any who find out more about this.
>Fred Feldman


From mlebowit at sfu.ca  Tue Feb  3 20:04:07 2009
From: mlebowit at sfu.ca (michael a lebowitz)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 22:34:07 -0430
Subject: [Marxism] re sweezy [last comment]
Message-ID: <498905A7.9050808@sfu.ca>

My last note said:
> My simple point was that insofar as Sweezy drew upon [as a part] 
> Keynes, it did not make him a Keynesian  [indeed, according to Jim F, 
> 'one of the pioneer Keyensian
> economists in the US, right alongside his more famous colleagues like 
> Paul Samuelson'] --- any more than it made Marx a Ricardian because he 
> drew upon [as a part] Ricardo....Very simply, Jim begged the question.
Jim responded with the following:

> Apparently, I have done so along with lots of other
> people. For one example see Robert Pollin's
> tribute to Sweezy at:
> http://www.counterpunch.org/pollin03062004.html
>
> Likewise, see this Indian Maoist take on Sweezy at:
> http://www.massline.org/PolitEcon/MR/Gupta_On_Sweezy.htm
>
> Paul Mattick in his hostile take on Sweezy, placed
> great emphasis on the Keynesian influence, for
> example see:
> http://www.marxists.org/archive/mattick-paul/1955/sweezy.htm

    So?
     Obviously not an answer to my point. But, no matter. I made my point.
          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
www.centrointernacionalmiranda.gob.ve
mlebowit at sfu.ca



From cdb1003 at prodigy.net  Tue Feb  3 21:00:48 2009
From: cdb1003 at prodigy.net (Charles Brown)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 20:00:48 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Marx was a restricted consumptionist ( late response)
Message-ID: <496529.95831.qm@web180104.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Here's a reply to Steve Palmer from a while ago. I missed it at the time

CB

^^^^^
> "theory" of underconsumption:
> ___________
> 1. You have made your entire argument balance on one sentence from Marx.

CB: No it doesn't. As I said , it relies on the  beginning and most fundamental discussions of Marx in Vol. I of _Capital_ . Steve Palmer and S Artesian ignore this, and can't answer it because my argument in based on the most basic concepts in _Capital_ as well as the quoted sentence. The concept of exploitation is more fundamental than the OCC and FROP in Marx's overall thesis. 

Actually , there are even some other points to my argument as made on Marxmail last time. I guess I'll go back and find them

^^^^

> 2. It has been pointed out that this sentence has been ripped out of context
> and that, were one to choose the previous sentence, one could turn Marx into
> a disproportionality theorist.

^^^^
CB: It was claimed, but not true that I used the quote out of context. I replied to this on Marxmail. The context is where Marx discusses the FROP
^^^^^^^

> 3. It has been pointed out, with quotations, per your request, that Marx
> explicitly disavowed an underconsumptionist explanation.

^^^^^
CB: But then he made one as in the quote. So, as some have said, his discussion is contradictory. He didn't leave us a coherent theory of crises.

^^^^^

> 4. It has also been pointed out that in its naive form, per your
> presentation, capitalism would never work.

^^^^
CB: It has been asserted but not demonstrated as true.  Then of course, capitalism doesn't "work" in the sense that it always has crises , not to mention Marx's "Absolute Law of Capitalist Accumulation" from Vol. I is that immiseration is a secular trend of capitalism. 

My presentation is naive , but sophisticated. You can learn from it.

^^^

> 5. Evidence has been presented from Marx to demonstrate that he thought the
> FROP to be central to his theory of crisis.

^^^
CB: Evidence has been presented from Marx that he thought that the ultimate cause of all crises is the poverty and restricted consumption of the masses.

^^^^^
> 6. As Sartesian has pointed out, underconsumption/disproportionality (they
> are really the same thing - one viewed from the value side, the other from
> the use value side) is simply one of the manifestations of the FROP
> asserting itself.

^^^^^
CB: I have pointed out to Sartesian that underconsumption follows directly from Marx's extensive and fundamental discussion of exploitation in Vol. I. Workers are not paid enough to buy all that they make.

^^^^^^

> 7. To all of this, you keep repeating the same quote and have failed to
> respond to any of these specific criticisms.

^^^^^
CB: This is patently false . I have made several arguments, and knocked the stuffing out of said sad criticisms.

^^^^^
> 
> Therefore your assertion that "you have no substantive reply" is simply
> untrue.


^^^^^
CB: No your statement here is simply untrue

^^^^
> 
> (And we haven't even gotten started on the politics of all this.)

^^^^^
CB: _You_ haven'r gotten started on the politics. I made a political argument that the overproduction/overconsumption arguments view matters from the standpoint of the capitalist class.  Poverty and restricted consumption approach views matters from the side of reforms favoring the working class. You made no reply at all to that, let alone a substantive one.

^^^^
> 
> "Every accusation is a confession."

^^^^^
CB: I see several accusations by you above.




From cdb1003 at prodigy.net  Tue Feb  3 21:14:32 2009
From: cdb1003 at prodigy.net (Charles Brown)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 20:14:32 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Regarding Underconsumption 1
Message-ID: <514815.33530.qm@web180103.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>


Regarding Underconsumption 1 
From: "Charles Brown" <charlesb at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 13:55:12 -0500 

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

johnaimani 


Greg McDonald wrote:

"I think underconsumption is an effect, not a cause."

Comrade Artesian is correct, I think, when he proposes Marx' theory as 
"over-productionist":

"(O)verproduction as overproduction of the means of production as 
capital,required to, but unable to, sufficiently exploit wage-labor at the 
required intensity to offset the fall in the rate."

^^^^
CB: And why is that ? Why would means of production that is exploiting wage-labor at a certain intensity drop off in its ability to exploit at that level of intensity ? The rate of exploitation is not based on variations in the means of production. It is based on the level of class struggle over level of wages.


From cdb1003 at prodigy.net  Tue Feb  3 22:28:37 2009
From: cdb1003 at prodigy.net (Charles Brown)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 21:28:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] More on generation of capitalist crisis
Message-ID: <728806.55848.qm@web180105.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

 Anonymous:  The urbanization rate in the NIEs of Asia accelerates
> remarkably after 1986.  The World Bank did studies on it.


^^^^^^^
CB: However, people moving into the cities and becoming wage-laborers/proletarians is not the over-accumulation of capital that leads to crisis. Wage-laborers are variable capital. Overaccumulation refers, through the OCC, to the accumulation of too much constant capital relative to the amount of variable capital or wage-laborers. Wage-laborers/variable capital is the source of surplus value. They can't be over-accumulated from the standpoint of producing profits ,  profits per total capital or rate of profit ( unless their wages are too high ! which was not a problem in East Asia at the time referred to) Variable capital increase does not cause the rate of profit to fall.  It is overaccumulation of constant capital relative to the amount of variable capital ( increased OCC) that leads to a fall in the rate of profit. So, this trend of increased urbanization/proletarianization is not the cause of the rate of profit falling when it  does. 

Again the rate of profit falls because of a)over-accumulation of _constant_ capital relative to variable capital, increase in the OCC, because variable capital is the only source of new value , and therefore surplus value (and constant capital is not a source of new value or surplus value); and b)overproduction of commodities relative to the poverty and restricted consumption of the masses of wage-laborers, who are the consumers of the great mass of personal consumption commodities, thereby preventing realization of a major fraction of the potential surplus value exploited by the capitalists. 

The tendency of the rate of profit to fall is a valid generalization of capitalism , because, individual capitalists are constantly revolutionizing the instruments of production, in order to produce more unit commodities per labor time to get a leg up on the other capitalists. This is relative surplus value as opposed to absolute surplus value. Eventually , all such efficiency increasing eventually spreads to all capitalists in an industry, and this raises the OCC industry wide (see above on how increase in the OCC causes the rate of profit to fall.)


From Waistline2 at aol.com  Tue Feb  3 22:35:53 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 00:35:53 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Regarding Underconsumption 1
Message-ID: <c0a.53ab23b8.36ba8339@aol.com>

>> CB: And why is that ? Why would means of production that is  exploiting 
wage-labor at a certain intensity drop off in its ability to exploit  at that 
level of intensity ? The rate of exploitation is not based on variations  in the 
means of production. It is based on the level of class struggle over  level 
of wages. <<

Comment
 
 
1). The rate of exploitation 
2)   is not based on variations in the means of production. 
3)   It is based on the level of class struggle over level of  wages. 
 
Pardon, but I understand the word "exploitation" to mean in the mouth of  
Marx and Marxist, "extraction of surplus value" rather than political  
oppression, intensity or duration of laboring. 
 
Further, I understood, perhaps incorrectly, that wages are first and  
foremost determined by the cost of reproduction of the working class, and this  cost 
of reproduction of the working class is always tied to the existence of a  
non-working population. 

Please explain why exploitation and wages are "based" - (as fundamentality,  
pivot on or the lower part of a built structure) tied to the level of conflict 
 between classes.  
 
Actually it is not "means of production that exploit labor," in my opinion.  
It is exclusively the property relations within the means of production that  
have been at work in (inside the productive forces so to speak) igniting  
production, that is the "thing" that exploits labor.  
 
The reason capital flees from one sector of the economy, that undergoes a  
change in density of dead labor or a heightened rise in fixed capital (drop off  
in its ability to exploit at that level of intensity) is because maximum 
profits  cannot be realized in that same area, but can be realized in another 
arena. 
 
Just asking. 
 
 
 
WL. 
**************Stay up to date on the latest news - from sports scores to 
stocks and so much more. (http://aol.com?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000022)


From markalause at gmail.com  Tue Feb  3 23:06:34 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 01:06:34 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] 75th Anniversary Minneapolis coal yard strike
In-Reply-To: <4988FA2D.2050808@cox.net>
References: <4988FA2D.2050808@cox.net>
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0902032206x1ed98f0fj1e5e66f22f906708@mail.gmail.com>

I hope someone's around with a good video camera for the tour.  That
would be a real YouTube contribution

ML


From russo.matthew9 at gmail.com  Tue Feb  3 23:18:04 2009
From: russo.matthew9 at gmail.com (Matthew Russo)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 22:18:04 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Proletarianization and Overaccumulation
Message-ID: <1b7033e60902032218l730ca0c9y10a8ff2ed4fad591@mail.gmail.com>

>b)overproduction of commodities relative to the poverty and restricted
consumption of the masses of >wage-laborers, who are the consumers of the
great mass of personal consumption commodities, >thereby preventing
realization of a major fraction of the potential surplus value exploited by
the >capitalists.

Exactly.  And this is the principal cause of the present crisis.  It is the
point of unity of the _proximate_ and _fundamental_ causes of the crisis.
It was papered over in the imperialist countries for a time by the extension
of credit against future wages so as to permit the reproduction of labor
power, a time that covered decades since the onset of the Reagan-Thatcher
onslaught on wages, but that time has run out.  The weak link in the credit
chain snapped when Mexican immigrant workers began defaulting on their
mortgages on the south side of Stockton, California back in 2006.  This
singular event engaged the whole accumulation of financial imbalances built
up over those same decades and unbelievably, the whole rotten house of cards
came tumbling done in a debacle of spectacular proportions.

At rock bottom it is the class struggle again, in an era of the further
proletarianization of capitalist society.  My hat is off to those Mexican
workers to whom I bow in all humility.

-Matt

From sartesian at earthlink.net  Wed Feb  4 01:47:04 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 09:47:04 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] More on generation of capitalist crisis
References: <728806.55848.qm@web180105.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <2621DE6393474EA99803CADBCF45ED8F@dmsthinkpad>

There's nothing anonymous about that claim.  Charles is, as Charles usually 
is, being a bit disingenuous in his presentation in order to advance his 
argument.

I wrote the "anonymous" passage on Julio Huato's Marxist debate list, where 
Charles decided to reproduce his favorite, and apparently only quote, on 
Marx and underconsumption.

This triggered a discussion during which I think it was Matt Russo, or 
perhaps Waistline reproducing HCK Liu's article, referring to the 1997 Asian 
crisis as a  "financial crisis."

I argued it was not at core a financial crisis, but one of overproduction, 
overaccumulation and a declining rate of return-- and not secularly, as part 
of some overall trend, but in its immediate, momentary history.

In that discussion of the history of the Asian event,  I mentioned  the 
increasing urban migration, and rates of urban migration throughout the 
NIEs-- particularly after the time of OPEC shocks and the Plaza Accords, 
with rural, village economies being effectively dispossessed throughout 
these countries [and not only these countries but also in Latin America--  
but that's another issue].

Charles then replied that [ not verbatim, but in essence] "urban migration 
has been going on for decades.  You can't show anything special about the 
1991-1997 period."

My response to that was the above "anonymous statement"  which Charles has 
edited to omit the part where I point out how little investigation Charles 
must have done to make his statement attempting to refute the pattern of 
urban migration.

Now of course rather than take up the event that he claimed never happened, 
he shifts the terrain.

Maybe Charles thinks all those workers in the Quangdong, in Thailand, in 
Malaysia, in the Philippines, etc. were quickened in vats held deep 
underground and released at just the right moment.  Who knows?  After all he 
did claim that the war in Vietnam ended in 1973, complete with helicopter 
evacuations from the roof of the US embassy.

I have no interest in carrying on a discussion with Charles about 
substantive matters--as his pattern is to... well, it's to do exactly what 
he's just done, but if  he wants to drag arguments from other lists onto 
this list, simple courtesy to the list is that he provide the background.



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Charles Brown" <cdb1003 at prodigy.net>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 6:28 AM
Subject: [Marxism] More on generation of capitalist crisis


> 


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Wed Feb  4 01:51:39 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 09:51:39 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Debunking Third World myths
References: <mailman.6411.1233395974.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
	<BAY122-DS7A0C75B7022DBE5A4B21B80C30@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <A7BFDE2A43A24436AD053C0BB184F227@dmsthinkpad>

No Paula, you have it wrong.  The South is not "catching up" to the North. 
The North looks enviously at the prospect of  "spinning down"  to the South, 
of driving wage rates and living standards down to those levels.

Your good doctor needs to come to grips with the massive decline in per 
capita GDP in Africa over the last 40 years-- the reversal of the increments 
of medical progress made recently.

Tell you what, those who don't want to read or think love Powerpoint 
presentations.  I suggest you read back issues of the Lancet to find out 
what "progress" is being made is these critical areas of human development.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paula" <Paula_cerni at msn.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 2:21 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Debunking Third World myths




From neprimerimye at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Feb  4 01:59:18 2009
From: neprimerimye at yahoo.co.uk (mike pearn)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 08:59:18 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Marxism] Polish Workers Walkout?
In-Reply-To: <mailman.7087.1233725327.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <651867.45699.qm@web25217.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>

Fred Feldman wrote "The following was submitted to the UK_Left_Network list by one on the socialists who has been regularly contributing on this. No source or URL was given so I have not yet been able to confirm this report. Will be glad to hear from any who find out more about this."

The report that Fred posted came from the local paper and is far from reliable either politically or factually. I note that the article claims that 500 workers had not reported for work and that a handful of foreign (sic) workers including some from Poland had been sent home. Only later i a claim made by a union official that Polish workers had walked out and this claim is then exageratted into the hundreds in the post heading when in fact there is no evidence that hundreds of Polish workers were employed at this plant let alone that they have taken strike action.

Whatever the fantasies of some on the left in britain the well spring of this rash of disutes is british chauvinism and a concern, understandable but not supportable, for protection with respect to the sectional intersts of a particular group of woprkers.

Fraternally,

Mike Pearn.


      


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Wed Feb  4 01:59:35 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 09:59:35 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Proletarianization and Overaccumulation
References: <1b7033e60902032218l730ca0c9y10a8ff2ed4fad591@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <03D0A050F63D4D5CAF4A3786940371A2@dmsthinkpad>

Couple of points:

1. I don't know about Stockton California specifically, but nationally, 
mortgage default rates for immigrants were much lower than the national 
averages, with "don't ask, don't tell" mortgages [available to undocumented 
immigrants] having particularly high rates of repayment.  That may have 
changed, but I don't think we can attribute the precipitating force in the 
sub-prime collapse to immigrant mortgage delinquencies.

2. At core, the argument about the "overproduction of paper,"  i.e. excess 
mortgage, and asset backed securitization, as the cause of the current 
predicament is nothing but another variation on the old "speculation is the 
source of the problem"-- and creates a false, but useful separation for the 
bourgeoisie, between bad speculative capital, and good productive capital. 
This speculation argument gets trotted out every time something goes wrong 
with earning money the old fashioned way-- making other people work for it--  
but it is no answer, and no analysis at all.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Matthew Russo" <russo.matthew9 at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 7:18 AM
Subject: [Marxism] Proletarianization and Overaccumulation


>The weak link in the credit
> chain snapped when Mexican immigrant workers began defaulting on their
> mortgages on the south side of Stockton, California back in 2006.  This
> singular event engaged the whole accumulation of financial imbalances 
> built
> up over those same decades and unbelievably, the whole rotten house of 
> cards
> came tumbling done in a debacle of spectacular proportions.



From Waistline2 at aol.com  Wed Feb  4 02:03:55 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 04:03:55 EST
Subject: [Marxism] More on generation of capitalist crisis
Message-ID: <c1c.4c4bbb50.36bab3fb@aol.com>

This triggered a discussion during which I think it was Matt Russo, or  
perhaps Waistline reproducing HCK Liu's article, referring to the 1997 Asian  
crisis as a  "financial crisis."
 
I argued it was not at core a financial crisis, but one of overproduction,  
overaccumulation and a declining rate of return-- and not secularly, as part  
of some overall trend, but in its immediate, momentary history.
 
Comment
 
 
I agree and will stop trying to answer appearance form questions. 
 
The modern world of finance proves an overproduction and over accumulation  
of capital seeking profits . . . which are impossible because profits are  
derived solely from surplus value.
 
Hence the brave new world of valueless wealth or "profit less wealth." 
 
I do not know what to call it. 
 
Or rather, I will answer political questions with political answers.  

**************Stay up to date on the latest news - from sports scores to 
stocks and so much more. (http://aol.com?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000022)


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Wed Feb  4 05:20:06 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 13:20:06 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] D word
Message-ID: <9F124A6104F647CDB2A60A11D546CC0B@dmsthinkpad>

For Depression:


From sabocat59 at mac.com  Wed Feb  4 06:35:04 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (Greg McDonald)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 08:35:04 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuba Distributes more than 45,000 land parcels
Message-ID: <F5EC9EF2-E8F7-4C75-8524-C1F0B2E67888@mac.com>

Eli Stephens wrote:

<If I remember correctly from the excellent documentary "How Cuba  
Survived Peak Oil" (http://www.powerofcommunity.org/cm/index.php),  
the term the Cubans use (and others too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ 
Usufruct) is "usufruct". And such arrangements were a big part of the  
organic farming revolution described in that film.>

It just so happens the latest edition of Monthly Review has an  
excellent article on urban organic agriculture in Cuba. I've just had  
a chance to skim it, but apparently the idea originated within the  
Cuban military under the auspices of Raul.  it's a definite mixed  
economic approach, adjusted more to the pragmatic reality of any  
given situation. But it is all based on long term leases. Of course,  
private household gardens are also considered to be part of the project.

In terms of techne, they use a raised bed approach where the organic  
fertilizer is mixed directly into the soil. It's a permaculture  
approach to provide yields year round.

One can easily see how the latest land distribution is a natural  
growth of this approach.

Greg McDonald


From nmgoro at gmail.com  Tue Feb  3 20:25:05 2009
From: nmgoro at gmail.com (Nestor Gorojovsky)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 00:25:05 -0300
Subject: [Marxism] Hundreds of Polish workers said to join UK wildcat
 strikes
In-Reply-To: <a06240801c5aeaa4688b7@[72.225.169.30]>
References: <8147EC487A2F45FB84079F90F8CDF84A@office1pc>
	<a06240801c5aeaa4688b7@[72.225.169.30]>
Message-ID: <49890A91.4000903@gmail.com>

Are we approaching a 1848? As soon as the worst part of the global slump 
recedes, things may be bound to happen in Eastern Europe. Keep an eye on 
that fragile piece in the imperialist chain.

Shawn Redden escribi?:
> Same report here; it's not much better than an anonymous source, but 
> it's something:
> 
> http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/02/421170.html
> 




From ymorvan at cs.tcd.ie  Wed Feb  4 03:52:53 2009
From: ymorvan at cs.tcd.ie (Yann Morvan)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 10:52:53 -0000
Subject: [Marxism] Polish Workers Walkout?
In-Reply-To: <651867.45699.qm@web25217.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
References: <651867.45699.qm@web25217.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <op.uotpufma0opwfu@duchamp.isg.cs.tcd.ie>

On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 08:59:18 -0000, mike pearn <neprimerimye at yahoo.co.uk>  
wrote:

> Whatever the fantasies of some on the left in britain the well spring of  
> this rash of disutes is british chauvinism and a concern, understandable  
> but not supportable, for protection with respect to the sectional  
> intersts of a particular group of woprkers.

That's it? We're going to have to take your (quickly typed) word for it?
Thanks but we can get that from the Daily Mail or the BBC.

A few facts about Lindsey
-The new contractor hired by Total (IREM) is anti-union
-According to shop stewards, it has stated that it would not consider
  applications from workers who are already there
-It houses its workers on a recommisioned prison ship, making back some of
  its labor costs with profits on rent and food
-This plus the way work is organised keeps the Portugese and Italian  
workers
  segregated from the others
-The "British jobs for British workers" slogan was hastily pushed by
  clueless or worse Unite stewards, possibly as a dig at Brown
-Since then the workers have supported the strike committee statement
  rejecting chauvinism that nada posted about earlier

It's about the right to a job where you live, as opposed to being shipped
around like a commodity. It's also about overturning the Viking and Laval
cases that make the job of union busters easier throughout europe.

I'd like to hear your case why that's not supportable.
In the meanwhile for each marxist turning their nose up there's two
BNPers desperate to turn the whole thing rightward.

Yann


From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Feb  4 07:43:36 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 09:43:36 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Democrats will placate Republicans on recovery plan
Message-ID: <4989A998.9010602@panix.com>

(Some liberals warned about judging Obama solely on his cabinet 
appointments and urged that we wait until after he has taken office. 
Well, he has taken office and the verdict should be clear by now. 18 
dead Pakistanis and an ineffective "triangulated" recovery plan.)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/03/AR2009020304024.html
Senate Lacks Votes to Pass Stimulus
Democrats Trying to Trim $900 Billion Plan to Gain GOP Support

By Shailagh Murray and Paul Kane
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, February 4, 2009; A01

Senate Democratic leaders conceded yesterday that they do not have the 
votes to pass the stimulus bill as currently written and said that to 
gain bipartisan support, they will seek to cut provisions that would not 
provide an immediate boost to the economy.

The legislation represents the first major test for President Obama and 
an expanded Democratic Congress, both of which have made economic 
recovery the cornerstone of their new political mandate. The stimulus 
package has now tripled from its post-election estimate of about $300 
billion, and in recent days lawmakers in both parties have grown wary of 
the swelling cost.

Moderate Republicans are trying to trim the bill by as much as $200 
billion, although Democrats working with those GOP senators have not 
agreed to a specific figure.

The Senate's first vote on a stimulus amendment, a failed effort 
yesterday to add more infrastructure spending to the package, signaled 
the change in course. For weeks, the measure has grown to meet a 
worsening economic crisis with the largest possible infusion of 
government cash. Despite warnings of dire consequences if Congress does 
not act boldly, Republicans have become resolute in their opposition to 
what they view as runaway and unnecessary spending in the legislation. 
And as the total in the Senate version climbs to $900 billion, unease 
also is stirring among moderate Democrats.

Extensive Senate revisions would force lawmakers to work at a frantic 
pace to meet a self-imposed Feb. 13 deadline for completing a compromise 
bill with the House, which passed an $819 billion version last week. 
Obama reiterated his call for urgent action in a meeting Monday night 
with Democratic leaders and by letter yesterday to Senate Majority 
Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.).

For now, the Senate bill remains a work in progress. "We're trying to 
find a way to reach 60" votes, Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), 
the Senate's chief vote counter, told reporters. "A number of Democrats 
have said they want to see changes to the bill before they can vote for it."

Durbin predicted that "100 decisions" will be "made between now and when 
we deliver the bill to the president's desk."

To remove obstacles from the measure's path, Reid said numerous items 
could fall by the wayside. "The president, the Democratic leaders, the 
Republican leaders certainly have every intention of moving forward to 
getting everything out of the bill that causes heartburn to a 
significant number of senators," he told reporters yesterday.

What Senate leaders cannot predict is which provisions will stay in and 
which will fall out. It also remains unclear whether Democrats are 
willing to tamper with measures that are considered high priorities for 
Obama, but that tackle longer-term challenges such as health-care reform 
and alternative energy development, rather than providing the quick jolt 
of expanded unemployment and food-stamp benefits and individual tax relief.

The most ambitious effort to cut the bill is being led by Sens. Ben 
Nelson (D-Neb.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), moderates in their parties 
who share a dislike of the current version. Collins is scheduled to 
visit Obama at the White House this afternoon. "I'm going to go to him 
with a list" of suggested deletions, she said.

Nelson said he and Collins have agreed to "tens of billions" in cuts, 
although he said he is skeptical that the effort will reach Collins's 
target of $200 billion in reductions. The pair has counted up to 20 
allies in their effort, with more Democrats than Republicans at this point.

Among the items that the Collins-Nelson initiative is targeting: $1.1 
billion for comparative medical research, $350 million for Agriculture 
Department computers, $75 million to discourage smoking, $20 million in 
Interior Department funding, $400 million for HIV screening and $650 
million for wildlife management.

The medical research measure, aimed at developing uniform treatment 
protocols, is an Obama priority and part of the foundation he is trying 
to build for health-care reform.

"We have the blessing of leadership to do a good deal of this," Nelson 
said. But he conceded the difficulty of finding middle ground, with 
scores of provisions potentially up for review. "It's a little bit of a 
bookkeeping nightmare," he said.

Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (Maine), a moderate who has been considered the 
most likely GOP vote in favor of the plan, said yesterday that she 
cannot support it until items that would not do enough to stimulate the 
economy or create jobs are dropped.

"They should scrub it," said Snowe, who voted for the tax-relief portion 
in the Senate Finance Committee last week. She said many of the 
provisions were jammed into the legislation by members of the 
Appropriations Committee who were "trying to short-circuit the normal 
legislative process."

Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, said 
the centrist group led by Nelson and Collins would target programs that 
the Congressional Budget Office has estimated would not spend their 
funding quickly. He said the list includes a number of proposals that 
will spend only about 10 percent of their funding in the next 18 months. 
"These become immediate candidates for review," Conrad said of the 
provisions.

Some Republicans in the group are seeking a much broader rewrite of the 
legislation, and they want Obama to lead the effort. "Get us all in a 
room. That's what you do with a major piece of legislation," said Sen. 
Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.), who supports an alternative drafted by Sen. 
John McCain (R-Ariz.) that would cost $445 billion.

Graham said he could back something between the McCain bill and the 
House bill. Although some Republicans would prefer to shelve the measure 
temporarily, hoping that spending demand will cool, other GOP lawmakers 
would prefer to stay on schedule and find common ground. "There's sort 
of political chaos right now," he conceded.

The momentum to cut spending became apparent in votes on several 
amendments. First, the Senate fell two votes shy of the 60-vote 
threshold needed yesterday to add $25 billion for highway projects and 
transit programs.

Then, on a 52 to 45 vote, the chamber stripped $246 million in tax 
breaks for Hollywood production companies, a measure offered by Sen. Tom 
Coburn (R-Okla.), the Senate's self-appointed watchdog on federal 
spending. Coburn, who almost always loses his quixotic efforts to cut 
funding, appeared jubilant -- if somewhat surprised -- by his unexpected 
victory.

"This is a gift," he said of the Hollywood provision. "It's not going to 
stimulate the economy at all."

Later, the Senate turned away legislation to reduce the tax rate on 
multinational corporations that are returning earnings from overseas, as 
opponents argued that it was a giveaway to industry. But some new 
spending programs proved too politically attractive to the Senate. In a 
71 to 26 vote, the Senate approved a new incentive for car buyers, at an 
estimated cost of $11 billion over 10 years. According to Sen. Barbara 
A. Mikulski (D-Md.), the amendment's sponsor, buyers could deduct the 
cost of sales tax for new cars purchased between last Nov. 12 and Dec. 
31, 2009. Individuals with incomes of up to $125,000 would qualify.

And the chamber ended the night by unanimously accepting an additional 
$6.5 billion for research at the National Institutes of Health, pushing 
the cost of the Senate legislation -- for now -- to more than $900 billion.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Feb  4 07:38:36 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 09:38:36 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Elmar Altvater on the plagues of capitalism
Message-ID: <4989A86C.4000609@panix.com>

(Apologize for the length of this, but it was poorly formatted on 
http://www.greatrecession.info/, an otherwise useful website.)


Elmar Altvater

The Plagues of Capitalism
Energy crisis, climate collapse, hunger and financial instabilities

There is no historical proof that the ten biblical plagues that the God 
of the people of Israel inflicted upon the Egyptians, according to the 
second book Moses in the old testament, including poisoned wells, 
mosquitoes, smallpox, cattle plagues, avalanches of frogs, swarms of 
locusts, or a solar eclipse ever took place. But it is an undeniable 
fact that today, billions of people are suffering from hunger, that the 
fossil fuel supply for the future is insecure, that the global climate 
threatens to collapse, and that the global financial crisis is causing 
horrendous losses in the trillions, that millions of jobs are being 
destroyed, and whole branches of industry are in trouble, and the 
incomes of the masses are declining in the current global financial 
crisis. The modern plagues afflict the people just as much as the 
plagues of Egypt did more than 3000 years ago.


The financial crisis turns into a crisis of the real economy At the 
beginning of October 2008, the IMF valued the losses of the global 
financial crisis at US$ 1400 billion. Only a month later, the Bank of 
England doubled this estimate to US$ 2800 billion. This is almost three 
times as much as the losses indicated by the Bank of England in April 
2008 (US$ 1150 billion) . Obviously, the crisis is out of control - 
despite government subsidies and guarantees to the amount of some US$ 
thousand billions on both sides of the Atlantic.

These sums seemed absurdly high only a few months ago, and in the 
meantime government subsidies and guarantees were also necessary in 
Japan, China, Russia and Latin America. Almost daily, new financial 
assistance is supplied to ailing banks and large industrial companies, 
for instance, nearly US$ 50 billion was given to Citigroup at the end of 
November 2008 (SZ, Sueddeutsche Zeitung, Nov. 25th 2008) or to the air 
plane leasing division of the damaged AIG, the world?s biggest insurance 
corporation, or the seemingly almost ridiculous amount of $ US 13.4 
billion to the three car giants in the USA. The losses of the credit 
card operators are still hidden in their accounts; they are expected to 
inevitably be revealed in 2009. The ?public contingent liabilities? in 
the euro area have now risen to more than 2000 billion euros, according 
to the ECB monthly report of November 2008. These liabilities, if 
realised, would then amount to 21% of the GDP of the EU-members. 
Considering the approaching recession, it is not unlikely that this happens.

In contrast to the forecasts of many, even critical economists only a 
few weeks ago, the crisis has left the financial sector and grown into a 
serious crisis of the ?real? economy. Unemployment is increasing 
exponentially, the pressure on incomes is rising. The tax revenue of the 
governments and local authorities is declining, and therefore financing 
social benefits is more difficult, particularly since so much money has 
been absorbed by the banking sector to compensate for the losses in bank 
balance sheets and to replace equity capital lost through speculation. 
The European Central Bank estimates that the fiscal costs of the present 
financial market turbulences amount to about 3% of the GDP in the euro 
area; the European Commission has decided on an economy stimulating 
package of 200 billion euros in order to achieve some kind of 
coordination of the hectic economic stabilisation measures of the 
various EU countries. In November, the White House assigned 150 billion 
US dollars for fiscal interventions.

After his election in November 2008, Barack Obama promised fiscal means 
that would secure 2.5 million jobs. Shortly before Christmas this 
promised number of jobs was raised to 3 million. Paul Krugman proposed 
an economy boosting package of US$ 750 billion for the USA. This would 
amount to about 6% of the US national product, and would approximately 
double public debt. Obama seems to be approaching this
target, there are even speculations that the package to counter the 
crisis could be more than US$ one thousand billion and that US ?deficit 
spending? would then amount to about 10 per cent of US GDP.

China will also spend large sums with a promised cash injection of 460 
billion US dollars. China has accumulated huge reserves and does not 
even need to incur debt to revive the economy.  These gigantic amounts 
could still be exceeded if loans defaults have to be covered by 
insurances because of the real economy crisis. Credit default swaps 
(CDS) of up to US$ 60,000 billion could then be due and explode the 
financial sector despite state assistance. The financial crisis sharpens 
to a catastrophe. The fact that some states were already virtually 
bankrupt in 2008 (Iceland, Ukraine, Hungary, Baltic states etc.) had 
particularly fatal effects and the credit risk of government bonds has 
generally risen.

Suddenly, there is an echo chanting ?yes, we are, yes we can? following 
President Nixon?s exclamation almost 40 years ago: ?today we are all 
Keynesians?. Even those who rejected any calls for demand management 
with active fiscal policies as economic nonsense and a dangerous 
intervention in the workings of the free market not so long ago, are now 
joining in. They seem to realise the gravity of the situation: the costs 
of the financial crisis are absorbed, and additionally, hundreds of 
billions of euros and dollars are being pumped into the global economic 
system. The urgency is understandable. Which explanation could be given 
to the voters that 20 per cent of the national product has been made 
available to banks and bankers, but there still is no money to secure 
and create jobs? Post-neoliberal Keynesianism serves primarily to 
provide legitimacy for redistribution measures to rescue ailing 
financial institutions and businesses.

Everybody knows that the outrageously wicked proposal by Josef Ackermann 
(CEO of the Deutsche Bank) to create a public ?bad bank? to take over 
?toxic assets? from private banks so they could again become ?good 
banks? could only work when it is presented not only as a practical 
constraint without alternatives but also with some offers to employees 
and other citizens.

The crisis - collapse or a fountain of youth for the system?

Banks and other financial institutions are absorbing a fifth of the 
national product to compensate their losses with public funds and to 
exchange their toxic assets for good central bank money. Climate change 
will cost a fifth of the global national product over the next decades - 
if nothing is done to prevent it. These findings are from the well-known 
report  by Nicholas Stern for the British government in 2006 or from the 
reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) . We can 
choose which plague causes greater shudder: the massive losses of the 
global financial crisis or the astronomical costs of climate change. 
Climate change has become bitter reality and consequently determined 
public debate. However, after the collapse of some globally operating 
big banks (Bear Stearns; Lehman Brothers), the public debate solely 
revolved around the rescue packages for the financial sector. The 
financial and economic crisis also provided the most important argument 
for putting a break on climate policies: charity begins at home. The 
horrendous costs of the financial crisis have also made us forget that 
at least 923 million people in the world suffer from hunger, according 
to the FAO, and that the energy crisis is not in the least over - 
because fossil resources are limited (Peak Oil), even if the oil price 
has declined since August 2008 as a result of the financial and economic 
crisis; because industrial production is stagnating or even decreasing. 
But this will change again very soon; the basic trend for the price of 
fossil fuel is inclined to increase.

The present financial crisis is not a novelty in the history of 
capitalism. Many people have lost a lot in the historical financial and 
economic crises and it will not be different in the present global 
crisis, even if the full force of losses have not yet reached the ?man 
in the street? at the beginning of 2009. In financial and economic 
crises, ?only? money was and will be lost, the capitalist economic 
system is not collapsing. On the contrary, economic crises are a kind of 
?fountain of youth? since, as Josef A. Schumpeter states , the system 
renews its power base through ?creative destruction? in times of crises. 
This was also clear to Karl Marx: ?the crises are always only short-term 
violent solutions to the inherent contradictions, violent eruptions, 
which for the moment restore the disturbed equilibrium??  - until the 
next crisis occurs.

This is different for natural disasters, including those caused by 
mankind. In general, they not only incur high financial costs, as has 
been calculated in the aforementioned ?Stern report? on the costs of 
climate change compiled for the British government , but also cause 
irreversible changes which are mostly destructive to the natural 
environment. Even if we could offset an extinct plant or animal species 
with money, we are unable to bring it back to life. In the previous 
history of mankind, regional or local cultures fell victim to ecological 
and other catastrophes; the societies on Easter Island have disappeared, 
the Maya and Inca cultures, too. In the era of globalization, crises in 
nature can result in the global collapse of climate, energy supply, 
biodiversity and consequently of food production. That would not only be 
a bitter financial loss, but would also mean the irreparable destruction 
of natural habitat and consequently also of human livelihoods.

In view of the financial and economic crisis, as well as the ecological 
crisis (the energy crisis resulting from ?peak oil?, the threatening 
climate collapse, inadequate supply of water and food in many regions of 
the world), we must recall what Karl Marx described as the crucial point 
of political economy. The crucial point is the definitive recognition of 
the ?twofold character? of labour and of the commodity: the prevalent 
understanding of the economy is that we are dealing mainly with value 
and monetary cycles, and these are interpreted as basically reversible. 
Disbursed capital returns to itself - augmented with the profit. Thus, 
profit is also called ?return on capital?. At the same time, 
irreversible material and energy transformations occur in production, 
transportation, communication and consumption, which inevitably increase 
the entropy of the Earth?s system. This need not concern us as long as 
we are nowhere near the limits to the availability of resources or the 
sustainability of sinks to cope with pollutants. But we have to take 
them into account as soon as we approach the natural limits of the 
planet Earth with an increasingly large ?ecological footprint?. We will 
fail if we do not take them into account, and a social and political 
failure in view of these ecological limits will have more far-reaching 
consequences than the monetary losses of the financial and economic 
crisis. However, debates on these limits do not rely on objective 
natural facts, but depend on our knowledge, they are determined by 
social and economic interests, and, not least, are politically filtered. 
Consequently, it is not possible to consider the crises in finance, 
economy, energy and climate separately and isolated from each other, 
since they of course mutually have an effect on each other.

The ?mother of all crises? is the production and consumption model of 
the capitalist centres. This requires high rates of productivity 
increase, is based on mass production and mass consumption and is 
therefore based on the massive consumption of raw materials, fossil 
energy and land area. Biodiversity, and hence the evolution of life are 
also impaired by monocultures. At the same time, the industrialised 
countries are economic and political power centres of the capitalist 
world and have the potential to confront the systemic crisis - if the 
elites would choose to accede. Money is one of the means of state 
intervention in economy and business but it is not available when 
finances are needed to combat hunger or the threatening climate collapse 
- or ?just? to create jobs. Incredible amounts of good money have to be 
pumped into the financial system to neutralize bad, toxic money and to 
save the system from collapse. The industrial countries have reduced the 
means to combat hunger to 12 billion dollars, the Oxfam charity 
organisation complains. This amount will only suffice to provide each of 
the 923 million hungry people with 11US dollars. The UN World Food 
Programme urgently needs US$ 5.2 billion for 2009 to provide minimal 
help to the starving in Haiti, in the Congo and elsewhere.  For the 
hungry, there are not even crumbs of peanuts available - whereas massive 
amounts are spent to save the banks. This is also indicative of a 
collapse, the moral collapse of financially-driven capitalism.

Real surpluses and financial claims

What were the causes of this financial crisis in 2008, probably the 
severest in the history of capitalism? The financial claims of the 
financial sector institutions have to be serviced in real terms, and as 
long as that remains possible, it is business as usual and no-one even 
remotely thinks of a problem with payments or even a financial crisis. 
The ability to service demands can be undermined from two sides: a 
decline in the surpluses of the real accumulation process which must 
service financial demands, and at the same time, the profit requirements 
of financial investors increase. Both of these occurred before the 
financial crisis. The gap opened wide between a financial sector 
completely going wild with increasingly absurd profit claims and the 
capacity of the production sector. Capitalist economy is not just a 
virtual event as post-modern theorists like to assume. Real surpluses 
must be produced if they are to satisfy the virtual demands which only 
exist as bits and bytes.

Real surpluses must increase all the more, the greater the capital value 
already is, in order to consolidate or increase the yield or rate of 
profit (the relationship between surplus and advanced capital). This 
also applies to the growth of national product. The absolute increase 
must rise so that the growth rate does not decrease in time. In contrast 
to virtual surpluses, however, real surpluses cannot be increased 
exponentially. There are many explanations available in economic theory; 
beginning with the classic law of diminishing returns, via the Marxist 
theory of the falling rate of profit to the post-Keynesian theory of 
secular stagnation to the theory of limits to growth in ecological 
economics.

When real surpluses decrease relative to advanced capital or to the 
gross domestic product, then the recipients of financial returns are 
served for a while from the material substance and continue the 
?accumulation of capital by dispossession?  through the redistribution 
of already produced material value from the global south to the north, 
from debtors to creditors, from those dependent on labour to proprietors 
of wealth and capital. Therefore it is no accident that the proportion 
of wages and salaries in all industrial countries has been reduced by 
five to ten percent and the corporate and capital incomes have been 
correspondingly increased over the past two decades of globalisation. 
This redistribution from the ?real economy? to service debt to the 
financial sector can be maintained for a while, but not for extended 
periods, since the material substance is undermined. The legitimation 
resources of societies in the global area are overburdened, and even the 
economic mechanisms will not permit an unlimited continuation of 
accumulation by dispossession. The redistribution of income in favour of 
capital asset owners not only triggers social resistance but also causes 
a reduction in mass demand which is no longer available to provide for 
the accretion of goods or to ?regularly? service mortgage debts. Cost 
savings during the accumulation process initially have a positive effect 
on the profit rate. However, the environmental damage caused by the 
irreversible character of such production and consumption inevitably 
returns and diminishes the profitability of capital. This, at the 
latest, is the case when the ?social costs of private enterprise? (K. 
William Kapp) provoke social and political resistance, because the 
living conditions of the people are deteriorating.

Therefore, real surpluses meet the limits which apply to all 
transformation processes for materials and energy. Limits in capitalism 
appear in the form of a falling profit rate, which can disrupt the 
dynamics of accumulation. The crisis is then unavoidable.

At the same time, financial claims increase as if there were no natural 
limits and as if the social  contradictions of real reproduction and the 
accumulation process did not exist. Financial innovations appear to 
enable a nirvana of huge profits and dream salaries of managers.  There 
is a worldwide competition of the financial locations for high returns 
and interest rates. New financial institutions are set up to increase 
the returns for ?investors?: investment banks, all kinds of funds, 
special purpose vehicles. They introduce new financial instruments, 
always promising increasing returns without providing information on the 
real risks. Rating agencies have contributed to disguising the risks of 
?accumulation by dispossession?, although their task should actually be 
to reveal the risks. This has occurred on a massive scale through the 
securitisation of mortgage loans which were the foundation for dubious 
credit pyramids and fictitious capital. These paper assets enabled high 
earnings as long as the increasingly high speculative pyramids were 
based on increasing property values, e.g. on exploding house prices.

Everyone wanted a share of the business. New financial centres are made 
attractive by deregulation and weak supervision, as for example, icy 
Iceland, where hunting customers among the bargain-hunting finance
investors from all over Europe was much less uncomfortable than catching 
cod in the North Atlantic.

The acrobatics of the financial jugglers became increasingly more 
daring. For example, by increasing the ?leverage? of equity capital. 
With one euro, more than 10 euros, or even 100 euros were moved in order 
to gain high financial surpluses, and the gains are increased enormously 
in comparison to the amount of equity capital invested. Thus, financial 
investments enable double digit profits even when real growth is 
minimal. The financial sector appeared to be completely independent of 
real conditions, as if it was a virtual economy were fat profits could 
be created out of nothing. Unsurprisingly, work is considered worthless, 
or even scorned, in such an environment, and unions as organisers of 
labour are only seen as trouble makers for businesses, and economists 
fail to understand theoretical principles that interpret labour as 
creating value, and instead they indulge in the prevailing superstition 
that value is formed by gambling in the casino.

At the same time, debt is growing enormously, and it is used to expand 
financial transactions and consumption rather than as investment in 
production. This is obviously the case in the USA. The consumer debt in 
the USA has sharply increased from less than US$ 740 billion in 1975 to 
almost US$ 11,500 billion in 2005, or from 62.0% to 127.2% of the 
disposable income. The ratio of total debt to GDP has risen from approx. 
160% at the beginning of the 1970s to 340% in 2005.  On the other hand, 
this debt corresponds to equally increasing monetary wealth. In search 
of investment opportunities, this ?demand? leads to the supply of new 
?vehicles? promising high returns. There is a geopolitical dimension to 
the debt explosion in the USA, since a large part of the monetary wealth 
it entails is hoarded as foreign currency reserves by China, Japan, 
Russia and some other countries with a positive balance of payments, 
such as Germany.

Given the dominance of the financial sector over the ?real economy?, it 
is not surprising that short-term thinking and the principle of 
shareholder value determine entrepreneurial behaviour. But, as John 
Maynard Keynes already established in his ?Treatise on Money?  which was 
published before his ?General Theory of Money, Interest and Employment?, 
financial markets are unstable because financial market participants 
expect future yields, but the future is uncertain and full of risks. 
Financial instabilities can intensify to financial crises. Due to the 
liberalisation of the global financial markets since the late 1970s, 
several speculation waves have affected different world regions leading 
to serious debt and financial crises: at first, the third world was hit 
by the debt crisis of the 1980s. The result was a ?lost decade?. A 
decade later, the emerging markets had to face a financial crisis, 
beginning with Mexico in 1974, and then the crisis reached the ?Asian 
tigers? in 1997, Brazil suffered a setback in 1999, and Argentina in 
2001. The USA also went through some financial crises: the ?Savings and 
Loan crisis? (1987) and the crisis following the wave of unfriendly 
takeovers (1986 and 1989), the ?New Economy? crisis in 2000, and finally 
the ?subprime crisis? which in the meantime has not only affected the US 
real estate sector but many other business sectors. It has caused 
massive losses in almost all countries of the capitalist world economy, 
and it will continue in 2009.

The lesson is simple: returns of 20% and more on equity capital with 
real growth rates of 1% or 2% are impossible over the long term, they 
are neither economically, nor socially or ecologically sustainable.

Only a fool can deny this. At some point, the financial claims of the 
financial sector can no longer be met in real terms. The securitised 
claims can no longer be realised, they are worthless. In the current 
financial crisis, this was first visible in the mortgage crisis in the 
USA, but includes credit cards, consumer credit and other credit 
relationships. This requires a massive need for depreciation which 
nobody can estimate since deregulation and the widespread securitisation 
practices have led to a lack of transparency close to blindness. There 
are loud laments about ?wrong deregulation? from the most devoted 
neoliberals. They say these have unleashed such a ?greed? which was even 
rewarded with wrong incentives.  Greed could be a valuable explanation 
to some extent, although greed should not be defined as a psychological 
defect but as a feature of ?character-masks? ?in the stock exchange game 
of the Bankocrats? (Marx). They act like Captain Ahab in Herman 
Melville?s ?Moby Dick? where he says he is ?quite rational?, only the 
objective or the rules are crazy.

Solutions for escaping the crisis maze

The financial crisis is only one aspect, although a particularly 
important one in the crisis of the capitalist system. This needs to be 
taken into account when searching for ways to escape the crisis 
labyrinth. Some of the solutions to the financial crisis which are on 
offer threaten to intensify the energy, climate and food crisis, and 
their repercussions could thrust the capitalist economy, and 
consequently also the financial systems, into new and deeper crises.

We must again remember the crucial point, the dual character of all 
processes in a capitalist economy: production, circulation and 
consumption necessarily cause a change in nature. Conversely, the 
transformation of materials and energies and living nature also have 
consequences for economic and financial processes and therefore also for 
regulating the crisis. This is apparent considering the three most often 
discussed rescue packages for the financial and economic crisis:

(1) the state bears the banks? losses, i.e., losses are socialised

(2) massive investment opportunities are to trigger an economic revival, 
and

(3) externalisation of the costs of overcoming the crisis and the 
geopolitical conflicts arising from it.

Firstly: The liquidity trap or the lack of profitable investment 
opportunities

The crisis cannot be handled by pouring money into the tight purses of 
the financial institutions. This will not stimulate the real production 
of surplus which would be the only way to satisfy financial demands. If 
government funds replace dissolved equity capital or even if the state 
takes over commercial banks in one legal form or another, the 
institution as such remains intact, that is, bankruptcy is avoided. If 
government funds are used to buy bad assets, then the ?toxic assets? in 
the bank safes are replaced by good central bank money or secure 
government bonds. Holes are filled in the financial institutions by 
enabling an exchange of assets: they are given good assets with a 
government guarantee instead of valueless assets which should be written 
off, or they replace the equity capital of financial institutions which 
were gambled away by managers in an ?irrational exuberance? (Greenspan).

However, a comfortable continuation of the finance-driven model is 
probably not possible for the financial institutions and their managers 
who have been saved with cash infusions of a few billions.

The returns of the previous bonanza period can no longer be achieved, 
even if the government-provided means are actually invested. The 
lucrative business with subprime mortgages is now over, securitized 
assets are checked with a Geiger counter before they are included in a 
portfolio, and the levers of the ?leverage? system which were so 
profitable have been capped, so as not to fall into the same risk trap 
again. Neoliberalism with its strong belief in the market is treated 
like an old cloak that has gone out of fashion, including the toxic 
financial products, and is now stylishly beefed up as the dernier cri in 
the form of a neoliberal Keynesianism: ?we have to rethink - yes, even 
completely Keynesian?.  Supply policy, the nuts and bolts of neoliberal 
concepts, is now ineffective because the private sector has suddenly 
become diffident and unwilling to take risks. Consequently, the state 
must provide liquidity which can no longer be obtained on the interbank 
market, and must additionally support businesses through massive demand 
or possibly even take them over in contradiction of neoliberal dogma. 
Otherwise the liquidity trap snaps shut.

The state is able to divert income flows to the financial sector through 
its tax monopoly. This constitutes a unique privilege which is now used 
by the private financial institutions and other businesses.

The question is, whose taxes are used and who pays for the means that 
are directed to private businesses to compensate for their speculation 
losses? How can the redistribution in favour of the financial sector be 
legitimised by ?those above?, and how can the acceptance of this 
redistribution manoeuvre ?by those below? be achieved? Inevitably, the 
question of ?gouvernementalit?? or ?governance? of a global 
redistribution arises.  Political conflicts are preordained. Can 
Keynesians claim a victory in view of the massive intervention to the 
economy? Perhaps, but it is only a Pyrrhic victory.

Secondly: The ecological pitfalls of Keynesian demand-side policies

To whom and for which business can the banks lend the capital provided 
by the state? A regular servicing and repayment is only possible if a 
bank succeeds in getting the money to ?work?, by investing in new 
investment opportunities and finding new solvent debtors. Rescuing 
financial securities with the aid of government guarantees is not 
enough, the real economy has to produce a surplus to service theses 
securities. Following the financial crises in Asia, Russia, Turkey and 
Latin America, capital surplus mostly flowed into the new economy and 
pumped up a speculative bubble there. When this burst in 2000, the 
rescued capital was invested in the real estate sector - until the 
subprime crisis erupted in 2007. And now? In contrast to the financial 
crises in the globalisation era, the nation-state is now called upon.

Through investment programmes, the state must ensure that bank credits 
function again, in a more subdued fashion than was previously the case. 
The investment bank business is over for the moment, and banks must 
again assume more of a mediation role between ?savers? and ?investors?. 
This function is necessary in a capitalist money society, but here, 
dream profits cannot be achieved. Investment banking, for which 
university professorships have just been created in Germany, no longer 
offers any perspective.

In fact, new investment opportunities are being repeatedly discussed. 
The ecological crises not only imply the potential of a collapse but are 
also said to offer new possibilities for investors in the financial 
markets, even if investors would not receive the opulent double digit 
returns they have enjoyed until now. The International Energy Agency 
(IEA) has presented the investment requirements of the oil industry and 
the necessary infrastructure over the next 20 years with its ?World 
Energy Outlook 2008?.  According to the IEA, a 20,000 billion US dollar 
business could be possible: the renovation and extension of the oil 
producing installations, pipeline construction, investment in refinery 
capacities, tankers and other vehicles of transportation, etc. However, 
the new business opportunities for investors would lead to collateral 
consequences. The fossil fuel system could again be extended by some 
decades. The car would still continue to secure individual mobility. 
This is good news for the car industry which has come across a somewhat 
bumpy road because of the financial crisis, the threatened climate 
collapse and the need to reduce pollutant emissions. But these 
investments are not secure.

Firstly, because ?peak oil? is now an economically relevant reality 
(i.e., oil production has reached its peak). The oil price then tends to 
increase, even if it decreases at times because of reduced demand due to 
the crisis. Secondly, the political stability in the oil regions is 
endangered not only because of ?state failure? and an ungovernable 
situation in some countries, stability is also undermined by the 
political and military conflicts in which the big oil consuming 
countries are involved. Thirdly, the global logistics networks are also 
vulnerable as the new forms of piracy clearly show.

Because of peak oil, the IEA also believes that it is necessary to link 
up 20-30 nuclear reactors per year to the electricity grid over the next 
two decades. That would amount to about 1300 worldwide by the year 2030. 
A business volume of hundreds of US$ billions would be waiting, mainly 
for the benefit of big energy corporations. Abandon nuclear energy? No 
thank you, the financial crisis will not allow that. Considering the 
political conflict around one single nuclear reactor in Iran today, 
spreading hundreds of nuclear power stations all over the world is an 
absurd, even suicidal scenario. This reinforces the assessment that 
today?s crises express different forms of a systemic crisis of the 
capitalist mode of production.

Consequently, it would be appropriate to not only look for solutions to 
the financial and economic crises, but also to look for an integrated 
strategy that would include a solution for the ?collateral crises?.

Climate protection also offers favourable investment opportunities, at 
least at first sight. What initially appears to be a threat in the 
climate reports turns out to be an opportunity at a second glance. The 
threat consists of the possible loss of a fifth of the global national 
product due to climate change (according to the aforementioned Stern 
report). But there is a possibility to avoid this disaster for mankind 
if 1 per cent of the global GDP is invested in climate protection.

Investments in climate protection would become big business if emissions 
trading were globalised in the Kyoto II agreement as prepared for 
Copenhagen 2009. At present, the volume of European emissions trading 
amounts to less than US$ 100 billion. Optimists expect a potential of up 
to 20,000 billion US dollars worldwide, especially if climate protection 
also includes preventing clearing and degradation of forests. These are 
probably exaggerated expectations since the emissions trade could only 
achieve this extent when all countries agree and as many business 
sectors as possible are included ? and when the financial markets 
?normalise? after the crisis. If climate policies are left to the 
financial gamblers on the global financial markets with ?market-based 
instruments?, this generates hope in their circles. Climate politicians, 
however, fall into deep depression at this prospect of 
financially-driven climate policies.

There are also investment possibilities in the extraction of minerals, 
commercialisation of the sea beds and in the cultivation of agro-fuels. 
Converting whole landscapes with monocultures of agro-fuel would be a 
productive investment, but it would give rise to many conflicts.  Social 
movements, such as peasant organizations like Via Campesina, and others 
are organising resistance against the monocultures of big transnational 
corporations in agriculture, for social and ecological reasons. 
Political and scientific institutions in the industrial countries also 
see dangers because of the negative consequences for biodiversity, 
forests and the environment. Whether these business sectors can absorb a 
large part of the unused and not yet devalued capital (including the 
capital substituted by governmental rescue funds), is questionable. Only 
when resistance and doubt do not exist or are overcome, can the 
ecological threat be transformed into economic opportunities for 
investors. Until then, the expected massive investments will not take 
place. The consequences for the financial sector are fatal. Repayment of 
the government rescue packages to public budgets will only be at least 
partially possible when financial institutions succeed in lending the 
financial rescue packages provided by the states as credit to solvent 
debtors for investment. Again, the importance of the twofold character 
is apparent: the financial obligations of the banks can only be met if 
debt can be converted into concrete claims on investment. Debts must be 
serviced from really produced surpluses. The price would be high, since 
this would mean the continuation of the development model of ecological 
destruction - unless the crisis is used in a different way than to date, 
that is, as an opportunity for a ?systemic change of the model?.

Thirdly: Geopolitical conflicts or: the devil takes the hindmost

A high price will also be paid if the transfers to the financial sector 
are not (or cannot) be invested in the real economy. Then the taxpayer 
would have to bear the realised losses, or they would be redistributed 
in an inflationary process and ?spread? among the market participants. 
The losses of the financial institutions would then affect everybody, 
although to different extents, due to the loss in purchasing power of 
the currency. Especially people with material assets or those who manage 
to convert their financial assets into tangible assets in good time 
would suffer least. Concepts of social justice would be violated and 
demands for equalisation of burdens would be raised.

Consequently, it might seem reasonable to attempt to externalise the 
losses of the finance sector and the subsequent loss in purchasing power 
by devaluing the currency. Admittedly, only countries whose currency is 
a reserve currency can do this, others cannot. If these countries 
depreciate their currencies, then this could develop into a devaluation 
race as in the 1930s, in order to maintain or expand market shares on 
contested world markets. However, devaluation with the aim of 
externalising financial losses is different. Since many countries have 
accumulated dollar reserves, some of the reserves being huge, the USA 
could devalue the dollar so that American taxpayers do not have to bear 
the losses of their financial system that amount to trillions. This 
could prevent internal political conflicts, but the price would be high 
even for the USA. There would then be a threat of geopolitical conflicts 
between the USA and countries with large dollar reserves, i.e. the EU, 
China, Russia, Brazil and other emerging countries. These countries 
would gain influence, within the G20, for example. The big emerging 
economies could no longer be served at the ?side table?, as is usually 
the case at G8 meetings. They will be part and parcel of regulating the 
global financial crisis and in eliminating what are euphemistically 
called ?global inequalities?.

These are the result of the twin US deficits: the national budget and 
the balance of trade, which has been financed by foreign countries and 
has lead to the accumulation of large dollar claims against the USA. 
Consequently, the USA must not only support banking institutions and 
ailing businesses, but also consider external creditors. This leaves 
little scope.

A devaluation would mean relief, but then the US dollar would no longer 
be able to play its role as oil currency. Despite all political 
relationships and dependencies, the oil exporters would convert to 
trading in a different currency to the US dollar. The USA, which import 
two thirds of their oil consumption, would have to pay for their imports 
with a foreign currency that would have to be ?earned? through their 
exports. This could only work if the US had a positive savings ratio. 
The crisis would cause a diversion of financial flows.

Even the trading currents, ?well established? over previous decades, 
would be redirected, when the USA would no longer sweep the world 
markets empty like a credit-financed vacuum cleaner.

So the crisis is by far not over yet. The crisis on the financial 
markets is still primarily being fought with trillions of dollars and 
euros. No one wants to even think of the losses, and consequently they 
have not yet been distributed between the classes and the nations. The 
plagues of climate collapse, peak oil and hunger are neglected in the 
discussion. The conflict to determine who will be the hindmost for the 
devil to take has only just started.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Feb  4 07:50:22 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 09:50:22 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] War crime accusations rattle Israel
Message-ID: <4989AB2E.7000801@panix.com>

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0204/p06s01-wome.html

War crimes accusations rattle Israel
In the wake of the Gaza war, Israel is preparing to defend itself and 
its soldiers against possible criminal charges in European courts that 
claim 'universal jurisdiction.'

By Joshua Mitnick | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor

Tel Aviv - Three-and-a-half years ago, Israeli reserve Gen. Doron Almog 
was forced to flee Britain just after landing in London. He had been 
tipped off about a surprise warrant for his arrest issued by a British 
magistrates court. The charge: war crimes.

Now, as the recent Gaza war stirs up more accusations of offenses, the 
Jewish state and international human rights advocates are gearing up for 
more potential criminal cases against military officers and political 
leaders in Europe and possibly elsewhere.

But instead of international tribunals or the Israeli justice system, 
the main venue for the cases is expected to be European domestic courts 
that cite a legal approach known as "universal jurisdiction" that allows 
for the trial of cases of heinous acts, torture, or war crimes that 
allegedly occur outside their own borders.

Israelis consider the threats part of an ongoing political witch hunt. 
Palestinians and humanitarian activists, on the other hand, see the 
domestic courts as the only forum to argue whether war crimes were 
committed.

"The systems in place across a number of countries will be tested.... We 
have legal teams working across and beyond European countries" on behalf 
of Palestinian plaintiffs claiming war crimes, says Daniel Machover, an 
Israeli-born British lawyer who works in coordination with the 
Gaza-based Palestinian Center for Human Rights and pushed for Mr. 
Almog's arrest in 2005. "There's no other way a country under occupation 
or a land under occupation can seek justice."

Mr. Machover also helped bring before a Spanish national court the case 
of the Israeli assasination of a Hamas military chief in 2002.

That bombing allegedly killed more than a dozen civilians in a Gaza 
neighborhood.

Just last week, a Spanish judge announced an investigation, sparking 
tension between Israel and Spain, and spurring more speculation in 
Israel of war crimes efforts.

Dogged by a series of allegations ranging from targeting civilian 
locations to preventing the evacuation of noncombatants, Israel's 
government in recent weeks reaffirmed a commitment to offer legal 
defense to soldiers and politicians implicated in the cases. It has also 
decided to keep the identities of soldiers secret to protect as many as 
possible from prosecution.

According to Palestinian officials, more than 1,300 Gazans were killed 
and thousands wounded during the three-week Israeli offensive against 
Hamas last month. The number of noncombatants included in those figures 
is disputed. Only 13 Israelis were killed, most of them were soldiers.

In her debut address as the US ambassador to the United Nations, Susan 
Rice called on Israel to investigate the behavior of its military in the 
recent Gaza war and accused Hamas of its own violations for firing 
rockets at Israeli towns and working out of civilian areas.

An Israeli investigation is unlikely given the conviction by most 
Israelis that the Israel military did its best to limit injury to 
civilians. Israel and the US say Hamas has broken international law by 
shooting rockets at towns and cities and using Palestinian civilian 
areas as a base.

Ironically, Israel was one of the first countries to invoke the 
principle of universal jurisdiction when its court system asserted its 
right to try Nazi chief Adolf Eichmann for crimes against humanity and 
war crimes during World War II.

Neither Israel nor the Palestinians, however, are parties to the treaty 
that set up The Hague-based International Criminal Court, making it 
difficult to mount a war crimes trial in that venue. Instead, legal 
challenges to Israeli behavior have been made in domestic courts in 
Europe rather than international tribunals.

One Israeli legal expert dismissed the effort to try the war crimes 
abroad as an extension of a "media war" against the Jewish state for the 
Gaza operation. Daniel Reisner, the former head of the Israeli 
military's international division, says universal jurisdiction is being 
used to pursue allegations against Israel only and not Hamas.

"The danger to Israel now are those countries that have extra 
territorial jurisdiction that don't have a nationality requirement," 
says Mr. Reisner. "The question is whether that is a major danger or a 
minor danger."

A Belgian court considered in 2001 an indictment of former Israeli Prime 
Minister Ariel Sharon for his role in alleged massacres during the 
Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982.

But broad application of universal jurisdiction by third-party national 
courts without links to the alleged perpetrator or victims of the war 
crimes is a relatively recent development, and some European legal 
experts say it hasn't gained traction.

Belgian lawyer Michael Verhaeghe filed charges against Mr. Sharon ? a 
legal effort that awakened Israelis to the threat of war crimes 
prosecution in local European courts. He finally convinced the Belgian 
Supreme Court to give his case jurisdiction and standing on a 1993 
national statute, but the legislation was later revoked by the Belgian 
parliament.

The number of states in Europe and elsewhere that have the kind of 
universal jurisdiction needed to try war crimes by combatants of other 
wars in their own courts is in decline, he said. Still, Mr. Verhaeghe 
believes the Israeli soldiers, if they have committed war crimes, "can't 
consider themselves as untouchable and safe as before."

Neither of the cases ever went to trial.

On Jan. 29, however, a National Court of Spain judge ordered an 
investigation into Israeli actions in the 2002 bombing of Hamas 
operative Salah Shehadeh that killed 14 others, including nine children.

Israeli National Infrastructure Minister Binyamin Ben Eliezer, who was 
defense minister at the time of the attack and was one of seven suspects 
named in the probe, said the court's decision was "outrageous."

"Terrorist organizations ... use the systems put in place by democratic 
states to sue a country fighting terrorism," he said.

? Staff writer Robert Marquand contributed from Paris.




From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Feb  4 07:55:52 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 09:55:52 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] SWP Democracy Commission
Message-ID: <4989AC78.8040104@panix.com>

(I don't think that this will solve their problems unless it is 
accompanied by a commission to review the appropriateness of "democratic 
centralism" mechanically understood.)

http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=17008
SWP Democracy Commission

by Sheila McGregor, Chair of the Democracy Commission

The Democracy Commission was set up at the recent Socialist Workers 
Party (SWP) annual conference. It is made up of ten elected members and 
four members appointed by the SWP?s Central Committee. Its first meeting 
will be on Saturday 7 February.

Since the 1999 Seattle protests sparked a new wave of global resistance 
to capitalism, party members have thrown themselves into building the 
movements ? particularly those against globalisation and war ? as well 
as developing an alternative to New Labour.

However, concern has grown over the last few years that there has been a 
lack of proper debate and reflection about our activities. Many comrades 
feel that this has led to mistakes and unaccountability.

Hence the widespread view among members articulated at our recent 
conference that we need to restore a proper culture of debate within the 
party.

This will enable all comrades to discuss the party?s work and provide 
the basis for democratic decision making and accountability.

Just as importantly, it can provide the framework within which all 
members feel confident about taking up a leadership role in their sphere 
of work.

We must be able to properly assess events so we can decide how best to 
respond.

The fast-changing world situation makes it all the more pressing that 
comrades feel engaged in our discussion of how to respond ? whether we 
face the Israeli assault on Gaza or the recent wave of unofficial 
strikes across Britain.

If everyone feels they have taken part in the discussion we can be 
confident that decisions, once taken, will be respected by all.

The commission?s purpose is to look at the ?culture of debate?, the way 
we organise inside the SWP, and how we discuss and decide on our work. 
It will draft proposals to take to a special conference within the next 
three to six months.

At our first meeting the members of the commission will look at how to 
take that discussion to branches and districts in the next few weeks.

We also welcome submissions from individual members of the party. Please 
contact the SWP national office for submissions to the Democracy Commission.


From leninstombblog at googlemail.com  Wed Feb  4 08:02:57 2009
From: leninstombblog at googlemail.com (Lenin's Tomb)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 15:02:57 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] SWP Democracy Commission
In-Reply-To: <4989AC78.8040104@panix.com>
References: <4989AC78.8040104@panix.com>
Message-ID: <c17d8d380902040702l6a257f91x80d56aa5a8304671@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> wrote:

> (I don't think that this will solve their problems unless it is
> accompanied by a commission to review the appropriateness of "democratic
> centralism" mechanically understood.)


I don't agree with your claims about democratic centralism, and I suspect
your sense of what our problems are would not coincide with those of most
members.  However, to answer your point, the scope of the commission
includes every aspect of SWP organisation, including the constitution.  What
problems it solves depends upon the recommendations made by the commission,
and those voted through at the next conference.

From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Feb  4 08:12:07 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 10:12:07 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] SWP Democracy Commission
In-Reply-To: <c17d8d380902040702l6a257f91x80d56aa5a8304671@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4989AC78.8040104@panix.com>
	<c17d8d380902040702l6a257f91x80d56aa5a8304671@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4989B047.3040505@panix.com>

Lenin's Tomb wrote:
  > I don't agree with your claims about democratic centralism, and I 
suspect
> your sense of what our problems are would not coincide with those of most
> members.  

Undoubtedly.

> However, to answer your point, the scope of the commission
> includes every aspect of SWP organisation, including the constitution. 

I don't place much stock in constitutions, especially when Stalin's 
constitution for the USSR was the best ever written *on paper*.

Indeed, a constitution cannot resolve the key problem for the SWP, or 
any other group in the "vanguard" model, which is the kind of 
homogeneity bred by peer pressure. In other words, the gag in a member's 
mouth tends to be put there by him or herself, not by a bureaucratic 
leader. I speak from bitter experience in the American SWP, another 
group bred in Leon Trotsky's hothouse.

The solution for that is a clean break with the past, something that 
such groups are obviously loath to do.



From leninstombblog at googlemail.com  Wed Feb  4 08:14:43 2009
From: leninstombblog at googlemail.com (Lenin's Tomb)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 15:14:43 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] SWP Democracy Commission
In-Reply-To: <4989B047.3040505@panix.com>
References: <4989AC78.8040104@panix.com>
	<c17d8d380902040702l6a257f91x80d56aa5a8304671@mail.gmail.com>
	<4989B047.3040505@panix.com>
Message-ID: <c17d8d380902040714u3a75d319s8322a62105ff2257@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 3:12 PM, Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> wrote:

>
> Indeed, a constitution cannot resolve the key problem for the SWP, or
> any other group in the "vanguard" model, which is the kind of
> homogeneity bred by peer pressure. In other words, the gag in a member's
> mouth tends to be put there by him or herself, not by a bureaucratic
> leader. I speak from bitter experience in the American SWP, another
> group bred in Leon Trotsky's hothouse.


Funny: you might be closer to my comrades than I thought.  But we're not
about to break with democratic centralism, albeit there are various ways in
which the model can be interpreted.

From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Feb  4 08:17:29 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 10:17:29 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Common sense and empty talk
Message-ID: <4989B189.4040705@panix.com>

Counterpunch, February 3, 2009
Common Sense and Empty Talk in Indonesia
What Does It Take to Get a Meal Here, an Earthquake?

By ALLAN NAIRN

In Indonesia, the government-funded Muslim Ulema's Council (MUI) has 
recently issued two remarkable fatwas that, first, prohibit smoking by 
pregnant women, children, or people in public spaces, and that second, 
forbid potential voters from abstaining -- or from voting for candidates 
who aren't "credible" --, since these voting choices could be seen as 
being "dangerous for the state" (Ali Mustafa Yaqud, Deputy Chief of the 
Fatwa Commission, Metro TV, February 3, 2009, Western Indonesia Time).

The edicts are refreshing for those who want to breathe well, and for 
those who seek political insight into the fact that "the state" -- even 
when it's a strongarm state -- usually wants and needs some legitimacy, 
and often seeks it through voting, but voting on its terms, sans 
thoughts, options or people that are not "credible."

In the late 1960s, surveys of US business leaders showed -- amazingly, 
to today's mentalities -- that they actually feared revolution in the 
United States. Today hardly anyone even imagines it.

Today you have Marxists for Obama, and former Marxists who worked for 
Bush (the neo-cons). In today's America, as in most of the world, 
revolution is no longer credible.

But, then again, looser talkers are now saying the same about what's 
called capitalism, or at least about Wall Street investment banking, 
which was about as solid and credible as you could get, until those 
weeks last September, when, as they say, it suddenly vanished into air, 
taking potentially lifesaving billions of imagined dollars with it 
(potentially lifesaving, that is, if those dollars had been used for 
things like food, instead of finance fun)(On the concepts of rich 
people's imagined and/or cybered money vs. poor people's earthbound 
earnings, see News and Comment postings of June 3, 2008 ["Drawing Your 
Last Breath Hungry. Burma, Food Crisis, Wall Street, and the World 
Economy"] and Nov. 21, 2007 ["Bangladesh and Wall Street After the 
Flood: Two Different Kinds of Property."]).

It's said that sensitivity to ground shifts tends to depend on an 
organism's constitution. Some claim that horses feel earthquakes before 
we do. And even among people, it does seem to be true that some are 
slower on the uptake than others.

I once sat in a Sumatra eating hall wondering why screaming people all 
around me were stampeding, until I looked up and noticed that the 
hanging light bulb was swaying back-and-forth as the earth quaked.

The MUI -- originally created by the dictator, Suharto, is showing some 
deep political insight. You want people on board. You want people 
signed-on. As their spokesman put it: "We must have a credible president."

But if people get off, refuse to affix their X's or signatures, run 
politically amok (an Indonesian word) -- what then?

What do presidents do, even if their boys have guns? That depends, in 
part, on how many guns.

But the point is this: sometimes rulers win, and -- also -- sometimes 
they don't win.

With conditions right, the mountains really do tremble.

And politics is not geology.

In politics, the rocks can think. They can meet and say 'Let's have an 
earthquake.'

People tried it in Central America and got smashed. Red huipiles ran 
moist with grief tears.

But people are now trying it in South America -- and from places like 
Bolivia, there are tremors.

When a person gets tremors, which -- for a person -- is bad, they may 
find, bizarrely, that nicotine helps.

But when a state gets the shakes, suppression can get messy, so 
preemption is clearly preferable. Thus, the minimal-choice election. 
Thus, the demagogue who stirs hope, but not food pots.

In the Indonesian language, to say something is 'empty talk' ('omong 
kosong') is to say something harshly insulting. It's worse than, in 
English or Spanish, crying 'bullshit!' or 'mierda!,' which makes sense, 
since bad as feces can be, empty talk can be even more damaging 
socially, especially, say, if it's on the ballot, and if the sum total 
of your political choice in life is voting either for package of empty 
talk A or package of empty talk B.

In such situations, common sense works, and it translates into any language:

It doesn't matter what they say. It matters what they do. And if they 
don't do it, get up and make them do it.

You could call that 'Do it yourself.' You could call it 'Revolution.'

But as the old US borscht-belt joke says, "You can call me anything you 
want. Just don't call me late for dinner."


From markalause at gmail.com  Wed Feb  4 08:55:49 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 10:55:49 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] SWP Democracy Commission
In-Reply-To: <c17d8d380902040714u3a75d319s8322a62105ff2257@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4989AC78.8040104@panix.com>
	<c17d8d380902040702l6a257f91x80d56aa5a8304671@mail.gmail.com>
	<4989B047.3040505@panix.com>
	<c17d8d380902040714u3a75d319s8322a62105ff2257@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0902040755j54a95b50vb3a32df88f488711@mail.gmail.com>

The discussion between Louis and Lenin's tomb is about brand names and
advertising labels.

But so is the main story here.  The SWP has always been "democratic"
and concerned about "democracy.'  Just ask it.  Consult its
institutions and its press.  So has the CPUSA.  So has the Democratic
Party.  So is the entire US of A.

Consumers prefer the label and you just have to have it if you're
serious about selling the product.

The establishment of committee about "democracy" where 1/3 of it are
appointed creatures of the purging hierarchy is rather a dead
giveaway, though.  It insures that the body will have no life
independent of what the hierarchy wants.  So does voting on much of
anything in an organization with decades of training to an Orwellian
internal life.

There's absolutely nothing radical about this, much less Marxist,
Leninist, Trotskyist, etc. (Maybe there is something of the tomb about
it, of course.)

This is just standard corporate culture.

ML


From Midhurst14 at aol.com  Wed Feb  4 09:01:21 2009
From: Midhurst14 at aol.com (Midhurst14 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 11:01:21 EST
Subject: [Marxism] SWP Democracy Commission
Message-ID: <cf5.475660bd.36bb15d1@aol.com>

My experience over 50 odd years of ultra-leftism, going back to the Fourth  
International, is that theyare consistently looking for ways to disrupt
Now that the right in the labour movement is largely bankrupt, the  
ultra-left has stepped in to fulfil the same function, to disrupt the unity  of the 
movement
The latest SWP move is to fix a sticking plaster over a gaping wound
George Anthony

From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Feb  4 09:04:31 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 11:04:31 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Arno Mayer on corruption
Message-ID: <4989BC8F.9000304@panix.com>

(Arno Mayer is the U.S.'s most distinguished and brilliant historian, as 
far as I am concerned.)

Counterpunch, February 4, 2009
A Feast of Vultures
On Corruption

By ARNO J. MAYER

At irregular intervals the U.S. is shaken by high-profile cases of 
political and financial corruption. Every time the media indignantly 
denounces the miscreants as if to reaffirm that except for them America 
remains unspotted and innocent. There is barely a mention of the corrupt 
practices and conventions inherent in contemporary finance capitalism.

Rod Blagojevich, governor of Illinois and would-be grifter, and Bernard 
Madoff, worldly moneyman, momentarily capture the headlines. With his 
alleged offer to auction off a U.S. Senate seat to the highest bidder, 
Blagojevich followed in the steps of Plunkett of Tamany Hall and is a 
piker compared to Madoff, whose alleged $50 billion Ponzi scheme is 
apparently history?s largest private financial fraud. Ex-chairman of the 
Nasdaq Stock Market and one of its major players, for decades Madoff 
lubricated his venture by making strategic political contributions and 
mixed business with philanthropy, in the process raising his social 
status and soothing his conscience.  The explosion of Wall Street?s 
government-condoned financial bubble exposed Madoff?s pyramid scheme, 
which can only be understood in the context of the larger praxis and 
culture of corruption that makes it so difficult for President Barack 
Obama to separate the wheat from the chaff as he forms his cabinet, 
White House staff, and inner circle of advisers.

Corruption is a highly polemical word-concept, its rhetorical use 
adapted to political warfare. Its charges?including bribery, extortion, 
nepotism?are leveled to mobilize popular and partisan support against 
incumbents or rivals. A phenomenon of group psychology and action, the 
meanings attached to the word corruption have changed from one 
civilization to another, from one century to another, and from one 
country to another.  To think critically about corruption is to think 
about venality not only in politics but also in economics, finance, 
religion, sports, the arts, education, and social intercourse. Even so, 
private individuals who tender bribes are judged and penalized much less 
severely than politicians, government officials, and bureaucrats who 
solicit and pocket them, presumably because they betray a public trust. 
The imbalance is greater in societies where the richest of the rich, 
both individual and corporate, are in a position to corrupt public 
servants of modest means.

If man is innately venal it is hardly surprising that elected 
politicians and state functionaries are corruptible. Political society 
is not ruled by angels mindful of prayer books. By the nature and logic 
of things, and in the words of Lord Acton, ?power tends to corrupt, and 
absolute power corrupts absolutely.?

Since corruption is chronic in political and civil society (and at 
certain moments, as Bertolt Brecht observed, ?to find an official who 
accepts a bribe is to find humanity?), the issue is not corruption as 
such, but its scale and virulence and pervasiveness. So-called primitive 
societies may well have been the least open to corruption, since there 
was little if any separation between the private and public sphere, 
which is a precondition for bribery to subvert non-venal gift-giving. 
But there was bribery, especially of judges, among the ancient 
Egyptians, Babylonians, and Hebrews. In Greece, by the fourth century 
B.C.E., bribery developed along with the growth of city, economy, and 
government, as well as with the need to pack public assemblies. Ancient 
Rome was never free of venality, though it only began to suffuse civil 
and political society during the late republic and with imperial 
expansion: sale of public offices, contracts, and concessions, capped by 
clientage and the buying off of the plebs with ?bread and circuses.? 
Even the office of Emperor occasionally went to the highest bidder.

Whereas ecclesiastic simony was probably the most common graft of the 
Middle Ages, the purchase or sale of public places, especially judicial 
and tax offices, became not uncommon in France and England in early 
modern Europe, as a complement to hereditary offices. Europe?s overseas 
colonization provided new avenues for corruption in the metropole as 
well as in distant imperial provinces. Corruption has always been part 
of and necessary to imperialism, involving the purchase and sale of fat 
charters, concessions, and contracts for the economic and fiscal 
exploitation of colonies, particularly for the extraction of 
nonrenewable resources and commodities.

Corruption, then, is not equally prevalent always and everywhere.  In 
moments of radical economic transition and social change, when 
governmental and legal structures are inchoate and social conventions 
are in flux?in the United States from 1865 to 1890; in the new states of 
post-colonial Middle East, Africa, and Southeast Asia; in the lands of 
the ex-Soviet Union and its former satellites since 1989?corruption 
becomes rampant and glaring by virtue of unhoped-for opportunities for 
tempter and tempted alike. Grand corruption overtakes petty graft.

With its moving frontier, particularly from the time of the Civil War to 
beyond the fin-de-si?cle, America excelled in corruption. The legendary 
robber barons and captains of industry, retrospectively celebrated as 
the founders of modern American capitalism, built their business empires 
with calculated recourse to the massive corruption of government?local, 
state, federal?for private gain.  In a climate of relative and widely 
condoned moral laxity, fraud and graft ran wild, particularly in the 
frenetic race for rights of way for railroads; for land grants from the 
public domain for the exploitation of timber, minerals, and oil; and for 
favorable tariffs, taxes, and business regulations. To achieve their 
ends, Cooke and Gould, Vanderbilt and Rockefeller, Huntington and 
Stanford, Frick and Carnegie spent vast sums to ?fix? things. They 
competed in bribing senators and representatives of both parties, in 
suborning elections, in buying newspapers, and in seducing public 
intellectuals.

A few magnates, hoping to cut the cost of fixing things, themselves 
stood for public office, using their wealth to secure political power. 
The giants of certain industries, rather than fight each other in the 
face of relatively toothless government controls, colluded to form 
lobbies and, eventually, to merge their firms. As of the late 1870s, 
because of his fraudulent and illegal practices in building up Standard 
Oil, John D. Rockefeller became a notorious fugitive from justice. To 
elude process servers he kept crossing state borders until, fearful of 
being arrested and extradited, he holed up in his estate in Pocantico, 
New York, surrounded by security guards, to fend off servers of 
subpoenas. With time, eager to improve his image and status, the oil 
mogul began to funnel some of his tainted wealth into philanthropic 
works, prompting Mark Twain?s assessment that through ?all the ages 
three fourths of the support of the great charities has been 
conscience-money.?

In the twentieth century, America?s emergence as an imperial power could 
not help but bring about an efflorescence of corruption. Compared to the 
directly ruled Roman and overseas European empires, the indirectly 
linked U.S. empire gave rise to a military-industrial complex which 
became cause and effect of constantly rising public expenditures for 
enormous military contracts which, historically, have been exceptionally 
conducive to jobbing. The growth of this mighty ?defense? establishment, 
with military bases and subaltern allies the world over, goes hand in 
hand with imperial America?s global reach for critical and invaluable 
commodities entailing enormously lucrative but also highly corruptible 
contracts. This grab is facilitated by the American lead in aeronautics, 
telecommunications, pharmaceuticals, and computer technology, all of 
which call for licensing, fraught with influence-peddling.

In this era of universal finance capitalism, yesterday?s pork-barrel and 
log-rolling politics has been overtaken by hyper-corruption, both 
straightforward and circuitous, legal and unlawful. With the sweeping 
deindustrialization of America, there is no longer a senator to 
represent the state of Boeing nor a corporate CEO?and future defense 
secretary (GM chief Charles Wilson)?to proclaim that ?what is good for 
General Motors is good for America.? The objectives have become 
altogether less insular: bribes, in the form of campaign contributions 
and gifts, are designed to influence, if not buy, legislative and 
administrative decisions to benefit giant interests, many of them 
transnational. Indeed, with the globalization of economy and finance, 
corruption has become global as well. Suitors and supplicants resort to 
it in the quest for business contracts and political leverage.

With corruption systemic in the U. S., not just mega-corporations and 
financial companies practice it but so do rating agencies and accounting 
firms. And it festers in the Old World where the Vivendi, Parmalat, and 
Afinsa/Escala scandals are analogous to the Enron and WorldCom scandals 
in the New World.

Obviously not all the culprits are big-time corporate executives. There 
remain super-wealthy individuals who fix things as a matter of course. 
Bill Gates and Sergey Brin, Warren Buffet and George Soros do so 
aboveboard; the likes of Marc Rich and Boris Berezovsky act 
surreptitiously.  The latter know no national loyalty: Rich renounced 
his American citizenship to acquire Spanish, Swiss, and Israeli 
passports to facilitate staying ahead of the law; Berezovsky fled to the 
United Kingdom to escape Russian courts. Confirming Mark Twain?s maxim, 
all make large bequests to philanthropic causes.

Overall, however, most of the great tempters are faceless CEOs who seek 
to advance corporate fortunes along with their own. Together with 
well-funded lobbies and pressure groups it is they who do most of the 
giving to both political parties, leaving organized labor and civic 
groups far behind. Increasingly, business-friendly Republicans and 
Democrats, their elections and advancements heavily financed?hence 
swayed?by big corporations and trade associations, are hegemonic in the 
legislative, executive, and administrative branches of government at the 
federal, state, and local levels. The symbiosis between corporate 
business and corporate government is made possible by the revolving door 
between the private and public sector. Without severing their links to 
the Beltway the insiders become outsiders promoting interests pending an 
eventual return to power. To bolster their pedigrees many seek and 
secure affiliations with elite universities or think tanks.

While out of power the highest-level and most visible politicos and 
functionaries monetize their experience and connections in government, 
corporate business, and high society at home and abroad. Jimmy Carter 
apart, ex-presidents today seek and command huge fees for oily corporate 
speeches. Former cabinet members and top advisors set up, join, or 
counsel high-powered consulting firms that engage in transnational 
influence-peddling and lobbying on behalf of domestic and foreign 
corporate clients, charging fees in keeping with their vaunted access to 
the inner corridors of political and corporate power: on the Republican 
side, James Baker III, Henry Kissinger, Thomas McLarty, Peter Peterson, 
and John W. Snow; Democrats include Madeleine Albright, Sandy Berger, 
William Cohen, Carla Hills, and Richard Holbrook.

James Baker?s Carlyle Group, with ex-President George H. W. Bush as its 
senior advisor, is prototypical of these corruption tanks, which, in 
collaboration with major law, investment, accounting, and public 
relations firms, constitute a formidable nexus of influence and power. 
Retired senior officers of the armed forces similarly cash in on their 
credentials and access by advising defense contractors and performing as 
military analysts in the media.

The 21st century is witnessing the birth of a new concert of nations to 
be dominated by several great powers, not just one. Although their 
political systems differ radically, they are all anchored in and driven 
by a new form of state capitalism. The rivalries among the major state 
actors will be intensified by sharpened competition for access to or 
control of increasingly scarce resources?energy, food, and water. In 
addition population growth will continue to be centered in chronically 
unstable countries racked by poverty and malnutrition. Not a few of 
these wretched states are endowed with valuable natural resources 
controlled by narrow and venal inveterate elites.

The reversion to a multinational world system dominated by several great 
powers practicing a new kind of mercantilism is a boon to corruption. 
The corruption-mongers of state finance capitalism are working 
hand-in-glove with the creatively destructive robber barons and fixers 
of emerging and failing states. The former decry the latter for their 
crude and blatant corruption and nepotism all the while they wheel and 
deal with them. As for the likes of Blagojevich and Madoff, they will 
continue to figure as colorful supernumeraries while serving to deflect 
attention from the feast of vultures.

Arno J Mayer is emeritus professor of history at Princeton University. 
He is the author of The Furies: Violence and Terror in the French and 
Russian Revolutions.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Feb  4 09:07:56 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 11:07:56 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] SWP Democracy Commission
In-Reply-To: <cf5.475660bd.36bb15d1@aol.com>
References: <cf5.475660bd.36bb15d1@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4989BD5C.2060308@panix.com>

Midhurst14 at aol.com wrote:
> My experience over 50 odd years of ultra-leftism, going back to the Fourth  
> International, is that theyare consistently looking for ways to disrupt

Especially when they dug that tunnel from Taiwan into China beneath the 
Taiwan Strait in order to smuggle arms to Christian missionaries and the 
Falun Gong.


From Midhurst14 at aol.com  Wed Feb  4 09:11:36 2009
From: Midhurst14 at aol.com (Midhurst14 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 11:11:36 EST
Subject: [Marxism] SWP Democracy Commission
Message-ID: <c55.40266fc6.36bb1838@aol.com>

Man after my own heart
George Anthony

From leninstombblog at googlemail.com  Wed Feb  4 09:13:36 2009
From: leninstombblog at googlemail.com (Lenin's Tomb)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 16:13:36 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] SWP Democracy Commission
In-Reply-To: <b16d8daf0902040755j54a95b50vb3a32df88f488711@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4989AC78.8040104@panix.com>
	<c17d8d380902040702l6a257f91x80d56aa5a8304671@mail.gmail.com>
	<4989B047.3040505@panix.com>
	<c17d8d380902040714u3a75d319s8322a62105ff2257@mail.gmail.com>
	<b16d8daf0902040755j54a95b50vb3a32df88f488711@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c17d8d380902040813u5439b9f2xba4344ef99edbf0a@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Mark Lause <markalause at gmail.com> wrote:

> The discussion between Louis and Lenin's tomb is about brand names and
> advertising labels.


Darling, please.  The discussion, brief though it was, was about an article
concerning the internal organisation of a relatively small far left party in
the UK.  You didn't participate in the debates either before or at
conference, and therefore you do not and cannot know what you are talking
about.  Moreover, as far as I know, any experience you have of the SWP UK is
limited to whatever might have arisen during your former membership of the
ISO.  In that light, I'm not sure how seriously I am supposed to take your
catholic denunciations of our 'corporate culture'.

From leninstombblog at googlemail.com  Wed Feb  4 09:19:04 2009
From: leninstombblog at googlemail.com (Lenin's Tomb)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 16:19:04 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] SWP Democracy Commission
In-Reply-To: <cf5.475660bd.36bb15d1@aol.com>
References: <cf5.475660bd.36bb15d1@aol.com>
Message-ID: <c17d8d380902040819h4d109f12ob3e2bab8e41173d9@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 4:01 PM, <Midhurst14 at aol.com> wrote:

> Now that the right in the labour movement is largely bankrupt,


The right-wing in the labour movement is currently dominant, while its
left-wing is only just germinally recovering from the defeats since the late
1970s.  Whatever role you think the 'ultra-left' (whoever they are) plays,
it can't have anything to do with replacing a moribund right-wing.

From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Feb  4 09:44:35 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 11:44:35 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Obama's Secretary of Commerce
Message-ID: <4989C5F3.9070006@panix.com>

(Part of the deal in getting this scumbag Republican to join Obama's 
cabinet was to have the Democratic Governor of New Hampshire appoint 
another Republican to assume his Senate seat. Obama, another FDR? My foot.)

NY Times, February 4, 2009
A New Member Joins the President?s Team, Though He?s Not in Lockstep With It
By JIM RUTENBERG

WASHINGTON ? Senator Judd Gregg, named by President Obama on Tuesday as 
the choice for commerce secretary, once supported eliminating the 
department he is to lead. He differs with his boss-to-be in favoring oil 
drilling on the coast of an Alaska wildlife refuge. He promotes a 
lighter touch with China than does the president. And he disagrees with 
him in backing private accounts for Social Security.

Given all that, Mr. Gregg, a deficit hawk from New Hampshire who is the 
senior Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, certainly fits with 
Mr. Obama?s professed desire to create a cabinet with conflicting views. 
If confirmed, he will be at the top of the list of administration 
officials having fundamental differences with a president who is 
enlisting them to advance his agenda.

Mr. Obama acknowledged as much when he announced Tuesday morning that he 
was nominating Mr. Gregg. ?Clearly,? he told reporters, ?Judd and I 
don?t agree on every issue.?

Mr. Gregg himself said in an interview that while the two had 
differences, he did not foresee being asked to promote any policy 
violating his conscience.

?He?s willing to bring into his council chamber and to listen to 
somebody who comes from a different philosophy,? the senator said of the 
president, ?and he actively sought me out to do that. But he?s the 
captain. Put another way, I?m a field commander.?

Aides to both men said that on crucial issues like efforts to rejuvenate 
the economy, the two mostly saw eye to eye, Mr. Gregg having been one of 
the chief negotiators for the $700 billion bank bailout passed last fall 
with Mr. Obama?s support.

As a new cabinet designee in an awkward week, Mr. Gregg also offers 
another plus for the president: He said he was confident his taxes were 
in order.

Mr. Gregg does hold a variety of stocks that, under Commerce Department 
ethics rules, will most likely have to be either sold or placed in a 
blind trust. Many were issued by banks that benefited from the bailout 
legislation (and whose political action committees were, coincidentally, 
among the many financial industry PACs that contributed more than 
$300,000 to his 2004 Senate re-election campaign, according to the Web 
site CQ MoneyLine). The Senate?s rules generally do not bar its members 
from holding stock in companies affected by legislation they draft or 
support.

Mr. Gregg said many of the stocks had been passed down for generations 
in his family, which, in the late 1800s, helped found the Indian Head 
Bank; in 1988 the bank was sold to Fleet Bank, which was later acquired 
by Bank of America. Of his banking stocks as a whole, the senator 
lamented, ?There?s not much value left.?

He does not have to worry about money, however. The Center for 
Responsive Politics lists him as the 21st-richest senator, with assets, 
according to his 2007 financial disclosure forms, of $3 million to $10 
million. He even won $850,000 in the Powerball lottery in 2005.

Mr. Gregg preserved good will within his own party by making his move to 
the administration contingent on the naming of a Republican to succeed 
him for the two years remaining in his Senate term. On Tuesday, New 
Hampshire?s Democratic governor, John Lynch, complied, saying he would 
appoint J. Bonnie Newman, an official in the administrations of Ronald 
Reagan and George Bush who was also Mr. Gregg?s chief of staff when he 
served in the House.

White House aides said that if confirmed, Mr. Gregg would be among those 
officials rotating into the president?s daily briefings on the economy.

They also said Mr. Obama had picked him in part because of his influence 
with Senate Republicans. One fellow Budget Committee member, Senator 
Jeff Sessions, Republican of Alabama, agreed that ?he?ll have a lot of 
credibility with colleagues,? though Mr. Sessions warned that good will 
had its limits: ?If he wants to send more money to Wall Street fat cats, 
I may not support him on it.?

Mr. Gregg could face greater resistance from liberals and Democrats. The 
liberal blog Daily Kos features a list of 88 reasons he should not be 
commerce secretary, among them his vote against legislation making it 
easier for victims of pay discrimination to sue ? the first bill Mr. 
Obama signed as president ? and his participation in debate preparations 
for George W. Bush in 2000, when he played the part of Al Gore, and in 
2004, when he assumed the role of John Kerry.

Representative Barbara Lee of California, chairwoman of the 
Congressional Black Caucus, has criticized Mr. Gregg for his 1995 vote 
in favor of a budget resolution that assumed the elimination of the 
Commerce Department, and for declining a request from President Bill 
Clinton to increase financing for the 2000 census, a Commerce Department 
function.

Mr. Gregg said his critics were selectively plucking items from a long 
voting record of support for the department?s activity. He also said, 
jokingly, that his backing for the resolution abolishing the department 
came during ?my wild and crazy days.?

?As a practical matter,? he said, ?I believe things are so difficult 
right now we all need to be in the same boat pulling oars to the shore.?


From Midhurst14 at aol.com  Wed Feb  4 09:56:46 2009
From: Midhurst14 at aol.com (Midhurst14 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 11:56:46 EST
Subject: [Marxism] SWP Democracy Commission
Message-ID: <c1b.452a1fe5.36bb22ce@aol.com>

Who are the right-wingers you have in mind?
Brendan Barber, who is a right winger, but largely ineffective
If it's Derek Simpson you have in mind, then it's goodnight from me
 
George Anthony

From Midhurst14 at aol.com  Wed Feb  4 09:58:16 2009
From: Midhurst14 at aol.com (Midhurst14 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 11:58:16 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Obama's Secretary of Commerce
Message-ID: <c05.55e236cb.36bb2328@aol.com>

I thought they did what they were told?
George Anthony

From absynthe at gmail.com  Wed Feb  4 10:01:34 2009
From: absynthe at gmail.com (chegitz guevara)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 12:01:34 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] SWP Democracy Commission
In-Reply-To: <4989AC78.8040104@panix.com>
References: <4989AC78.8040104@panix.com>
Message-ID: <e1d1857b0902040901x5bd4bff2o5b1c1bc202cd931a@mail.gmail.com>

Let 100 Flowers Bloom, with all that implies.

On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> wrote:
> (I don't think that this will solve their problems unless it is
> accompanied by a commission to review the appropriateness of "democratic
> centralism" mechanically understood.)
>
> http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=17008
> SWP Democracy Commission
>
> by Sheila McGregor, Chair of the Democracy Commission
>
> The Democracy Commission was set up at the recent Socialist Workers
> Party (SWP) annual conference. It is made up of ten elected members and
> four members appointed by the SWP's Central Committee. Its first meeting
> will be on Saturday 7 February.
>
> Since the 1999 Seattle protests sparked a new wave of global resistance
> to capitalism, party members have thrown themselves into building the
> movements ? particularly those against globalisation and war ? as well
> as developing an alternative to New Labour.
>
> However, concern has grown over the last few years that there has been a
> lack of proper debate and reflection about our activities. Many comrades
> feel that this has led to mistakes and unaccountability.
>
> Hence the widespread view among members articulated at our recent
> conference that we need to restore a proper culture of debate within the
> party.
>
> This will enable all comrades to discuss the party's work and provide
> the basis for democratic decision making and accountability.
>
> Just as importantly, it can provide the framework within which all
> members feel confident about taking up a leadership role in their sphere
> of work.
>
> We must be able to properly assess events so we can decide how best to
> respond.
>
> The fast-changing world situation makes it all the more pressing that
> comrades feel engaged in our discussion of how to respond ? whether we
> face the Israeli assault on Gaza or the recent wave of unofficial
> strikes across Britain.
>
> If everyone feels they have taken part in the discussion we can be
> confident that decisions, once taken, will be respected by all.
>
> The commission's purpose is to look at the "culture of debate", the way
> we organise inside the SWP, and how we discuss and decide on our work.
> It will draft proposals to take to a special conference within the next
> three to six months.
>
> At our first meeting the members of the commission will look at how to
> take that discussion to branches and districts in the next few weeks.
>
> We also welcome submissions from individual members of the party. Please
> contact the SWP national office for submissions to the Democracy Commission.
>
> ________________________________________________
> 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/absynthe%40gmail.com
>


From Waistline2 at aol.com  Wed Feb  4 10:03:11 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 12:03:11 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Afircan AMerican History Month 2209: Intro dialectics of
	social change 1 of many
Message-ID: <cf0.4f6041ca.36bb244f@aol.com>

Change wave and process logic: The dialectic of  change 

When fundamental things change, everything dependent upon them  must also 
change. This does not imply that results of change are direct or  immediate and 
most certainly it is not to say that everything changes at one  time. However, 
scientific thinking demands that we find the motivation for  fundamental 
change, place such changes in its proper context and make some  estimate of their 
consequences. 

Profound social changes, driven forward  by changes in the productive 
machinery of the economy, are opening a window of  opportunity that allows us to  
make up for the past half century of  stagnation. As in previous moments of great 
change, some revolutionaries become  stuck in the mud of yesteryear and are 
unable to move forward with changing  times. That mud is theoretical confusion. 
This confusion arises when  revolutionaries hold to unchanging doctrine or 
theory while disregarding  constantly changing facts. The unending fight for 
clarity is  precisely the  effort to keep theory and doctrine united with and 
reflecting the  facts of  a constantly changing world. 

The fight to caught up with a changing  world is unending, and requires 
collective discussions and many inputs by  communists, because of the nature of 
flesh and the human mind. Not simply  because we must rely upon data made 
available to us by the bourgeoisie, or the  inability of any individual to see the 
totality of our filed of battle, but also  because of the law system governing 
the emergence of qualitative change -  something new, and the virtual 
impossibility of the minds eye to see emergence.  

When we are able to observe something new, a new qualitative definition,  it 
means that we are witnessing it second phase of development.  The first  phase 
is always a complex combination of the new quality entering a  field,  
altering that, which is fundamental, then compelling everything dependent on it  to 
begin the change process. Nothing can change all at one time in the social  
sphere. Some understand this as the concept of uneven development. That is fine. 
 

Such is the case in isolating for a moment, the history of the African  
American people. 

For a moment I want to speak of the Communist Party USA  (CPUSA), not as a 
knee jerk hater, but because much of their history spans the  20th century. I 
remember being taught in the early 1970s by a much older  communist, how the 
party was unable to shift, when the magnificent struggle of  the Negro People 
broke out and into the public sphere in Montgomery Alabama on  December 4,  1955. 
The party was reeling from the jailing of its members  during the Second  Red 
scare - Mc McCarthyism, and going through various  ideological splits with  
the publication of  Khrushchev ?secret  speech,? but more than that it was 
caught flatfooted by the speed and pace of  the surging Negro Peoples Movement of 
that time. 

The party's remaining  members was more than less in heavy industry at a time 
where that was the last  place the blacks could be found. Hence, to no 
significant degree could they  impact the movement. Some older comrades had 
anticipated the outbreak of the  Negro Peoples Movement based on a subtle awareness of 
realignment taking place  in post WWII America. Many of these comrades were 
ex-soldiers, trained by Uncle  Sam and understood that a wave of repression, 
always accompanying the return of  black solider into American society, who were 
willing to fight the worse  features of Jim Crow with guns in hand. 

The CPUSA  clung to old  doctrines rooted in the formation of the industrial 
working class  and  virtually missed the 1960s and 1970s. 

Although I have never been a  member of the CPUSA, but was a member of 
another communist groups, I remembered  this lesson again reading a ?FAQ? outline 
in Political Affairs 

Here is  how the entire the decade of the 1960?s and 1970s is summed up, in 
respects to  the Civil Rights Movement. 

?We participated in the beginning of the  Civil Rights Movement. 

In the 60s, we helped begin the movement against  the War in Vietnam, which 
we opposed from the very start. Members volunteered  for Mississippi Summer, a 
project that brought Northern volunteers, mainly  students, south to help with 
voter registration. 

We initiated or  participated in many union rank-and-file committees and 
movements, working to  democratize and radicalize unions and union members. In 
1968, for the first  time in several decades, we ran candidates for President 
and Vice-President.  

In the 70s, we led the movement to Free Angela Davis, organized to  fight  
the effects of double-digit inflation on workers and their families.  We 
continued to fight against the Vietnam War, and supported welfare  rights  organizing 
and other efforts to broaden the base of progressive  movements. We  
continued to run candidates for national and local offices,  and fought to be a  fully 
legal political party.  (http://www.cpusa.org/article/static/511/#question27) 
? 

Again the  purpose of mentioning the party is not to brow beat them, but the 
Negro Peoples  Movement was the catalyst for the broad student movement of 
that era; expansion  of the "ban the bomb movement" and its passing over to the 
anti-war movement;  and reignited an interest in revolutionary Marxism, which 
in turn provided the  intellectual material for the formation of the so-called ?
New Communists  Movement? of militants.

To this day it irritates me  when our  bourgeoisie pretends that the 1960 and 
1970s was dominated by ?hippies?   and flower power children. No, the 
decades of the 1950s, 1960, 1970 was  dominated by the intense struggle of the Negro 
People and all indicates show  that the next decade is going to be dominated 
by a new form of class  intersection, perhaps as different at the Negro People 
Movement was from the  1930 and 1940, when communists of all kinds pushed for 
the transition from  craft  to industrial unionism. These communists pushed 
events by organizing  the movement itself. 

In the case of the transition from craft to  industrial unionism and then the 
Negro Peoples Movement, what they both had in  common was neither was geared 
to or could be  geared to a movement to  overthrow the power of capital. Both 
movements sought to reform the   relations within and between classes, which 
is the definition of   reform.  The most the Marxists and Marxists-Leninist 
could do is recruit  individuals to the ideology of communism; the ideology of 
revolution and  carry  on the systematic education of Marxism to the best of our 
ability.  Clearly the past 40 years have proven the impossibility of being 
revolutionary  in a on revolutionary environment, except in ones head. 

It is absolutely  correct for communist to fight within these movements,  
keep them on track  and lead such reform movements to their conclusion, without 
hidden agenda or  trying to make them something they are not. 

Changes in the machinery of  productive forces cause changes in society. In 
the case of the industrial union  movement the change was the huge growth of 
industrial production. In the case of  the Negro Peoples Movement it was excited 
and driven by the mechanization of  agricultural and the release of 11 
million sharecropper from the land; 5 million  black and the need to overcome any 
barriers against their entry into the post  WWII industrial expansion. This need 
in turn excited the Black Power Movement  whose demand was for inclusion into 
the  electoral machinery of our  bourgeois superstructure. 

When one strips from their mind the old  concepts of race and suspend the 
color factor for a moment, it is  easy to  see that the migration of blacks South 
to North follows the exact same   pattern of all ethnic groups. The newly 
arriving migrant or immigrants settle  into their ethnic community. At a certain 
stage of growth of their numbers the  fight for political representation takes 
place. Such was the case with the  Irish, German, English and Italian, and 
the blacks, although the blacks probably  actually had it better  than the early 
Italian immigrants. 

It is  this context that Obama election as President will be looked at. 

The  worse mistake a communist can make is try and make something what it  ain
?  t. My kids or rather young adults say, ?it is what it is.? 

Another law  of the social struggle emerges; once a social process, that is  
a change  process gripping all of society, is underway no one can stop it 
until it has run  its course. What we can do is impart our distinct character to 
it in the way of  its consciousness and understanding. 


WL.  

**************Stay up to date on the latest news - from sports scores to 
stocks and so much more. (http://aol.com?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000022)


From binesi at gvtel.com  Wed Feb  4 10:04:48 2009
From: binesi at gvtel.com (David Thorstad)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 11:04:48 -0600
Subject: [Marxism] Oscar Wilde Bookshop to close
Message-ID: <4989CAB0.4040404@gvtel.com>

I met John Lauritsen, my coauthor of /The Early Homosexual Rights 
Movement (1864-1935)/, in the original Oscar Wilde Memorial Booshop (it 
then had "Memorial" in its name) on Mercer Street in Greenwich Village. 
Craig Rodwell, the owner, warmly agreed to sell the monograph we peddled 
as a precursor to that book, after the Socialist Workers Party refused 
to publish it because it was allegedly too sympathetic to social 
democracy. Craig could be counted on to use his business to support gay 
activism, not the other way around as it is mostly today, where gay 
businesses support profit making above all. So, now the bookstore goes 
the way of radical gay activism, down the memory hole.
David

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/03/venerable-gay-bookstore-will-close/ 




From leninstombblog at googlemail.com  Wed Feb  4 10:07:44 2009
From: leninstombblog at googlemail.com (Lenin's Tomb)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 17:07:44 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] SWP Democracy Commission
In-Reply-To: <c1b.452a1fe5.36bb22ce@aol.com>
References: <c1b.452a1fe5.36bb22ce@aol.com>
Message-ID: <c17d8d380902040907n739f0faq460c91cf7276e2b8@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 4:56 PM, <Midhurst14 at aol.com> wrote:

> Who are the right-wingers you have in mind?
> Brendan Barber, who is a right winger, but largely ineffective
> If it's Derek Simpson you have in mind, then it's goodnight from me


[Apologies for over-posting]

I assumed that by the labour movement, you were talking about more than
union leaders.  The labour movement as a whole is still dominated
overwhelmingly by forces from the right, notwithstanding the fame of the
'awkward squad'.  And even they face rightward pressures from their
bureacracy and the Labour Party itself (that is why some of the left-wing
union leaders helped finish off the public sector pay revolt, for example).

As for Derek Simpson, I wouldn't classify him as a right-winger.  His
predecessor was, of course, one of the most reactionary bigots of the labour
movement, who helped defame asylum seekers, and it was a real pleasure to
see Simpson replace him.  But does that mean the left is currently in
command of the labour movement?

From binesi at gvtel.com  Wed Feb  4 10:38:01 2009
From: binesi at gvtel.com (David Thorstad)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 11:38:01 -0600
Subject: [Marxism] French government fears rise of the left
Message-ID: <4989D279.6090109@gvtel.com>

"Certainly, ministers in Paris are worried about some kind of insurrection."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7861774.stm





From sartesian at earthlink.net  Wed Feb  4 11:08:30 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 19:08:30 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Polish Workers Walkout?
References: <651867.45699.qm@web25217.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
	<op.uotpufma0opwfu@duchamp.isg.cs.tcd.ie>
Message-ID: <8AAF89F07A9548F3B34C41400AD7223B@dmsthinkpad>

I think Yann makes very important points, and the strike as it has 
explicitly opposed chauvinism and thrown the BNP out should be supported. 
That is the only way to combat "recreep" of chauvinism.

 I would add, however, that  it certainly should be about more than the 
"right to a job where you live."  It should be about the deconstruction of 
the working class that goes on during expansion and contraction-- where the 
whole world is enterprise zone, a maquilladora, a la the fantasies of Jack 
Welch.

It should be about one big European union all right, with a small e and a 
small u, that of the workers-- with continental union labor organization and 
standards of wages, protections and social benefits.

By the way, this thing about housing the workers on barges-- that is 
literally right out of Jack Welch's [former head of US General Electric] 
fantasies-- along with the 19 year old triplet dominatrixes in spike heels 
and latex.  I think in his version the factories were on barges and floated 
to wherever tax structures and wage rates were most "welcoming."  Since we 
know capital and wage-labor are opposite identities, this floating the 
workers on barges is same-same.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Yann Morvan" <ymorvan at cs.tcd.ie>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Polish Workers Walkout?


> 



From russo.matthew9 at gmail.com  Wed Feb  4 11:56:08 2009
From: russo.matthew9 at gmail.com (Matthew Russo)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 10:56:08 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Why analyze the economic crisis
Message-ID: <1b7033e60902041056m3878c112r92c1943711702f4@mail.gmail.com>

An aggregation to two separate posts - first some specifics, then the
general point, once again:

>This triggered a discussion during which I think it was Matt Russo, or
>perhaps Waistline reproducing HCK Liu's article, referring to the 1997
Asian
>crisis as a  "financial crisis."

To be clear, that was not me.  There would be no reason to refer to Liu and
other "left Keynesians" as I see them, in the context of this discussion as
I was framing it.  That even though at the point of the question of the role
of China's dollar reserves, Liu and Artesian actually coincide in agreement,
despite their radically different analytical frameworks.

>1. I don't know about Stockton California specifically, but nationally,
>mortgage default rates for immigrants were much lower than the national
>averages, with "don't ask, don't tell" mortgages [available to undocumented
>immigrants] having particularly high rates of repayment.  That may have
>changed, but I don't think we can attribute the precipitating force in the
>sub-prime collapse to immigrant mortgage delinquencies.

There are clearly huge income differences within the set of all immigrants
in the U.S.  For example, only 80 miles or so form Stockton, CA is Fremont,
CA, home to a host of highly paid Indian and Chinese immigrant homeowners,
and their default rates are (so far, but wait for it, unless Obama saves
them!) not surprisingly, relatively low.  Stockton, however is part of the
whole Central Valley complex ranging from Sacramento to Fresno that has been
the place of residence for workers priced out of the Bay Area, and a prime
Ground Zero for the mortgage collapse.  South Stockton is now a Great
Depression-style economic desert of boarded up strip malls bearing Spanish
marquees.

And in anticipation of my next point, clearly the "overproduction" of
mortgage paper corresponded to an overproduction/overaccumulation of
housing, and a caricature of "good" homebuilders versus "evil" mortgage
bankers does not at all need to follow from any analysis that seeks to
establish the relation between capitalist finance and capitalist production.

>I argued it was not at core a financial crisis, but one of overproduction,
>overaccumulation and a declining rate of return-- and not secularly, as
part
>of some overall trend, but in its immediate, momentary history.

BTW, I would hold that overproduction/overaccumulation has been both an
overall secular tendency - "chronic" -  with, obviously, fluctuations, since
the 1970's, and periodically, immediately manifest, as it is now. That
despite the appearance of enormous new "greenfield"  opportunities for the
exploitation of fresh labor-power in places like China, as production never
really regained its former postwar dynamic where it counts ultimately for
the bourgeoisie, their imperialist core countries.

China, etc. did not historically resolve the problem of structural
overproduction/overaccumulation of the imperialist core that emerged with
full force in the 1970's.   The program of Reaganism-Thatcherism is exposed
as a failure.  The chronic financial bubble blowing was always a sympton of
this failure.

>2. At core, the argument about the "overproduction of paper,"  i.e. excess
>mortgage, and asset backed securitization, as the cause of the current
>predicament is nothing but another variation on the old "speculation is the
>source of the problem"-- and creates a false, but useful separation for the
>bourgeoisie, between bad speculative capital, and good productive capital.
>This speculation argument gets trotted out every time something goes wrong
>with earning money the old fashioned way-- making other people work for
it--
>but it is no answer, and no analysis at all.

I must reluctantly - as I don't wish to be tiresome - quote the old man
here, from "The Method of Political Economy" in the Introduction to the
Grundrisse:

"The economists of the seventeenth century, e.g., always begin with the
living whole, with population, nation, state, several states, etc.; but they
always conclude by discovering through analysis a small number of
determinant, abstract, general relations such as division of labour, money,
value, etc. As soon as these individual moments had been more or less firmly
established and abstracted, there began the economic systems, which ascended
from the simple relations, such as labour, division of labour, need, exchange
value, to the level of the state, exchange between nations and the world
market. The latter is obviously the scientifically correct method. The
concrete is concrete because it is the concentration of many determinations,
hence unity of the diverse. [MR: Famous aphorism!] It appears in the process
of thinking, therefore, as a process of concentration, as a result, not as a
point of departure, even though it is the point of departure in reality and
hence also the point of departure for observation [*Anschauung*] and
conception. Along the first path the full conception was evaporated to yield
an abstract determination; along the second, the abstract determinations
lead towards a reproduction of the concrete by way of thought. In this way
Hegel fell into the illusion of conceiving the real as the product of
thought concentrating itself, probing its own depths, and unfolding itself
out of itself, by itself, whereas the method of rising from the abstract to
the concrete is only the way in which thought appropriates the concrete,
reproduces it as the concrete in the mind. But this is by no means the
process by which the concrete itself comes into being."
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1857/grundrisse/ch01.htm

IOW, the beginning point of analysis here is to relate the abstraction of
overaccumulation - only NOW since about mid-2008 become concretly manifest
in itself - to the FACT (arrrggghh!) of the financial crisis that manifested
itself EARLIER around August 2007, actually a bit earlier in the mortgage
area.  How can Marxists simply ignore with a wave of a hand the facts of
finance, facts that not only the bourgeoisie but, now, just about every
worker on the street are quite aware of.

The point of analysis to to explain what workers are concretely experiencing
in a real temporal sequence to anyone willing to listen.  How do we explain
overaccumulation as a cause of financal crisis that in turn exposes that
overaccumulation to concrete view?  We'd first have to see the possibility
that overaccumulation may be chronic and structural, how that sets up a
situation of serial financial bubble blowing from the 1980's onward, the
essence of Reaganism-Thatcherism, and how at the end of this historical
process the fact of overaccumulation has been brought to the glaring light
of day for all to see, right now.

And, finally, to link this up with the issues of the class struggle (CB's
constant point, of course), pointing to the stagnation or decline in real
wages, in an era where it is the proletariant that makes up the market for
much of capitalist production, as the root of the economic problem, whose
solution of course stand outside capitalist relations of production.

-Matt

From rfls12802 at blueyonder.co.uk  Wed Feb  4 11:56:53 2009
From: rfls12802 at blueyonder.co.uk (Paul Flewers)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 18:56:53 -0000
Subject: [Marxism] SWP Democracy Commission
In-Reply-To: <mailman.7221.1233770925.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
References: <mailman.7221.1233770925.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <004e01c986fa$58691f00$093b5d00$@co.uk>

The leadership of the Communist Party of Great Britain, reeling in the
aftermath of Khrushchev's denunciation of Stalin in 1956, facing widespread
discontent within the ranks, members leaving and a none-too-marvellous image
in the labour movement, set up a commission to investigate 'Inner-Party
Democracy'. 

The Commission duly went away, investigated things and presented its report.
The report recommended just a few minor twiddles and tweaks to the party's
modus operandi, and the leadership tried to carry on in the old familiar
way.

The leadership of the Socialist Workers Party, reeling in the aftermath of
the demise of its ganzer macher Tony Cliff and the failure of its Respect
project, facing widespread discontent within the ranks, members leaving and
a none-too-marvellous image in the labour movement, has set up a commission
to investigate inner-party democracy...

Paul F






From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Feb  4 12:47:24 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 14:47:24 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Steffie Brooks in hospice
Message-ID: <4989F0CC.50304@panix.com>

(I received this from Linda Thompson. Steffie was a subscriber to 
Marxmail and the SWP mailing list on yahoo.)

I am sorry to report that Steffie Brooks, a member of Solidarity and the 
Green Party who helped to build the Trotsky Legacy Conference and so 
many other political campaigns, is in Hospice and is not expected to 
recover. During the conference she had learned that she had cancer. That 
was a scant six months ago and her situation has deteriorated rapidly.

She can have visitors although she is in and out of consciousness and 
cannot respond to visits very well. Many East Coast comrades have been 
to visit her and Linda Lowe and Guy Miller have come in from Chicago for 
this week to visit daily.

She is at Calvary Hospital
1740 East Chester Road
Bronx, 10461

She is in room 444. Flowers and cards and messages of support would be 
appreciated I am sure. She cannot realistically take phone calls.


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Wed Feb  4 13:39:58 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 21:39:58 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Why analyze the economic crisis
References: <1b7033e60902041056m3878c112r92c1943711702f4@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3E4B6572F29045F29764B937E44C66DA@dmsthinkpad>

I don't know at what point Mr. Liu and I agree about China's dollar 
reserves, unless it's the point that China is/was/will not replace the US as 
the linchpin of the global network of capitalism; that the dollar reserves 
are not "owned" by the Chinese government but are for the most part held as 
a type of "demand deposit"  for other banks, for international trading, 
etc.; or that China really cannot use those reserves as stimuli to jump 
start its rapidly contracting economy.    Actually, I only know of one 
position Mr. Liu and I share-- and that is the first one in the list-- that 
China is not about to replace the US.

Anyway,- it was Waistline who brought Mr. Liu's analysis of 1997 as a 
financial crisis into the picture, and I forget whether or not Matt agreed 
with that characterization-- of it as a financial crisis.  I do know that 
when I said "no, it was not a financial crisis.  It was the direct result of 
overinvestment, overcapacity leading to a declining rate of return," Matt 
thought I was arguing for, and confusing, the secular trend with the 
immediate eruption.  I was not arguing about the secular trend.  That was 
not the case in 1997.  That was not the case in 2007.

We need to go back a bit.  We can go back more than a bit.  We can see the 
period from app 1945-1969 or 1970 as the "postwar salad days" with high 
rates of growth and investment in US, Europe, Japan, and higher rates of 
growth than what would follow in those countries and in Latin America. 
Higher rates of growth do not preclude, at the same time, deferred 
investment in some areas, and asset debilitation.  Still growth rates in 
profit, and overall growth 1945-1970 beat the snot out of what followed. 
And what followed was a decline and the various attempts to offset that 
decline-- through, my best description is the famous 1973 double-whammy of 
OPEC induced oil price spikes and  Pinochet type attacks on labor.  These 
things are accompanied by obvious opposing forces-- but all the opposite 
reactions, like the Portuguese revolution,  have their root in 
overproduction, the overgrowth of the means of production beyond their 
ability to return a profit quickly enough to maintain capitalist 
reproduction.

This failure is the compressed identity of the conflict between the means 
and relations of production that Marx identifies as the herald of 
revolution, and that he also identifies as the historical limit to 
capitalism.

Through OPEC, and the flushing of petrodollars into the US, the recession of 
1974-1975 became the stagflation, which was really more overproduction, 
culminating in the second OPEC price spike and the Volcker  " World Interest 
Rate War Against the World" creating the lost decade for Latin America, and 
the leveraged buy out liquidation of assets in the US.  Waistline here is 
onto something, and something big, when he calls it-- profit without wealth, 
for what Reagan/Volcker/Thatcher did was to "restore" capitalism in all its 
zombie-vitality by transferring wealth up the social ladder, up the class 
struggle-- like an arsonist transfers wealth to the owner of the real estate 
from all those suckers who make up the great pool of the insured and 
uninsured.

And where did that get us-- well once again, with reduction of asset 
investment, with real declines in wages, with wealth transferred by tax hook 
and tax reduction crook, it got us into a mildly improved rate of profit, 
and.... then more overproduction,  particularly in oil, the bellweather, the 
coal mine for which all other capital is nothing but a canary.  And then 
what followed was a war.

Certainly there is more to this part than I enumerate here-- there is the 
Plaza Accord, putting the screws to Japan, driving it to shift dramatically 
its investment to the NIEs of Asia, and from there to China in a big way. 
There was the economic dragging to ground of the fSU through the collapse in 
oil prices and military spending... Still in all this, capital does what it 
does for itself, and to itself, regardless of the consumption capacity of 
the workers, the masses, the poor.  Capital is concerned with its 
accumulation and reproduction and the limits to those are in itself-- in its 
exchange with wage-labor-- not in the wage itself, but in the relation of 
the wage in the exchange with fixed, dead, labor.

Consumption itself is a product of this success in reproduction.... so much 
so that Marx is not the partisan of the LaSallean "iron law" of subsistence 
wages.  On the contrary, Marx knows quite well that under conditions of 
capitalist expansion, which Marx argued is independent of the wage-rate, 
but dependent upon the ratio, the exchange of living to dead labor, workers 
needs expand, the reproduction of the worker becomes more expansive, 
complicated, and even expensive, and in some cases allows for the worker to 
even save a little, create a small reserve.

So let's move forward-- to the recovery after 1992-- a recovery generated 
and manifested in real increases in capital spending, technological 
improvement, labor productivity in the US; real expansion in the NIEs of 
Asia where, yes urban migration and immigration are  enduring themes, just 
like profits, and just like profits experience a flow in the salad days, and 
another flow in the 70s, and yet another flow in the 80s under the impact of 
increasing industrial investment and disruption of village economies.

We get a recovery in the rate of profit.  We get capitalism US investing in 
industry, heavy and light, in the means of transportation and 
communication/information-- trucks and telephones being the measures of this 
expansion.

In Indonesia, Malaysia, So Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, and China you get fixed 
asset accumulation supported by record FDI flows.

And we get overproduction again.  A decline in the rate of return in 
industry despite the increasing consumption in the US, in the NIEs, in China 
and Brazil.

And there's more to that story-- as this is accompanied by the dismantling, 
physically, socially of the fSU-- the liquidation of its productive capacity 
and ripping off of its "usable assets"-- that is to say a small portion of 
its industrial capability--  literally a ripping off.

Nevertheless what capitalism does there, in both recovery, and 
deconstruction it does regardless of the consumption patterns of the 
society; it does what it does based on its internal "clock,"-- it's 
mechanism, its metabolism for the aggrandizement of labor.  And that clock, 
that metabolism is simply that in order to engage, aggrandize wage-labor, to 
expand itself as capital, it must continuously expel the ratio of wage-labor 
engaged in production.   Thus the more capital exchanges itself with 
wage-labor, the relatively less it exchanges itself with wage-labor and 
consequently while value expands, the ratio of the newly accreting value to 
the existing body of value declines.    And this has nothing to do with 
consumption.

Now that gets us to 1998 and the decline in the price of oil to $10/barrel--  
which was hell on our poor oil bourgeoisie who didn't really get to enjoy 
the double-digit profit rates of the post 1992 period like other 
manufacturers given their, the oil industries', incredible capital-heavy 
investment and production ratio.

The US rate of profit durin this period shows a peak, I think around 1997, a 
drop, and then a recovery around 1999 ( I think, doing this from memory--  
don't have all my notes here in Paris), getting  at, or near, or above the 
previous peak (maybe not above, see earlier note about notes) by 2000, when 
all starts to fall down.

Come 2001 and we're in recession again.  Come 2002, oil prices have declined 
some 30% to about $20/barrel, the ROI is in the crapper, and you just know 
we're going to war again in Iraq.  And in 2003 we do, and the economy starts 
to recover.

What are the components of this recovery?   Is it increased wages?  No. 
Wages remain below their 2000-2001 level for some time.   Is the rate of 
profit improved?  It sure is. First and foremost, capital expending is 
choked off.  Fixed asset replacement rates fall below 1 as depreciation, and 
actual physical consumption of fixed assets exceeds capital expenditures and 
fixed asset accumulation.   Another part of the recovery is depreciation of 
the dollar, decreasing the cost of US exports-- and US capital exports after 
2003 begin a pretty sizeable increase-- one that by 2005 or 2006 has US in 
2nd place (ahead of Germany)  on the hit parade of exporters, China being 
numero uno with a bullet.

And a funny thing happens, capital expenditures, and fixed asset 
replacement/accumulation resumes-- modestly, but by 2006 it is clear that 
amounts will top the amounts of 2000, as the rate of expenditures ramps 
up... And where does that get us?  Right here. To another peak in the rate 
of profit.  To the petroleum industry trying to goose the golden goose with 
a staggering run up in prices-- to the run up in prices for copper, zinc, 
soybeans, iron ore, all of which drop like shares in a British bank the day 
after Lehman Bros. files for protection.

Now interesting and interestinger is the role of the banks in the US in this 
period-- or rather the role of the financial institutions as the members of 
the Federal Reserve System play only part of the role here.  But... but with 
industry not expanding after 2001-- with capital expenditures held in close 
check,  industrial, manufacturing loan activities contracts and the 
[generic] banks focus on "asset-backed securitization," debt vehicles first 
unveiled/unleashed during the financial arson period of Reagan/Bush.  That's 
where the money was, for the banks-- in the wage stream-- in attacking the 
wage stream through debt vehicles--- not in lending to industry, since 
industry wasn't ordering from that menu.

But the source of all of this is not in consumption-- it is not in 
fictitious capital-- it is not in the overproduction of paper-- and it is 
not in the inability of migrant workers to pay their mortgages-- all asset 
securitization, all capital as capital works on AGGREGATES, not the 
particulars of an individual or several individuals.

Certainly there was theft, speculation, flipping of homes, shoddy credit 
investigation, generalized pressure to lend, lend, lend with rates so low--  
and we can term all of that a house of cards-- but a house of cards doesn't 
build itself, and it does not knock itself down-- something has to move--  
either the air or the ground.

And the ground in this case that moved is that ground that always move under 
capitalism-- it is its own historical limitation, its internal conflict 
between means and relations of production.

Yes, the entire thing boils itself down to class struggle.  Economics is 
nothing but concentrated history.  But all history as Marx shows time and 
again is nothing but the expanded social relation of production.

When we point to stagnating or declining real wages we need to link that not 
with underconsumption but with the organization of the means of production 
as capital, with capital's need for profit-- that the attack on workers 
wages, living standards is not because underconsumption somehow has led 
capitalism to an abyss, so that now it must attack even less consumption in 
order to... in order to what?  We need to link it to the entire notion of 
profit-- to capitalism's need for profit... because if the problem is 
underconsumption then the nearest social democrat will absolutely agree and 
say what we need is to "tame" capital, not replace it, to augment 
consumption, to give capital a social, human, face and dimension.

And how does that get done?  By feeding capital what it must consume in 
order to reconstitute its mechanism of accumulation-- feeding bodies into 
that great furnace of consumption called war.

Bet on it.  That's where this capitalism is going, and in a hurry.  And to a 
big one.

Sorry to go on and for the sketchy presentation.  Close to the best I can do 
given the short notice and short resources.




From Waistline2 at aol.com  Wed Feb  4 14:20:03 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 16:20:03 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Why analyze the economic crisis
Message-ID: <c41.516e810b.36bb6083@aol.com>

Nevertheless what capitalism does there, in both recovery, and  
deconstruction it does regardless of the consumption patterns of the  
society; it does what it does based on its internal "clock,"-- it's  
mechanism, its metabolism for the aggrandizement of labor.  And that  clock, 
that metabolism is simply that in order to engage, aggrandize  wage-labor, to 
expand itself as capital, it must continuously expel the  ratio of wage-labor 
engaged in production.   Thus the more capital  exchanges itself with 
wage-labor, the relatively less it exchanges itself  with wage-labor and 
consequently while value expands, the ratio of the newly  accreting value to 
the existing body of value declines.     And this has nothing to do with 
consumption.

Comment

That was  not stretchy but frightening. 
 
You might have to save me a room and yes, I have half the rent.

I  forget the spectacle of the CEO of General Motors and Chrysler, testifying 
 before Congress and the American people that cutting wages will not help 
them  with wages being below 10% of total capital expended. Half of Congress 
thought  they were lying. 

The historical limit of capital is there to see for all  willing to look.
 
The falling rate of profit is absolute and not relative. Like a proletarian  
sucker, thinking he can beat the 3 card Monty man, I get happy when the value 
of  commodities momentarily fall faster than my wages, causing me to  get 
caught up in the suckers game . . .again. 
 
Then the chickens do what they do. 

Damn. 

There goes the  pension check or the better part of it. 

Advance robotics, increase in  density of dead labor is going to defeat me, 
when the bourgeoisie himself could  not hold me down. 

Marx really meant the advance of industry.    

WL. 

Yea, that overproduction of paper was kind of nice. 
 
**************Stay up to date on the latest news - from sports scores to 
stocks and so much more. (http://aol.com?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000022)


From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Feb  4 14:36:10 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 16:36:10 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Comment on my review of "Examined Life"
Message-ID: <498A0A4A.5000607@panix.com>

I wrote:

Going from the sublime to the ridiculous, we spend what seems like an 
eternity with Michael Hardt rowing a boat in a Central Park lake as he 
pontificates on Revolution. He begins by saying that the FMLN told him 
when he was in El Salvador in the 1980s that the best assistance he 
could give the revolution was to make one in the U.S. They suggested 
that he find a nearby mountain and get some guns. That?s all that?s 
needed. Having spent 5 years in New York City as a member of Committee 
in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador, a group that was in 
constant contact with the FDR, the political wing of the FMLN, I can 
assure you that no combatant would have given such advice. They were 
looking primarily for people to put pressure on the U.S. government to 
cut funding to the Salvadoran government. They also took a great deal of 
interest in Jesse Jackson?s Rainbow Campaign in 1984. But the idea that 
the FMLN would tell a bookish gringo to start guerrilla warfare is 
complete bullshit and simply makes Michael Hardt look like a fool.

full: http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2009/02/02/examined-life/

The comment:

FMLN?s suggestion to Hardt reminds one of a similar pisstaking antic 
applied by the Yanomamo tribesmen on the visiting anthropologist 
Napoleon Chagnon. Changon enquiring names of the fellow tribesmen got 
the answers like fart-breath, long-dong, hairy-pussy. He sincerely 
recorded and used them for five months.

Comment by Anarcho-Polpotist ? February 4, 2009


From Paula_cerni at msn.com  Wed Feb  4 15:06:57 2009
From: Paula_cerni at msn.com (Paula)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 14:06:57 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] it's not going to be OK
Message-ID: <BAY122-DS47BC0500121DAF489793580C30@phx.gbl>

"The economic crisis could plunge the U.S. into a long period of social instability. Our democracy is in peril; the threat of totalitarianism is real.", says Chris Hedges:

http://www.alternet.org/workplace/125192/?page=1

Paula

From neprimerimye at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Feb  4 15:40:51 2009
From: neprimerimye at yahoo.co.uk (mike pearn)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 22:40:51 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Marxism] Re Polish Workers Walkout?
In-Reply-To: <mailman.7163.1233758666.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <188311.97401.qm@web25217.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>

Yann Morvan wrote

"That's it? We're going to have to take your (quickly typed) word for it?
Thanks but we can get that from the Daily Mail or the BBC.

A few facts about Lindsey <snip>

It's about the right to a job where you live, as opposed to being shipped
around like a commodity. It's also about overturning the Viking and Laval
cases that make the job of union busters easier throughout europe.

I'd like to hear your case why that's not supportable.
In the meanwhile for each marxist turning their nose up there's two
BNPers desperate to turn the whole thing rightward.

Yann

Well yann you can read my case if you like. But first I note that I did not write about Lindsey but about the claims made, unsupported by any actual evidence, regarding Plymouth.

I also note that regardless of any statements or demands raised by the shop stewards that the men protesting at Lindsey continue to fly the butchers apron and brandish PC printed posters calling for Jobs for british Workers which is a chauvinistic and nationalist position no socialist can support in good conscience.

As for the remark you make concerning the BNP this is scar mongering. The fact is that this dispute could have developed in a Powellite direction, were it not for the lack of a Powell, but as it is can rest quite happily within the embrace of mainstream Labourism with all its history of national chauvinism and bigotry.

This goes some long way to explaining why Simpson could distance himself from the dispute, noting its illegal character, while backing the call for Jobs for British Workers that has been raised by both Brown and the Lindsey protestors. And by tailing this actually existing class consciousness those who would have had this dispute spread end up providing ideological backing to Labourism.

Frats,

Mike Pearn


      


From binesi at gvtel.com  Wed Feb  4 17:36:33 2009
From: binesi at gvtel.com (David Thorstad)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 18:36:33 -0600
Subject: [Marxism] The postman who wants to deliver the end of capitalism
Message-ID: <498A3491.3070104@gvtel.com>

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-postman-who-wants-to-deliver-the-end-of-capitalism-1545015.html 




From cdb1003 at prodigy.net  Wed Feb  4 18:25:05 2009
From: cdb1003 at prodigy.net (Charles Brown)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 17:25:05 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Small, Hot Earth-Like Planet DiscoveredSpace
Message-ID: <188983.8036.qm@web180102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Small, Hot Earth-Like Planet Discovered

Space.com

(Feb. 3) - What may be the smallest extrasolar planet, measuring less than twice the size of Earth, has been discovered orbiting a sun-like star. 
The world is far hotter than ours, however. And controversy over the size claim has heated up, too.

http://news.aol.com/article/new-planet/327842




From markalause at gmail.com  Wed Feb  4 18:40:47 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 20:40:47 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Small, Hot Earth-Like Planet DiscoveredSpace
In-Reply-To: <188983.8036.qm@web180102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <188983.8036.qm@web180102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0902041740w27e94bdft806ebf7702c8ac92@mail.gmail.com>

Charles Brown <cdb1003 at prodigy.net> wrote:
>
> (Feb. 3) - What may be the smallest extrasolar planet, measuring less than twice the size of Earth, has been discovered orbiting a sun-like star.
> The world is far hotter than ours, however. And controversy over the size claim has heated up, too.
>
> http://news.aol.com/article/new-planet/327842
>

Thanks, Charles.  Fascinating stuff.  People shouldn't miss the
"Amazing Space Images" feature on this page that includes some of the
remarkable imagery of other objects.

ML


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Wed Feb  4 19:41:34 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S Artesian)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 03:41:34 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Brown says D word
References: <E10BAF4A-455A-45EC-B355-8FCA6D6EF7C5@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <843D5B23-9F49-4E57-AA0F-585F394EF275@earthlink.net>

I said it first.



Begin forwarded message:

>
> Date: February 5, 2009 3:37:21 CEST
> To: "sartesian at earthlink.net" <sartesian at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Full Article Business
>

> http://cnnmobile.com/primary/_qP6pVn-ifapCItLVg
>

From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Wed Feb  4 21:08:08 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 20:08:08 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] The Great Anger,
 Ultra-Revolutionary Writing in France from the Atheist Priest to
 the Bonnot Gang
Message-ID: <498A6628.9060208@gmail.com>

The Great Anger, Ultra-Revolutionary Writing in France from the Atheist 
Priest to the Bonnot Gang: A collection of texts and essays edited and 
translated by Mitchell Abidor.

"Published for the first time, Mitchell Abidor presents the key writings 
of a series of revolutionaries from the late 17th-early 18th century 
priest Jean Meslier and the Enlightenment radical Baron d?Holbach, to 
the leaders of the left wing of the Great French Revolution, Jean-Paul 
Marat, Jacques H?bert, Anacharsis Cloots, Jacques Roux, Gracchus Babeuf, 
and Sylvain Mar?chal; and continuing with the tireless revolutionary 
Louis Auguste Blanqui and the voices of the Paris Commune. There follow 
the Propagandists of the Deed such as Ravachol and Emile Henry; the 
unclassifiable Zo d?Axa, and the uncompromising Albert Libertad. The 
collection continues with the philosophy of the individualist Georges 
Palante and concludes with Victor Serge, who wrote the last chapter of 
this school of anarchism and joined the Communist International. In the 
epilogue, Abidor reflects on the significance of the events of May 1968 
in Paris and their connection to the tradition."

This is an actual book published by the Marxists Internet Archive as 
part of an ongoing project to secure funds necessary to keep 
marxists.org online. The book can be ordered via our distributors at:

http://www.erythrospress.com/store/main.html

MIA volunteer Mitchell Abidor did the original translations.

Comradely,

David Walters


From Midhurst14 at aol.com  Wed Feb  4 23:17:34 2009
From: Midhurst14 at aol.com (Midhurst14 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 01:17:34 EST
Subject: [Marxism] SWP Democracy Commission
Message-ID: <d62.2aadcc6d.36bbde7e@aol.com>

Yes
Until this excellent stoppage over EU rules, the membership have lagged  
behind
This may be a new dawn
George Anthony

From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Thu Feb  5 01:18:03 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 03:18:03 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] NYT columnist warns Obama: take military option v. Iran
	off table
Message-ID: <F56631276EB74EA68DDB475814AD4E61@office1pc>

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/05/opinion/05cohen.html

February 5, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist
The Unthinkable Option 
By ROGER COHEN
TEHRAN

When it comes to Iran, the choice of metaphor is limited.

"I would never take a military option off the table," Barack Obama declared
during the campaign, a position unchanged since he became president.

"We are not taking any option off the table at all," Secretary of State
Hillary Clinton said at her Senate confirmation hearing.

As for Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, he tweaked the mantra this way:
"The military option must be kept on the table."

All three have also talked up dialogue with Iran. But the question, more
pressing since Iran fired its Islamic satellite into orbit this week,
remains: what in reality is this threat of force and what purpose does it
serve?

I've read think-tank scenarios that have the United States bombing Iran's
nuclear installations at Natanz, hitting Iranian military bases to limit the
response, imposing a naval blockade and infiltrating special forces from
Iraq or Afghanistan. After eight Bush-Cheney years, such plans exist at the
Pentagon.

To which my response is: Hang on a second.

The United States' role in the 1953 coup here that deposed the Middle East's
first democratically elected government lives in memory. Any U.S. attack
would propel 56-year-old Iranian demons into overdrive and lock in an
America-hating Islamic Republic for the next half-century.


From sabocat59 at mac.com  Thu Feb  5 06:38:02 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (Greg McDonald)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 08:38:02 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Why analyze the economic crisis
Message-ID: <17A64F06-FB26-4FF6-874E-90CA70E8C645@mac.com>

S. Artesian wrote:

<When we point to stagnating or declining real wages we need to link  
that not
with underconsumption but with the organization of the means of  
production
as capital, with capital's need for profit-- that the attack on workers
wages, living standards is not because underconsumption somehow has led
capitalism to an abyss, so that now it must attack even less  
consumption in
order to... in order to what?  We need to link it to the entire  
notion of
profit-- to capitalism's need for profit... because if the problem is
underconsumption then the nearest social democrat will absolutely  
agree and
say what we need is to "tame" capital, not replace it, to augment
consumption, to give capital a social, human, face and dimension.

And how does that get done?  By feeding capital what it must consume in
order to reconstitute its mechanism of accumulation-- feeding bodies  
into
that great furnace of consumption called war.

Bet on it.  That's where this capitalism is going, and in a hurry.   
And to a
big one.>

Ok,  so far I agree, having had the opportunity during these past few  
months to do some actual reading on Marx and economic crisis. Always,  
the driving force behind change under capitalism, is capitalism's  
need for profit. But could not underconsumption, or restricted  
consumption, as CB puts it, be a "second cut" contradiction? In other  
words, if the restricted consumption of the masses is caused by the  
exploitive extraction of surplus value during the production process,  
could not then this effect further exacerbate the original cause,  
becoming in and of itself a second order causal factor? Capitalism  
needs to make a profit to survive, and it can only realize a profit  
in the process of exchange. It has to sell its commodities on the  
market. If it cannot sell, (due mainly to overproduction but also to  
the lack of purchasing power by the workers) there is no profit to be  
made, regardless of the surplus value embedded in the commodity  
itself.  This exacerbates the original causal factor of  
overproduction, making the crisis worse.  Or am I just trying to have  
my cake and eat it too?

Greg McDonald



From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb  5 07:16:00 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 09:16:00 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] LCR rejects SWP/DSP approach
Message-ID: <498AF4A0.4080200@panix.com>

(Thank goodness the LCR rejected the counsel of Christian Picquet who 
urged a "Socialist Alliance" approach.)

 From 
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-postman-who-wants-to-deliver-the-end-of-capitalism-1545015.html

Asked if he is a "Trotskyist" (an allegiance which he has not claimed
publicly for several years), he said: "Our political logic is to take
the best of the different traditions of the working-class movement,
whether it be Trotskyism, Socialism, Communism, libertarianism,
Guevarism, or radical environmentalism."

This scattergun approach has been contested by a minority within the
LCR, distressed at seeing their political movement dissolved overnight.
Christian Picquet, the leader of the rebels, argues that M. Besancenot
should try instead to create a coalition of all the disparate parties of
the far left.

By merging the LCR in a new movement open to all "anonymous" members of
freelance radical causes, he argues, M. Besancenot is helping to
"de-politicise" public life and blurring the pure lines of ideological
allegiance: something that Nicolas Sarkozy has also been accused of.

In the best traditions of Trotskyist life, the rebellious M. Picquet has
been dismissed from the leadership role that he had held in the LCR for
two decades.


From pbond at mail.ngo.za  Thu Feb  5 07:16:00 2009
From: pbond at mail.ngo.za (Patrick Bond)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 16:16:00 +0200
Subject: [Marxism] Why analyze the economic crisis
In-Reply-To: <17A64F06-FB26-4FF6-874E-90CA70E8C645@mac.com>
References: <17A64F06-FB26-4FF6-874E-90CA70E8C645@mac.com>
Message-ID: <498AF4A0.8080702@mail.ngo.za>

Greg McDonald wrote:
> ... If it cannot sell, (due mainly to overproduction but also to  
> the lack of purchasing power by the workers) there is no profit to be  
> made...

... unless because of overaccumulation, profit is to be *temporarily* 
found in financial-speculative bubbling (the point of a paper I'm giving 
tomorrow in Joburg:
http://www.uj.ac.za/csr/Events/Seminars/ForthcomingSeminars/tabid/15441/Default.aspx 
)



From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb  5 07:46:27 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 09:46:27 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] ACLU: Obama Endorses Bush Secrecy On Torture And Rendition
Message-ID: <498AFBC3.6020803@panix.com>

(posted to LBO-Talk by Doug Henwood)

ACLU: Obama Endorses Bush Secrecy On Torture And Rendition

NEW YORK - After the British High Court ruled that evidence of British 
resident Binyam Mohamed's extraordinary rendition and torture at 
Guant?namo Bay must remain secret because of threats made by the Bush 
administration to halt intelligence sharing, the Obama administration 
told the BBC today in a written statement: "The United States thanks the 
UK government for its continued commitment to protect sensitive national 
security information and preserve the long-standing intelligence sharing 
relationship that enables both countries to protect their citizens."

The following can be attributed to Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director 
of the American Civil Liberties Union:

"Hope is flickering. The Obama administration's position is not change. 
It is more of the same. This represents a complete turn-around and 
undermining of the restoration of the rule of law. The new American 
administration shouldn't be complicit in hiding the abuses of its 
predecessors."

When the ACLU learned of the High Court's ruling earlier today, it sent 
a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton urging her to 
clarify the Obama administration's position relating to the Mohamed case 
and calling on her to reject the Bush administration's policy of using 
false claims of national security to avoid judicial review of 
controversial programs.

The ACLU's letter to Secretary of State Clinton is available online at: 
www.aclu.org/safefree/general/38660leg20090204.html

The British High Court ruling is available online at: 
www.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/judgments_guidance/mohamed-judgment4-04022009.pdf


From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb  5 07:51:34 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 09:51:34 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] The Crisis of Global Capitalism: A Talk by William I.
	Robinson
Message-ID: <498AFCF6.2080005@panix.com>

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/02/04/18568398.php


From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb  5 08:05:52 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 10:05:52 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Israel seizes ship bound for Gaza
Message-ID: <498B0050.8090206@panix.com>

NY Times, February 6, 2009
Israel Seizes Ship Bound for Gaza
By ETHAN BRONNER and ISABEL KERSHNER

JERUSALEM ? The Israeli Navy intercepted a cargo ship headed for Gaza on 
Thursday, diverting it to an Israeli port where the people aboard were 
to be questioned, the military announced.

The boat, called The Brotherhood Ship, was carrying what its organizers 
said was humanitarian aid: food, medicine, and toys.

A statement from the military said the boat, sailing under the flag of 
Togo, left Tripoli in the northern Lebanon a few days ago, made a stop 
in Cyprus, and then tried to enter Gazan waters against Israeli orders. 
The military said that when the ship?s crew was instructed on Wednesday 
not to try to reach Gaza, the crew replied that the vessel would go 
instead to El Arish in Egypt but it then changed course.

?During today?s morning hours, the cargo ship changed its bearing, and 
began heading toward the Gaza Strip, contrary to the claims made by the 
boat crew last evening,? the military statement said. ?Disregarding all 
warnings made, the cargo boat entered Gazan coastal waters.?

The statement added that Israel worried the boat could ?threaten 
security concerns? or be used to smuggle banned equipment, like weapons, 
?into or out of the Gaza Strip.? The Israeli military said humanitarian 
goods found on the boat would be sent into Gaza.

Among the nine people aboard was the former Greek Orthodox archbishop of 
Jerusalem, Monsignor Hilarion Capucci.

A reporter for Al Jazeera who was also on board spoke by telephone to 
television viewers, saying that the Israelis who took over the boat had 
pointed weapons and assaulted some of those on the ship. The connection 
to his telephone was then cut.

Israel has maintained a strict blockade of Gaza since Hamas took power 
there in a brief civil war in June 2007. In late December, Israel 
mounted a three-week military assault in Gaza that left more than 1,300 
Palestinians dead. Thirteen Israelis, including three civilians, also 
died during the offensive.

A number of boats run by activists have challenged Israel?s control of 
Gaza?s waters. Israel has let a few in and turned others back. The 
incident Thursday was the first since the war ended last month. The 
seizure of the vessel came a day after the United Nations agency that 
provides assistance to Palestinian refugees said that the Hamas police 
in Gaza had seized aid supplies intended for the needy, signaling 
increased tensions between the agency and leaders of Hamas in the 
Palestinian enclave.

The accusation was made in a statement by the United Nations Relief and 
Works Agency, which condemned the action ?in the strongest terms? and 
demanded the return of the goods.

On Tuesday afternoon, according to the statement, the police confiscated 
about 3,500 blankets and more than 400 food parcels from a warehouse at 
the Gaza City Beach Camp that were meant to help hundreds of families in 
the area. It was part of the emergency aid being distributed in the 
aftermath of the Israeli offensive in Gaza that ended on Jan. 18.

According to the statement, the incident took place after the U.N. 
agency ?refused to hand over the aid supplies to the Hamas-run Ministry 
of Social Affairs. The police subsequently broke into the warehouse and 
seized the aid by force.?

Christopher Gunness, a spokesman for the refugee agency, said it was the 
first time its supplies had been seized in such a way. ?They were armed, 
and we were not,? he said.

Ahmed al-Kurd, the minister of social affairs in the Hamas-run Gaza 
government, said he was ?very surprised and shocked? at the agency?s 
statement. The Hamas authorities had never interfered with the agency?s 
security, he said.

Peter Lerner, an Israeli Defense Ministry spokesman, said Israel was 
?aware of numerous incidents? where aid sent into Gaza, particularly 
from Jordan and Egypt, had been ,seized, ?sometimes at gunpoint.?

Israel has been allowing up to 200 truckloads of humanitarian aid a day 
into Gaza since the end of the campaign, but some relief , groups have 
been protesting that restrictions persist. Reuters reported Wednesday 
that the European Union had sent a letter to Israel complaining about 
the obstacles it had faced in the delivery of aid.

Also Wednesday, the Israeli military acknowledged that its soldiers 
fired two tank shells on Jan. 16 at the house of Izzeldin Abuelaish, a 
well-known Gaza doctor, killing three of his daughters and a niece.

The military said it concluded from an investigation that an infantry 
force had come under heavy sniper and mortar fire from a house adjacent 
to the doctor?s and identified ?suspicious figures? in the upper level 
of the doctor?s house who were ?thought to be spotters who directed the 
Hamas sniper and mortar fire.?

The doctor denied that any militants were operating from the house. The 
commander of the force gave the order to open fire, and Dr. Abuelaish?s 
family members were killed as a result. The military said that in the 
days leading up to the episode, officers had contacted the doctor and 
urged him to evacuate his home because of intense fighting in the area.

The military said that it was ?saddened by the harm caused? to the 
doctor?s family, but that under the circumstances, it considered the 
decision to fire toward the building ?reasonable.?

The doctor has long worked in Israeli hospitals and is known as a strong 
advocate of Israeli-Palestinian reconciliation, and the deaths of his 
relatives became a high-profile example of civilian casualties that 
moved many in Israel and abroad.

In a message broadcast on Israel?s Channel 2 television news on 
Wednesday, Dr. Abuelaish, speaking in Hebrew, thanked the Israelis for 
carrying out an honest investigation. ?We all make mistakes,? he said, 
adding that he hoped that such an error would never be repeated.

Taghreed El-Khodary contributed reporting from Gaza.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb  5 08:11:11 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 10:11:11 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] George Galloway interviews Richard Seymour
Message-ID: <498B018F.1090801@panix.com>

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2009/02/on-press-tv.html


From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Thu Feb  5 08:46:50 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 07:46:50 -0800
Subject: [Marxism]  LCR rejects SWP/DSP approach
Message-ID: <498B09EA.5080305@gmail.com>

On the other hand this new project could just easily head in the exact 
same direction as the rest of the "Euro-Left" has, toward "feel-good" 
social-democracy totally adapted to the new pan-European liberal 
capitalist state of things.

My problem with the "Socialist Alliances" (Louis doesn't state why he 
doesn't think them worth the effort) is that they are mechanical, not 
political, applications of the older Scottish Socialist Party experience 
and they've failed because they don't represent a socialist movement 
within a broader *movement* (as Joaquin would say) of workers toward 
social change (as the SSP did, in fact). They are not, or were not as 
the case in England and...Australia...*reflections* of what is going on 
in the class struggle itself. They are simply mini-united fronts among 
like minded, mostly small, sometimes politically irrelevant, political 
groups.

David


From cdb1003 at prodigy.net  Thu Feb  5 08:51:48 2009
From: cdb1003 at prodigy.net (Charles Brown)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 07:51:48 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Kapital-the movie
Message-ID: <705008.16158.qm@web180116.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Kapital-the movie 
 

http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/a-list/2009w05/msg00039.htm
Features ? Film

19/01/2009

Marx: the quest, the path, the destination
Alexander Kluge's nine-and-a-half hour long film of Marx's "Kapital" is not a minute too long says Helmut Merker
What is a revolutionary? The writings of Marx and Engels both use the metaphor of revolution as the "locomotive of history". Is, then, the revolutionary a standard bearer of progress, a pace setter, a frontrunner?

None of the above, because in a world ruled by a turbo "devaluation" where only the new has market value, where commodity production spirals out of control, the "train of time" is a deadly trend. Alexander Kluge instead opts for Walter Benjamin's idea of the revolution as mankind "pulling the emergency brake". We must hold up the torch of reason to the problems at hand, and the true revolutionary is therefore the one who can unite future and past, merging two times, two societies, the artist who montages stories and history. And so we come to Alexander Kluge and his art.

Kluge's monumental "News from Ideological Antiquity. Marx ? Eisenstein ? Das Kapital" is a 570-minute film available only on DVD which is based on the work of two other montage artists, James Joyce and Sergei Eisenstein. These two met in 1929 to discuss filming Marx's "Kapital" which had been written 60 years beforehand. Now, eighty years on, Alexander Kluge joins the party and takes up where Eisenstein failed, because neither Hollywood's capitalists nor Moscow's Communists were prepared to send the necessary funds his way.

Most of the film consists of involved discussions between Alexander Kluge and other Marx-savvy writers and artists. Poet and essayist Hans Magnus Enzensberger compares the soul of man with the soul of money, author Dietmar Dath explains the meaning of the hammer and sickle on the Soviet flag and, from the standpoint of the Stoics, leaps (rather than marches at an orderly pace) into industrialisation, the actress Sophie Rois makes an impassioned appeal for Medea, differentiating between additive and subtractive love, filmmaker Werner Schroeter stages a Wagner opera featuring the "rebirth of Tristan in the spirit of battleship Potemkin", philosopher Peter Sloterdijk talks about Ovid and the metamorphosis of added value, a man at the piano analyses the score of a strike song while workers and factory owners face off in an opera by Luigi Nono, the poet D?rs Gr?nbein interprets Bert Brecht's aesthetisation of the Communist manifesto in swinging oceanic
 hexameter, cultural scientist Rainer Stollmann emphasises the myriad meanings of Marx's writings as science, art, story telling, philosophy, poetry. And social theorist and philosopher Oskar Negt looks sceptical when asked whether it's possible to find the right images for all this stuff when you're less interested in pedagogical content than the encompassing theory. 

Scholarly stuff, wide and deep in scope, yet bold and playful. But even if your own study of Marx is no more than a faded memory, it is hugely enjoyable to watch and listen to these experts as their "thinking gradually deepens through talking" and to watch Kluge interject, hopping adroitly from one thought to the next, surprising his interlocutors, catching them off balance, sending them off on new trajectories. We never know how much agreement and variance is hidden in Kluge's objections. His a Socratic approach to questioning, curious, open to everything, and so wonderfully subtle that at the end always find yourself wondering whether he had been driving at a particular target all along. Alexander Kluge is a great manipulator, an industrious loom, who weaves the most far-flung observations into his system.

He is not filming "Das Kapital" but researching how one might find images to make Marx's book filmable. The quest is the way is the destination. The model for his underlying structure is Joyce's "Ulysses" where the entire history of the world is packed into a day in the life of his hero, Bloom. In Kluge's hands this becomes a collage of documentary, essayistic and fictional scenes, interviews and still photos, archive images of smoking factory chimneys, time-lapse footage of pounding machines and mountains of products, diary entries and blackboards scribbled with quotes referencing constructivism and concrete poetry. 

Coincidences, collisions. Back to back with a short film in which director Tom Tykwer stirs things up in a Berlin street, two readers struggle to recite the following sentence, slipping in and out of synch with increasing desperation: "Whenever real, corporeal man, man with his feet firmly on the solid ground, man exhaling and inhaling all the forces of nature, posits his real, objective essential powers as alien objects by his externalisation, it is not the act of positing which is the subject in this process: it is the subjectivity of objective essential powers, whose action, therefore, must also be something objective."

No sooner are we shown "how the history of industry and the established objective existence of industry are the open book of man's essential powers, the perceptibly existing human psychology" than we have the history of capitalism is explained to us as a giant extension of the fairytale about the devil with the three golden hairs ? every thing is a human being being cast under a spell. And the beginning of Mae West's film career runs parallel to the leap into industrialisation ? a form of aesthetic slapstick in which not cream pies fly through the air but ideas and concepts.

Unlike Eisenstein, who was driven to desperation by the herculean task of cutting the 29 hours of "October" into a 90-minute film version and turned to drugs into the process which left him temporarily blind, Kluge cooly sticks to his guns and his nine hours. And it's not a minute too long. 

* 

This article was originally published in Tagesspiegel on 8 January 2009.

Helmut Merker is a film critic.

 



From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb  5 08:52:38 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 10:52:38 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] LCR rejects SWP/DSP approach
In-Reply-To: <498B09EA.5080305@gmail.com>
References: <498B09EA.5080305@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <498B0B46.3090205@panix.com>

nada wrote:
> On the other hand this new project could just easily head in the exact 
> same direction as the rest of the "Euro-Left" has, toward "feel-good" 
> social-democracy totally adapted to the new pan-European liberal 
> capitalist state of things.

What's wrong with feeling good?


> My problem with the "Socialist Alliances" (Louis doesn't state why he 
> doesn't think them worth the effort) is that they are mechanical, not 
> political, applications of the older Scottish Socialist Party experience 
> and they've failed because they don't represent a socialist movement 
> within a broader *movement* (as Joaquin would say) of workers toward 
> social change (as the SSP did, in fact). 

I thought I have made this clear in the past. These socialist alliances 
were like the alliances struck between the Corleone family and their 
rivals in the beginning of the Godfather. At the first opportunity, a 
shiv would be put in the back of the rival. It is essentially a maneuver 
to promote one's sectarian interests in the guise of broad 
unity--whether or not this is the conscious intention. Like the scorpion 
tells the dying eagle, that is my nature.


From cdb1003 at prodigy.net  Thu Feb  5 08:58:25 2009
From: cdb1003 at prodigy.net (Charles Brown)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 07:58:25 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] White workers make history,
	proletarian internationalist formula
Message-ID: <729273.38097.qm@web180109.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>




From: Mark Lause 
i'm not sure how you're distinguishing between white working class
people and white voters generally. Is there a mechanism for doing
this?

ml

^^^^
CB: I'm sort of intentionally 
slurring that over.

I do hold the position that 85% of 
the population or
so are working class (wage-laborers).
But "in the final
conflict" , the working class will 
have to draw
the petit bourgeoisie to its side, 
and most of the pb will
pragmatically go with the wc.

Anyway, I think the White pb
who voted against racism ( or
as Ralph D pointed out non-racist)
were important ,too. I'm just
trying to give top billing
to the working class.



From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb  5 09:06:54 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 11:06:54 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Moscow Moves to Counter U.S. Power in Central Asia
Message-ID: <498B0E9E.3040105@panix.com>

Wall Street Journal
FEBRUARY 5, 2009

Moscow Moves to Counter U.S. Power in Central Asia
By ALAN CULLISON and YOCHI J. DREAZEN

MOSCOW -- Russia is reasserting its role in Central Asia with a Kremlin 
push to eject the U.S. from a vital air base and a Moscow-led pact to 
form an international military force to rival NATO -- two moves that 
potentially complicate the new U.S. war strategy in Afghanistan.

On Wednesday, Russia announced a financial rescue fund for a group of 
ex-Soviet allies and won their agreement to form a military rapid 
reaction force in the region that it said would match North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization standards. That came a day after Kyrgyzstan 
announced, at Russian urging, that it planned to evict the U.S. from the 
base it has used to ferry large numbers of American troops into 
Afghanistan. Russia said the base may house part of the planned new 
force instead.

The steps mark Russia's most aggressive push yet to counter a U.S. 
military presence in the region that it has long resented. They pose a 
challenge for the administration of President Barack Obama, which sees 
Afghanistan as its top foreign-policy priority and is preparing to 
double the size of the American military presence there.

The developments also underscore the difficulties for Mr. Obama as he 
seeks to build a closer relationship with Moscow. Russia is signaling 
that it will be a tough defender of its interests, especially in its 
traditional backyard of the former Soviet Union. Though its huge cash 
reserves are rapidly draining because of falling oil prices, the greater 
needs of its poorer neighbors are still giving it an opening.

"Russia would like to reassert itself in the region, and it is using the 
financial crisis as an opportunity," said Nikolai Zlobin, senior fellow 
at the World Security Institute, a Washington think tank.

Russian paratroopers are to form the core of the new military force, 
which is planned to be about 10,000 men. Russian President Dmitry 
Medvedev said the force will be ready "to rebuff military aggression," 
fight terrorism, drug trafficking and organized crime, and handle 
natural and technological disasters.

"These are going to be quite formidable units," Mr. Medvedev said. 
"According to their combat potential, they must be no weaker than 
similar forces of the North Atlantic alliance."

When Kyrgyzstan said Tuesday that it intended to shut the base to U.S. 
troops, Moscow announced that it was extending the country $2 billion in 
loans plus $150 million in financial aid. That's a tidal wave of cash 
for Kyrgyzstan, whose budget is barely more than $1 billion, and whose 
populace has been harried by electric shortages, rising food prices and 
rampant unemployment.

The Kremlin also is discussing aid packages to Armenia and Belarus, 
other former satellites hit hard by the financial crisis.

The seriousness of the Kyrygz push to close the Manas air base stunned 
Pentagon officials, who noted Bishkek had made similar threats before. 
"Frankly, we thought it was a negotiating tactic, and we were ready to 
call their bluff," said a military official. "But it's becoming clearer 
that, no kidding, they want us out."

U.S. officials now say they expect the Kyrgyz parliament to formally 
approve ending the deal this weekend, which would give the U.S. six 
months to vacate under the countries' agreement.

The loss of the Manas base would be a major blow to the escalating U.S. 
war effort in Afghanistan. In 2008, 170,000 American personnel passed 
through Manas on their way in or out of Afghanistan, along with 5,000 
tons of equipment.

"We have contingencies, and it's not fatal, but there's no way around 
the fact that this would be a real blow," said a senior Pentagon 
official. "It could also leave us more dependent on Russia, which is not 
a place we'd like to be."

The main U.S. supply route into Afghanistan runs through Pakistan, and 
militants have mounted a wave of attacks recently designed to prevent 
goods from entering Afghanistan. This week, militants demolished a key 
bridge on the route, forcing the U.S. to temporarily halt all shipments 
through Pakistan.

With Pakistan increasingly tenuous, U.S. officials have had to turn to 
Russia for help. The U.S. already ships large quantities of fuel through 
Russia, and senior military officials hope to start sending more supplies.

The Kremlin has long criticized the U.S. for maintaining bases in 
Central Asia, saying Washington initially promised a temporary move 
after the terrorist attacks of 2001.

On Wednesday Russia stressed that it supports the U.S.-led effort in 
Afghanistan, but that Washington needs to work more closely with Moscow 
and Central Asian countries.

Write to Alan Cullison at alan.cullison at wsj.com and Yochi J. Dreazen at 
yochi.dreazen at wsj.com


From cdb1003 at prodigy.net  Thu Feb  5 09:18:18 2009
From: cdb1003 at prodigy.net (Charles Brown)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 08:18:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Hundreds of Polish workers said to join UK wildcat strikes
Message-ID: <523137.93551.qm@web180101.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Hundreds of Polish workers said to join UK wildcat strikes

-
Subject: Re: [Marxism] From: Nestor Gorojovsky <nmgoro at xxxxxxxxx> 
Are we approaching a 1848? As soon as the worst part of the global slump 
recedes, things may be bound to happen in Eastern Europe. Keep an eye on 
that fragile piece in the imperialist chain.

^^^^
CB: Yes, and in Eastern Europe, they 
already know how to do socialism.



From Waistline2 at aol.com  Thu Feb  5 09:20:19 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 11:20:19 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Value, limit of feudalism, capitalism,
	Blade Runner and Machine world meet.
Message-ID: <d23.356f5740.36bc6bc3@aol.com>


Value is the amount of socially necessary labor in commodities.  Equivalent  
values is the pivot of commodity exchange. Production  capacity in the case 
of  
Detroit's Big 3, generally runs between 70%  and 80% each. 
 
20% + 20% + 20% = 60% overcapacity. 
 
(psssst. Dhey comin.  Red Coats; the robotic regime.)  
 
WL 
 

In a message dated 2/4/2009 11:51:53 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, 
__cdb1003 at prodigy.net_ (mailto:_cdb1003 at prodigy.net) _ 
(_mailto:cdb1003 at prodigy.net_ (mailto:cdb1003 at prodigy.net) )  writes: 
 
>> Perhaps we can get an understanding of the issues on this  thread  by 
imagining Waistline's totally robotized or automated  factory. 
 
As Walter Reuther said (to Ford ?) if automobile production is 100%   
robotized, then who will buy the cars produced ? This refers to a zero  
profit  
realization problem for capitalists when there is zero  consumption. If 
workers  
aren't paid anything the masses are in  absolute poverty and absolutely  
restricted 
consumption, and they can't  buy anything. So, the capitalists have  zero 
realized  profit.<<< 
 
Comment 
 
Let's place the entire labor forces producing auto's in America at  one  
million. Autoworkers did not buy 17 million vehicles  . . . a  year, in the  
American market, between 2001 - 2007. 
 
Let's examine this "visionary" machine world of Soylent Green. 
 
(Soylent Green is people!) 
 
In the world of 100% automated production, in a galaxy far, far, away,  there 
 
are no people; only classes of machines creating products, that  cannot, on 
there  own acquire a commodity form. Commodity exchange  presupposes an 
exchange 
with human labor via a division of labor; this  gives a product its commodity 
form. 
 
The machine world products are loaded and ship to another galaxy to  compete  
in the intergalactic market, with identical products produced  by various 
kinds 
of biological life forms - labor. In this relationship the  machine planets  
products are valueless and without price, but can  fetch a price form - cost, 
 
based on the "biological entities," pricing  of their products. 
 
Something is wrong. Biological world grows increasing poor, not  knowing  
that 
only relative equal amounts of value are exchangeable.  Machine world has no  
trees, gardens, lakes or Oceans 11. There are no  people to establish the 
cost 
of  reproduction on  machine world.  Nor is there a fetish attaching itself 
to  
products, because "machine  worlds" products exist in a direct relationship 
to 
the machines without a  market. There is no commodity form to fool the 
machines.  One machines  is interactive to with all machines through the 
world wide 
web. 
 
The exchange relations of "machine world" and "biological's" cannot  stand  
because no matter how the biological's price their commodities,  "machine 
world"  
undercuts their prices, faster than you can say,  "Scotty beam my ass up  
quick."  The biological's enter into a  most vicious and nasty competition;  
driven 
to lower the cost of their  products, decrease the socially necessary  
biological inputs in  commodities and then lower wages, while importing 
complex  
machinery  from the machine world to boost capacity of their productive 
forces. 
 
The machine world products are perpetually overproduced because  production  
is run 28/9. (24/7 on earth) 
 
Yet, there is never any overcapacity. 
 
There exists other machines on "machine world," designed to recycle  the  
excess products made by the other machines. Excess products are  destroyed 
and  
recycled through the system for a cost that is 20%  above, what the machines 
need  
to maintain their functionality; a  profit? The machines have no need for 
profit  but this old mathematical  relationship persists as programing, the 
function of  other machines,  12,000 years after the biological founders have 
left the 
planet. 
 
This profit is made without surplus value because their is no labor  to  
exploit, or what is the same, the modern world of  "financialization." 
 
The profits made from financialization is not really profits, but a   
recognized form of wealth.This very real wealth is digital inputs stores  in  
machines, 
able to be converted into currency with no value, due to  the  biological's 
severing the relationship between gold and money. 
 
For Marx, the source of profits is - not was, surplus value, which  acquires  
a monetary form. 
 
The 100% automated world produces no commodities, only products.  Produces  
and exchanges not value only "valueless profits" or  "valueless wealth," that 
is  
sent to them through computers as digital  inputs. 
 
In year 2000 on our earth, Ford Motor Company held a nationwide  telecast  
with all its employee's stating the next few years would be a  period of  
"profitless prosperity," exact words. I wrote about this on  Pen-L at the 
time  and 
went berserk, screaming 
 
"the robots are coming, advanced robotics, the robots are coming." 
 
Marx speaks of the historical tendency of capitalist accumulation. 
 
"The monopoly of capital becomes a fetter upon the mode of  production,  
which 
has sprung up and flourished along with, and under  it. Centralization of  
the 
means of production and socialization of  labor at last reach a point where  
they become incompatible with their  capitalist integument. Thus integument 
is  
burst asunder. The knell of  capitalist private property sounds. The  
expropriators are  expropriated." Yes, yes. How has this process worked 
itself  out? 
 
The historical limit of capitalist production is the dialectic of   
capitalism 
metabolism. This metabolizing is driven exclusively by  biological  inputs - 
labor. 
 
Scene 2 
 
What was feudalism historical limit? It was reached. Waves of  political  
revolutions sweep the earth. "The King is Dead." 
 
Then  . . . the political system of feudalism was overthrown by  new  classes 
created as a result of a revolution in the machinery of  society. For  good 
reasons the early formed proletariat rebelled  against the machine,  .  . . 
to no 
avail. 
 
We still rage against the machine. 
 
The steam engine did not bring feudalism to an end, but rather was  another  
marker, indicating the rise of a new technological regime; or  the historical 
 
limitation of feudalism; or rather the end of its  quantitative expansion as 
a  
system of production. 
 
Not as abstraction but rather as a system founded upon a historically   
specific configuration of productive forces and corresponding form of  
wealth. 
 
Feudalism is a political term derived from the word fief. 
 
Feudal society is founded on the landed property relations, limited  and  
narrow commodity production and manufacture, which passes through  distinct  
quantitative boundaries up to the marker - steam engine. 
 
The change in the form of wealth from land to gold is what really began  the  
breakup of the landed property relations. This change in the form  of wealth  
precedes the historical limit of feudalism, by a couple  hundred years, and  
blared its horn of a coming change: 
 
. . . Jacob at the Walls of Jericho. 
 
Manufacture develops intensively and extensively; then a new  qualitative  
configuration of machines - a product of the mind, are  quantitatively,  
incrementally introduced into the production process.  The Dark City shifts, 
but  no one 
can see the light. 
 
The change wave cannot yet be seen. 
 
As the pace of quantitative, incremental inputs of this new quality   
quickens, from a trot to a mad dash, manufacture, as it once expanded   
extensively and 
intensively, gives way to, shifts again and  again;  causes  reconfiguration 
of the infrastructure and creation of a new on;  now development  and 
expansion 
on a new basis - platform or new  technological regime, explodes. A  new 
technological regime or new  configuration of machinery slowly emerges into  
the 
light. 
 
Manufacture, as a distinct configuration of productive forces and a  self  
contained process, contains its own logic: has/had a metabolism. 
 
"morphology, longevity, incept date." 
 
Scene 3 
 
The machine world morphs in Los Angeles 2017 -  Blade Runner. 
 
Roy Batty a synthetic human, has escape from an off world colony,  high  
jacked a ship, made his way to earth; discovers the emotional  pain of life 
and  
death basis capital in pants and leather jacket. With  a life cycle; a 
historical  
limit, 
 
. . . . as does all productive forces 
 
and mode of productions. Roy is a productive force. 
 
The quest-ion called forth by the pre-existing answer, collapses, in  onto  
itself. 
 
It never changes: 
 
"morphology, longevity, incept date." 
 
Roy makes his way to the uppermost ribbon in the sky to meet his  maker.  
Mister Tyrel 
 
Tyrel: "I'm surprise you did not come here sooner." 
 
Roy: "Its not an easy thing to meet your maker. 
 
Tyrel: "What can he do for you?" 
 
Roy: "Can the maker repair what he makes?" 
 
Tryel: "Would you like to be modified?" 
 
Roy: "I had in mind something a little more radical." 
 
Tyrel: "What seems to be the problem?" 
 
Roy: "Death!" 
 
Tyrel: "Death?" 
 
"Well, I'm afraid that's a little out of my jurisdiction . . . you . . ." 
 
( Capital or rather Roy pleads, ) 
 
"I want more life father." 
 
Tyrell: "The facts of life. To make an alteration in the evolution of  an  
organic life system is fatal. A coding sequence cannot be revised  once it 
has  
been established." 
 
Roy: "Why Not?" 
 
Tyrell: "Because, by the second day of incubation, any cells that  have  
undergone reversion mutations give rise to revenant colonies,  like rats 
leaving  a 
sinking ship, then the ship sinks." 
 
Roy: "What about EMS recombination?" (expansion of the credit market) 
 
Tyrell: "We already tried it. Ethyl Methane Sultanate as an  alkalizing  
agent 
and a potent mutagen. It created  . . . a virus  so lethal the subject  was 
dead before he left the table." 
 
Roy; " Then a repressor protein, that blocks the operating cells." 
 
Tyrel: "It wouldn't obstruct replication, but it does give rise to an  error  
in replication, so that the newly formed DNA strands carry a  mutation and 
you've  got a virus again. 
 
But, uh, all of this is academic. You were made as well as we could  make  
you." 
 
Roy: "Not to last." 
 
Tyrell: "The light that burns twice as bright, burns half as long. And  you  
have burnt so very very bright Roy. Look at you. You're the  prodigal son. 
You're  quite a prize." 
 
Roy: "I've . . .gone questionable things." 
 
Tyrel: "Also extraordinary things. Revel in your time." 
 
Roy: "Nothing the god of bio mechanics wouldn't let you in heaven for." 
 
Scene 4 
 
Real life America: Thursday February 5, 2009 
 
a discussion of the historical limitation of capitalist production as   
consumption of living labor, is different from the wage earners consumption  
of  
congealed value in commodities. 
 
All consumption is not created equal. Only capital endows capital  only,  
with 
the inalienable right to life and the pursuit of happiness. 
 
Consumption by the masses properly fits within "the mode of  distribution."  
The mode of distribution of labor, as the production of  commodities, is the  
domain overseen by the gods of capital. 
 
One can only distribute that which has already been produced,  (outside  
nature's spontaneous bounty). 
 
The mode of distribution corresponds to/expresses the fact of property,  as  
it determines on what basis that, which has been produced  . .  . will be  
distributed. 
 
Capital must absorb wage labor, metabolize it as the creation of an   
expanding value, or rather ever increasing mass of commodities; whose value  
can  only 
be again metabolized and realized through the cut throat  world of  
competition. This in turn drives capital to lower the cost of  labor ability, 
or  the 
paying cost of socially necessary means of life  faster, than the falling  
cost of 
labor ability. This allows a  momentary increase in the amount of labors  
hired, which drives the  process to the inevitable and inexorable cycle of  
decreasing value  inputs. 
 
Momentary up ticks - blurps across the computer screen, . . . increase  of  
the mass of workers, whose total mass is a lower quantity of value  expressed 
as  
wages as a ratio of what is produced. 
 
Capital is a vampire. 
 
(Hide the women, children and temporary workers 30% of the workforce  and  
rising.) 
 
The cycles impact on consumption is good discussions because the  working  
workers must lose their ability to consume. Feast for some,  starvation for  
others, its all the same to the three card monty man. 
 
In the battle between the stomach and the head the stomach is going to  win.  
We have to inform the head. The workers do not lose their ability  to consume 
 
because they lose their ability to consume. Operating  like/as a blind law of 
 
nature, birthed unto a world wide restricted  consumption rooted in scarcity 
and  dwarfish pigmy productive forces,  capital converted and metabolizes 
all, 
causing  scarcity to be based in  abundance. 
 
60% overcapacity with Detroit's Big Three, might be factual, but not  the  
truth. The truth of the fact is world automotive capacity against  what it 
takes  
for reproduction on an expanding scale. 
 
The way out of all crisis of capital, without exception is destruction  of  
productive forces; the bleeding ones and the non-bleeding ones. 
 
The next generation of plants and vehicles is not machine world. 
 
"I had in mind something a little more radical." 
 
Another drop below the reproduction cost of another segment of the  world  
proletariat. 
 
Having no seat when the music stop is a bitch. 
 

WL. 
 
 
**************Stay up to date on the latest news - from sports scores to 
stocks and so much more. (http://aol.com?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000022)


From christopher.hutch at gmail.com  Thu Feb  5 09:46:54 2009
From: christopher.hutch at gmail.com (Christopher Hutchinson)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 11:46:54 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] General Strike Comics: revolutionary art history,
	Obey Plagarist 	Shepard Fairey a Critique by Artist Mark Vallen
Message-ID: <c81bf1a60902050846v1d67e3e8o7452526fd735b7c@mail.gmail.com>

Since I'm having issues loading images on to General Strike I am posting
this interesting bit of writing on the art work of self-proclaimed
"guerrilla street artist" Shepard Fairey.  Fairey recently created the
iconic "HOPE" poster for the Obama campaign.  Little did many folks realize
how deep his betrayal of the working class runs.  Obama aside, Mark Vallen,
who wrote the following article clearly documents how Fairey absconds with
images from art history and working class posters to print on clothing and
make huge profits.
"Fairey has developed a successful career through expropriating and
recontextualizing the artworks of others, which in and of itself does not
make for bad art. Pop artist Roy Lichtenstein based his paintings on the
world of American comic strips and advertising imagery, but one was always
aware that Lichtenstein was taking his images from comic books; that was
after all the point, to examine the blas? and artificial in modern American
commercial culture. When Lichtenstein painted Look Mickey, a 1961 oil on
canvas portrait of Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck, everyone was cognizant of
the artist's source material - they were in on the joke. By contrast, Fairey
simply filches artworks and hopes that no one notices - the joke is on you."

http://www.generalstrikecomics.com/2009/02/05/obey-plagiarist-shepard-fairey-a-critique-by-artist-mark-vallen/

keep well,

christopher

From elishastephens at hotmail.com  Thu Feb  5 09:57:52 2009
From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 08:57:52 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Why we must march on March 21: Letter from the ANSWER
	Coalition
Message-ID: <COL112-W81D549911FD9D5E9E6916ED7C00@phx.gbl>


I am writing you as one of the endorsers for the upcoming March on the Pentagon that will take place on Saturday March 21. Buses and car caravans are coming from all over the country.

This is indeed a critical moment for the large-scale anti-war movement. All of us who are mobilizing for the March on the Pentagon and who have endorsed this action are making a significant political decision. The question before the progressive movement is paramount: stay in the streets and build a progressive movement from below or move instead in a different direction. This demonstration against imperial war and occupation is different from all previous anti-war demonstrations that were organized in response to the invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001 and the full scale assault on Iraq that began on March 19, 2003.

Each of the prior mass actions opposing war and occupation took place while Bush was in office. Bush, the despised war criminal, became synonymous with Empire and with the imperial invasion and bombing of Iraq, Afghanistan, the endless assault against the people of Palestine, and other brazen aggressions -- all carried out under the banner slogan of the ?War on Terror.?

And when Bush was air-lifted out of Washington DC on a Presidential helicopter on January 20, 2009, the two million people assembled along the Inaugural Parade Route and the National Mall let out an amazing, emotion-drenched expression of celebration. They cheered and screamed, clapped, grabbed and hugged their partners and children. It felt like the awakening from a terrible nightmare. Bush was gone at last!

Moments before Bush?s helicopter headed for the horizon, Barack Obama took the oath of office and the celebration continued.  Since racism has been such a dominant feature of this society for over four centuries -- the election of the first African-American president was a historical moment that was steeped in symbolism and meaning for millions of people.

Without discounting the jubilation over Bush?s departure, however, we in the anti-war and social justice movement are acting to build mass action on the 6th anniversary of the Iraq invasion because the nightmare of war and occupation has not ended for the people of Iraq or Afghanistan or Palestine. Nor has it ended for the people of the United States who are forced to spend $1 trillion this year, and every year, on war expenditures while millions of families are losing their homes and jobs.

150,000 US troops and another 200,000 private contractors (mercenaries) still occupy Iraq. Robert Gates, Bush?s Secretary of Defense who was retained by the incoming Obama Administration as Pentagon chief, has promised that the US troop levels in Afghanistan will double in the coming year. Both he and Vice-President Joseph Biden are also promising an increase in casualties in the coming year. For the Palestinian people the nightmare of US -funded occupation has created thousands of fresh graves killed by US-supplied F-16 Fighter jets, Hellfire Missiles and attack helicopters.

We, all of us who are endorsers of the March 21 mass action, have rejected the argument made by some in the peace movement that we shouldn't be in the streets right now because we have to give the new Administration a chance ?to do the right thing.? Frankly, that is an infuriating argument.  Are the military contractors like Lockheed-Martin, Boeing and Halliburton quietly waiting for the President to do the ?right thing? from their point of view?  Are the biggest banks and Oil giants like Exxon-Mobil waiting, with arms folded to see how policy is shaped in the new Administration? Are the architects of an expanding war in Afghanistan ?waiting? to see the outcome of the debate? Are the advocates of Israeli aggression ?keeping quiet? so that they don?t step on the toes of the new White House/State Department team? Far from waiting to see the outcome, the forces of militarism and corporate exploitation are working at full throttle to shape the direction of the country in the coming years.

The progressive movement must step up the pressure, not step back. It must also recognize that while Bush became synonymous with militarism and war, these are dominant institutions in our society and not simply the reflection of policies associated with this or that elected official. Both the Republican and Democratic Parties have embraced and promoted these same institutions.

Barack Obama and the other candidates for the Democratic nomination were asked five days before the South Carolina Primary if they thought they would have received the endorsement of Dr. Martin Luther King, if he were alive today. Barack Obama, when he was running for office as a candidate promising change, responded to that question with the following comment:

?I don't think Dr. King would endorse any of us. I think what he would call upon the American people to do is to hold us accountable?I believe change does not happen from the top down, it happens from the bottom up. Dr. King understood that. It was those women who were willing to walk instead of ride the bus. It was union workers who were willing to take on violence and intimidation to get the right to organize. It was women who decided "I'm as smart as my husband; I better get the right to vote." Them arguing, mobilizing, agitating, and ultimately forcing elected officials to be accountable. I think that's the key.?

Those words can be written off as appealing campaign rhetoric or they can be put into practice in the critical months ahead. For our part, we know that change comes from the pressure of the mobilized people. That's where real power comes from and that is the only antidote to the entrenched power of the Military-Industrial Complex, which connects the banks, corporations, and the Pentagon war machine. Dr. King didn't stay out of the streets because a Democrat was in the White House. Nor was the 1964 Civil Rights Act or the 1965 Voting Rights Act passed into law because of the beneficence of politicians. As then-candidate Obama correctly pointed out at the South Carolina debate, it was the ?arguing, mobilizing and agitating? that became the ?key? to change.

The March 21 March on the Pentagon is significant because it signals a determination by the progressive movement to stay in the streets, to expand the reach of the movement to draw in ever wider sectors of society and to make the compelling argument about the inter-connectedness of world politics and U.S. foreign policy with the badly needed struggle for economic and social justice at a moment of growing unemployment, foreclosures and evictions, and deepening poverty.

This movement can and must grow. The decision by you and nearly 1,300 others to endorse the upcoming March on the Pentagon was so important because it tells everyone ?keep your marching shoes on.? It says to the people of the world that the ?we the people? of the United States can be partners in the struggle against an Empire that speaks in our name but not with our consent.

You have taken an important step with your endorsement.

I am also appealing to you and to all endorsers to take a very practical second step that can make a very significant contribution for the upcoming national demonstration.

We are encouraging all endorsers to make a vitally needed financial donation to help cover the huge expenses associated with a National March on the Pentagon. Volunteers are working hard passing out leaflets, putting up posters, doing phone banking and getting people to buy their bus tickets.

But we also urgently need to raise tens of thousands of dollars right away to help cover the expenses.

We are suggesting that each endorser contribute at least $100 to help make the demonstration the success it needs to be. We have created a special easy to use click through for March 21 Endorsers to make a tax-deductible donation. Click this link to donate. (http://www.pentagonmarch.org)

It is the leadership, sacrifice and commitment made by you and the other endorsers that will make the difference in helping the peace and social justice movement move forward, expand and grow in this next critical chapter in U.S. politics. Again, take a moment and make your donation now by clicking here.

Sincerely,

Brian Becker

National Coordinator, ANSWER Coalition 

_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live?: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect. 
http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t2_allup_howitworks_022009

From elishastephens at hotmail.com  Thu Feb  5 10:05:22 2009
From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 09:05:22 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] =?windows-1252?q?_Fidel=3A_Contradictions_Between_Obama?=
 =?windows-1252?q?=92s_Politics_and_Ethics?=
Message-ID: <COL112-W28F614FF3B0DD224DEA70CD7C00@phx.gbl>


Somebody has to do it in Walter's absence ;-)

A few days ago I referred to some of Obama?s ideas which point to his role in a system that denies every principle of justice.

Some throw their hands up in horror if anything is said to criticize the important personality, even if it is done with decency and respect. This is usually accompanied by subtle and not so subtle darts from those with the means to throw and transform them into the elements of media terror imposed on the peoples to sustain the unsustainable.

Every criticism I make is always construed as an attack, an accusation and other similar qualifiers reflecting callousness and discourtesy towards the person involved.

This time I?d rather address some questions of many that could be raised and that the new President of the United States should answer.

The following for example:

Whether or not he renounces his prerogative as President of the United States --that his predecessors with few exceptions exercised as a right per se-- to order the assassination of a foreign political adversary usually coming from an underdeveloped country?

By any chance, has any of his many assistants ever informed him of the sinister actions carried out by former presidents from the days of Eisenhower through the years 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, and 1967 against Cuba, including the mercenary Bay of Pigs [Giron] invasion, the terror campaigns, the introduction to our territory of a great amount of weapons and ammunitions, and other similar actions?

It is not my intention to blame the current President of the United States, Barack Obama, for actions conducted by former presidents when he had not been born or when he was just a 6-years-old boy born in Hawaii to a black Moslem Kenyan fathers and a white Christian American mother. On the contrary, this is an exceptional merit of the U.S. society and I am the first to admit it.

Is President Obama aware that for decades our country was the victim of deliberately introduced viruses and bacteria carrying diseases and plagues which affected people, animals and plants? Does he know that some of them like the Hemorrhagic Dengue Fever later became a scourge that took the lives of thousands of children in Latin America and that other plagues impinge on the economy of the peoples of the Caribbean and the rest of the continent as collateral damages that have yet to be removed?

Does he know that several politically submissive Latin American countries, which are today embarrassed by all the damages they caused, also took part in such terrorist and economically harmful actions?

Why is our country the only one in the world enduring the imposition of a disrupting Cuban Adjustment Act which promotes trafficking in persons and other events that take the lives of people, mostly women and children?

Was it fair to impose on our people an economic blockade lasting almost 50 years?

Was it right to arbitrarily demand from the world to accept the extraterritorial application of this economic blockade which can only bring hunger and shortages to the people?

The United States cannot meet its vital needs without extracting large mineral resources from a great number of countries often limited in their exports of them by the intermediate process of refining. In general, when it is convenient to the interests of the empire, these products are traded by big transnational companies operating with Yankee capital.

Will that country renounce such privileges?

Would that renunciation be compatible with the developed capitalist system?

When Mr. Obama promises to make large investments to be self-reliant in oil, despite the fact that his country is today the largest market in the world, what could the future be of those countries whose main revenues come from exporting that energy as many of them lack any other significant source of income?

After the crisis, once the competition and the fight over the markets and sources of employment is unleashed again, as it is usually the case among those who are better off and more efficient in the monopoly of that technology with sophisticated means of production, what possibilities will be left to the not developed countries dreaming of industrialization?

The efficiency of the new vehicles manufactured by the auto industry notwithstanding, will they use the procedure demanded by the ecology to protect Humanity from the increasing deterioration of the climate?

Will the blind philosophy of the market be able to replace that which only rationality could promote?

Obama promises to mint enormous amounts of money to foster the quest for technologies that can multiply the production of energy whose absence would paralyze modern societies.

He includes the nuclear power plants among the sources of energy he promises to hastily develop. These are already opposed by a high number of people due to the high risks of accidents with disastrous consequences for life, the atmosphere and human food. It is absolutely impossible to prevent the occurrence of some of these accidents.

Modern industry has already contaminated all the seas on the planet with the release of toxins, even without such accidental disasters.

Can the conciliation of such contradictory and antagonistic interests be rightly promised without transgressing ethics?

The U.S. House of Representatives with a Democratic majority launched the extremely protectionist slogan of ?buy US goods?, to please the unions that supported his campaign. This tramples on a basic principle of the World Trade Organization, since every nation in the world, be they big or small, dream of their development based on trading goods and services; however, only the big and rich among them have the privilege to survive to realize such dream.

The Republicans in the United States, discredited by the actions of the reckless Bush administration, soon reacted against the measures taken by Obama to please his allies in the unions. Thus is wasted the credit given by the voters to the new President of the United States.

As an old politician and fighter I commit no sin by modestly exposing these ideas.

As hundreds of news from the political, scientific and technological circles are published every day, many questions could be raised for which there are not easy answers.

Fidel Castro Ruz

February 4, 2009

_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live?: Keep your life in sync. 
http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t1_allup_howitworks_022009

From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb  5 10:21:36 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 12:21:36 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Moscow, Tehran force the US's hand
Message-ID: <498B2020.5010104@panix.com>

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/KB06Ag02.html
Central Asia
Feb 6, 2009
	
Moscow, Tehran force the US's hand
By M K Bhadrakumar

It may seem there could be nothing in common between the blowing up of a 
bridge in the Khyber, the usage of an air base nestling in the foothills 
of the Pamirs and the launch of a 60-pound (37.2 kilogram) satellite 
into the night sky that will circle the Earth 14 times a day.

But band them together and they trigger the political and diplomatic 
equivalent of what is known in the game of chess as zwischenzug, which 
means an intermediate move that improves a player's position.

Persians, who invented chess, would have mastery over zwischenzug.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hassan Qashqavi said in Tehran on 
Wednesday, "Iran has no plans to stop its nuclear activity. At its 
forthcoming meeting, the 'Iran Six' should draw up a logical approach 
and accept the fact that Iran is a nuclear state."

The Taliban don't play chess

It is unlikely the Taliban factored Iran's imminent zwischenzug when 
they blew up the 30-meter iron bridge in the Khyber Pass 24 kilometers 
west of Peshawar in northwest Pakistan on Monday, which halted the 
supplies for North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) troops in 
Afghanistan. But the disruption of traffic once again exposed the 
vulnerability of the main NATO supply route and focused attention on Tehran.

This is forcing NATO into a major policy shift. NATO's top military 
commander in Afghanistan, General John Craddock, admitted that the 
alliance would not oppose individual member nations making deals with 
Iran to supply their forces in Afghanistan. To quote Craddock, a 
four-star American general who is also NATO's supreme allied commander, 
"Those would be national decisions. Nations should act in a manner that 
is consistent with their national interest and with their ability to 
resupply their forces. I think it is purely up to them."

Craddock was transferring rapidly to the operational plane what the 
alliance's secretary general Jaap de Hoop Scheffer had said only a week 
ago that NATO member countries, including the United States, should 
engage Iran to combat the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Scheffer wouldn't have spoken without Washington's nod. Craddock 
underscored it. NATO is keen to use the new highway built by the Indian 
government from central Afghanistan to the Iranian border at Zaranj, 
which would allow access to Iran's deep-sea Persian Gulf port at 
Chabahar. The road is largely unused. The Indians completed work on the 
highway hardly a fortnight ago.

NATO is scrambling. It must somehow reduce dependence on Pakistani 
supply routes, which are currently used for ferrying about 80% of 
supplies. The irony cannot be lost on onlookers. NATO seeks an Iranian 
route when Tehran is demanding a US troop pullout from Afghanistan.

Last Thursday, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki remarked that 
Iran had paid attention to the plans of US President Barack Obama's 
administration to withdraw US troops from Iraq and "we believe this 
should be extended to Afghanistan as well".

The irony deepens insofar as a fortnight ago US Secretary of Defense 
Robert Gates in his first congressional testimony in the new 
administration leveled allegations about increased Iranian 
"interference" and doublespeak in Afghanistan, and implied that Tehran 
was fueling the insurgency.

Russia's zwischenzug

The heart of the matter is that the US's efforts to open supply routes 
from the north across the Amu Darya have got caught up in the great game 
in Central Asia. American spokesmen blithely claimed Russia and the 
Central Asian states were providing supply routes. But the geopolitics 
do not bear that out.

Kyrgyzstan President Kurmanbek Bakiyev dropped a bombshell on Tuesday by 
demanding the closure of the US military base in Manas, which is used 
for ferrying supplies for Afghanistan. He said this after talks with 
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, during which Moscow pledged to 
Bishkek that it was writing off $180 million debt and would also provide 
Kyrgyzstan with a $2 billion soft loan and an outright grant of $150 
million.

NATO's envoy to Central Asia, Robert Simmons, rushed to Bishkek in a 
last-ditch attempt to stall the Kyrgyz move, but only to regret the 
development and admit that NATO's Afghan operations would be adversely 
affected. Washington still hopes to salvage the situation, but that 
involves taking Moscow's help.

Moscow is willing, as always - provided the US is prepared to shelve its 
untimely geopolitical agenda to broaden and deepen its (and NATO's) 
strategic presence in Central Asia on the pretext of developing new 
supply routes for Afghanistan. Plainly put, Moscow feels irritated about 
Washington's abrasive diplomacy in Central Asia in recent weeks.

The US signed an agreement with Kazakhstan, Russia's key ally, offering 
to procure "a significant part" of its supplies for Afghanistan from 
that country. and in turn is pressuring it to make troop deployments in 
Afghanistan. Conceivably, Moscow (and Beijing) view with disquiet the US 
move to court their key Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and 
Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) ally into the Western 
strategic orbit. Conceivably, Moscow's zwischenzug to evict the US 
military from Kyrgyzstan would enjoy tacit Chinese encouragement as well.

Nyet to selective engagement

Washington prefers "selective engagement" without addressing the 
underlying factors that caused the chill in relations. The Kremlin 
remains cautiously optimistic that Obama may address relations from a 
fresh perspective. The mood is reflected in a pithy comment by former 
Russian president Mikhail Gorbachev that "there are grounds for 
optimism, so far".

But an underlying sense of exasperation is visible. As a Moscow 
commentator put it, the George W Bush era may be over, but the 
"consequences are still there"; Obama might have new ideas, but the "old 
wire-pullers" are still there in the establishment in key positions; 
and, therefore, Obama might need "years rather than months to shape a 
new foreign policy".

So, Moscow resorted to zwischenzug. Last Saturday, the influential 
Moscow paper Nezavisimaya Gazeta reported that Russia proposed to reopen 
the key Soviet air base of Bombora on the Black Sea coast in Abkhazia. 
On Tuesday, Russia signed an agreement with Belarus setting up an 
integrated air defense system. On Wednesday, Medvedev used the CSTO 
forum to reiterate he was open to cooperation with the US in the fight 
against terrorism in Afghanistan.

Again, in related comments on Wednesday, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister 
Grigory Karasin said, "We hope that we and the United States will hold 
special and professional talks on this issue [of transit routes to 
Afghanistan] in the near future. We will see how effectively we can 
cooperate ... The US, Central Asia, China - we are all interested in a 
successful anti-terrorism operation in Afghanistan."

Karasin assured that the US's eviction from Manas "would not prove an 
obstruction". He said, "We [Russia] hope that we and the United States 
will hold special and professional talks on the issue in the near 
future. We will see how effectively we can cooperate."

In sum, the ball is in Obama's court. The big question is whether he can 
bulldoze the hardliners and jettison the heavy baggage of geopolitics 
that his faltering Afghan war is needlessly carrying.

Meanwhile, the shadow of US-Russian relations falls on the Hindu Kush. 
The Russian media reported that a high-level Afghan military delegation 
is expected in Moscow in the "near future". With a growing possibility 
that Obama may withdraw support for Afghan President Hamid Karzai, 
Moscow will be weighing its options.

The US is perched on a slippery slope in Afghanistan. The Taliban 
resurgence continues and the security situation is deteriorating, but 
NATO is unable to increase its force level or evolve an effective 
strategy. NATO supply lines have come under threat, but alternate routes 
are yet to be negotiated. The US's rift with the Karzai regime is 
widening, but a replacement is never easy to be catapulted into power in 
Kabul. Again, Washington should pressure Islamabad, but the situation in 
Pakistan is far too fragile to take any greater pressure.

It is against this complex backdrop that Iran's satellite took off into 
the star-studded night sky on Monday. Named Hope, its launch has a 
multiplier effect on geopolitics. Warning bells are ringing in Western 
capitals that any expectation of Tehran lowering its guard is misplaced. 
The launch can be seen as a technological feat, which it indeed is, but 
Hope also gives a hard message about Iran's military capability.

Experts estimate that the two-stage rocket used for its launch could 
easily carry a small warhead to a target 2,500 kilometers away. It may 
not be an inter-continental ballistic missile, but southern Europe comes 
within its range, as indeed the whole of Israel. Simply put, Iran has in 
hand a credible deterrent against a US-Israeli military attack.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs described the launch as of 
"acute concern to this administration". German Foreign Minister 
Frank-Walter Steinmeir said after his first meeting with US Secretary of 
State Hillary Clinton, "We want to be helpful in making sure that the 
outstretched hand of President Obama is a strong hand." No doubt, these 
are strong words.

But an unmatchable German word is more to the point - zugzwang. It 
literally means "compelled to move". That is, a situation develops on 
the chessboard when any move a player makes can only weaken his 
position, but he is nonetheless compelled to make his move.

It may be far-fetched to say that Moscow and Tehran coordinated their 
respective zwischenzug, but certainly both keenly await Washington's 
zugzwang.

Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign 
Service. His assignments included the Soviet Union, South Korea, Sri 
Lanka, Germany, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait and Turkey.


From Waistline2 at aol.com  Thu Feb  5 10:56:03 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 12:56:03 EST
Subject: [Marxism]
	=?windows-1252?q?Fidel=3A_Contradictions_Between_Obama_?=
	=?windows-1252?q?=3D=3Fwin=2E=2E=2E?=
Message-ID: <d11.44818020.36bc8233@aol.com>

>> As an old politician and fighter I commit no sin by modestly  exposing 
these ideas.
 
As hundreds of news from the political, scientific and technological  circles 
are published every day, many questions could be raised for which there  are 
not easy answers.
 
Fidel Castro Ruz <<
 
February 4, 2009
 
 
Comment
 
As one who voted for Obama, I find absolutely nothing in the least bit  
offense and discourteous in any aspect of the entire above statement. 
 
In fact the embargo of "the" government, should have been lifted  already. 
 
I have reasons to believe American policy is undergoing another shift,  not 
withstanding the fact that our government has no permanent friends just  
permanent interest. This might provide a bit of space for a huge segment of  
Americans, with a sense of decency and fair play, to make an impact on our own  
government's policy. 
 
I am deeply aware that what the American people throw away, even right now  
with the country sinking deeper and deeper into another crisis of capital, is  
enough to feed tiny Cuba and several other countries perpetually, although 
this  is not to imply or suggest one is asking for anything other than basic 
human  decency. 
 
In my mind "the government" - my government, always have had a certain air  
of chauvinism and contempt for Cuba - a former society of slave  holders, 
because she dared insist on the right to control her own  destiny and write the 
agenda for her own citizens.  
 
If left to many of us, who push day in and day out, trying to make a  
difference, policy in respects to tiny Cuba would be changed immediately. 
 
"It is what It is." 
 
Until President Obama shows different there is no need to believe he is any  
different from any other President, whose imperial lust for the most naked and 
 raw capitalist policy shames everything decent and democratic in our 
country. 
 
 
WL.  

**************Stay up to date on the latest news - from sports scores to 
stocks and so much more. (http://aol.com?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000022)


From spalmer999 at yahoo.com  Thu Feb  5 11:15:26 2009
From: spalmer999 at yahoo.com (Steve Palmer)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 10:15:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Treasury overpaid $78bn for bank stocks
Message-ID: <306219.10649.qm@web82607.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Feb 5, 1:03 PM EST

Watchdog: Treasury overpaid for bank stocks

By JIM KUHNHENN
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The federal government overpaid for stocks and other assets in attempting to help financial institutions last year, a government watchdog said Thursday, taking further issue with the beleaguered $700 billion rescue program.

Elizabeth Warren, chairwoman of the Congressional Oversight Panel for the bailout funds, told the Senate Banking Committee on Thursday that Treasury in 2008 paid $254 billion and received assets worth about $176 billion.

The figures were reached by extrapolating the results of a study of 10 government transactions, comparing the price paid by Treasury and the value of the asset at the time of purchase. Warren did not present details of the transactions the panel analyzed. A full report will be released Friday.

In a bright spot for the rescue program, however, banks that received capital infusions from Treasury have already paid $271 million in dividends to the federal government. A Treasury official said Thursday that banks are expected to pay more than $1.5 billion in dividends by the end of this month. Among them is Wells Fargo, which received a $25 billion infusion. The bank announced this week it would pay Treasury $371 million in dividends.

Still, lawmakers and watchdog groups continued to express frustration with the implementation of the rescue plan, known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program. Congress approved the plan last fall, but members of both parties criticized spending decisions by the Bush administration and former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.

The misgivings come as new Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is preparing to place the Obama administration's imprint on the program with a sweeping new framework for helping banks, loosening credit and helping reduce foreclosures. Geithner plans to unveil the changes next week.

"The plan will strengthen transparency and accountability measures so that taxpayers know where and how their money is being spent and whether it's achieving real results," said Treasury spokesman Isaac Baker.

Referring to overpayment on assets, Warren said Treasury has failed to specify its goals and methods in helping more than 300 institutions.

"There may be good policy reasons for overpaying, but without a clearly delineated reason we can't know that," Warren said.

Senate Banking chairman Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., said the overpayment was sure to "raise eyebrows."

"I can understand some gap," he said. "No one is expecting perfection between the price you pay and what you think you're getting. But that's a pretty large disparity."


      


From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb  5 11:19:14 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 13:19:14 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Nicholas De Genova tells it like it is
Message-ID: <498B2DA2.5070202@panix.com>

(De Genova is a Columbia University professor who came under intense 
pressure from the rightwing when he spoke at a rally just before the 
invasion of Iraq calling for US troops to suffer the same fate that they 
suffered in Mogadishu. I don't know if he ever got tenure, but he still 
sticks his neck out. If 1/100th of the professors in the U.S. had his 
guts, the country would be in much better shape politically.)

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2009/02/04/letters-editor
To the Editor:

The article ?Coalition Rallies For Gaza,? published Jan. 28, completely 
misconstrued the context of my remarks about Columbia?s President, Lee 
Bollinger. My comments about Bollinger had nothing whatsoever to do with 
?the University?s role during the attacks? in Gaza, nor with Bollinger?s 
presumed failure to condemn them. It would be rather na?ve to expect the 
president of an elite U.S. university to do such an honorable thing as 
condemn Israel?s unrelenting holocaust against Palestinians, and it 
certainly makes little sense to demand that an academic administrator 
resign for his perfectly predictable silence regarding such obscene 
brutality.

What I did refer to was Bollinger?s aggressive response in 2002 to the 
faculty-initiated petition for divestment of the University?s funds from 
businesses involved with the Israeli military. Asserting his official 
role as University President, Bollinger disparaged the analogy between 
Israel?s oppression of the Palestinian people and South African 
apartheid as ?grotesque? and ?offensive.? Thus, on that occasion, 
Bollinger established himself publicly as an apologist for the state of 
Israel?s war crimes and genocide. Indeed, Bollinger thereby positioned 
himself far to the right of even former U.S. President Jimmy Carter and 
CBS?s 60 Minutes, who have frankly characterized Israel?s systematic 
confinement, degradation, and deprivation of the vast majority of the 
Palestinian people as, precisely, apartheid.

For his truly flagrant abuse of the power of his office, and the 
coercive and silencing force of intimidation he thereby exerted against 
dissent on this campus, as well as his numerous subsequent 
transgressions against free speech?for this disgraceful legacy of 
offenses against our faculty and students?Bollinger should be called on 
to resign. At minimum, he ought to apologize to the Columbia community 
and retract his craven apologetics for Israeli apartheid. Until then, 
Bollinger has truly earned the title ?President Grotesque.?

Nicholas De Genova, Assistant Professor, Department of Anthropology
Jan. 28, 2009


From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb  5 11:21:41 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 13:21:41 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Dennis Perrin reviews Richard Seymour book
Message-ID: <498B2E35.7030006@panix.com>

http://dennisperrin.blogspot.com/2009/02/slaughter-with-smile.html


From bobwood1 at btinternet.com  Thu Feb  5 11:24:25 2009
From: bobwood1 at btinternet.com (Bob Wood)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 18:24:25 -0000
Subject: [Marxism] Good commentary on the British wildcat strikes
References: <498AF4A0.4080200@panix.com>
Message-ID: <00e301c987be$fa0aaf30$bad86651@D9KTND1J>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/05/strikes-foreign-workers


From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb  5 11:35:18 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 13:35:18 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Bernie Madoff public service
Message-ID: <498B3166.2000107@panix.com>

http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/05/boldface-names-from-the-madoff-customer-list/
February 5, 2009, 10:03 am
Boldface Names from the Madoff Customer List

For weeks, the list of prominent people known to be caught up in Bernard 
L. Madoff?s investing scandal has been growing. And the roster got a 
flurry of new additions late Wednesday, when the names of thousands of 
customers of Mr. Madoff?s now-infamous firm, Bernard L. Madoff 
Investment Securities, were made public in bankruptcy-court filings.

The 163-page list included notable figures from the worlds of sports, 
politics and business; DealBook highlighted a few below.

Some caveats: The list includes anyone who responded to advertisements 
placed by the trustee overseeing the bankruptcy of the firm, and not 
every name on the list is necessarily a victim of Mr. Madoff?s reputed 
$50 billion Ponzi scheme. There was no indication how much money, if 
any, each customer invested.

 From baseball: Sandy Koufax, the Hall of Fame pitcher and Dodgers 
legend (also an old friend of Fred Wilpon, the Mets owner who was also 
burned by the Madoff scheme) and Tim Teufel, a former Mets second baseman.

 From entertainment and the media: JOHN MALKOVICH, the actor; the estate 
of John Denver, the late singer; and Larry King, the talk-show host.

 From politics: Frank Lautenberg, the Democratic senator from New 
Jersey, and Mark Green, the former public advocate of New York City.

 From the business world: Larry Silverstein, the New York real estate 
developer.

As the media combed through the list for names, one in particular seemed 
to catch nearly everyone?s attention: Ira Lee Sorkin, Mr. Madoff?s own 
lawyer.

---

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/1967317.stm
Saturday, 4 May, 2002, 08:21 GMT 09:21 UK

MP stunned at actor's outburst
A Scottish Labour MP is taking legal advice after the Hollywood star 
John Malkovich allegedly said he would like to shoot the politician.

Malkovich is reported to have said that the Glasgow Kelvin MP, George 
Galloway, was one of two people he would most like to kill.

The source of Malkovich's anger appears to be Mr Galloway's condemnation 
of Israel's action against Palestinians and his criticism of the west's 
policies on Iraq.

The actor was addressing students at the Cambridge union debating 
society when he was asked who he would most like to "fight to the death".

Malkovich, star of movies including Dangerous Liaisons and the Killing 
Fields, replied: "I'd rather just shoot them."

He named Mr Galloway and The Independent newspaper's Middle East 
correspondent Robert Fisk.

Union spokesman Julian Blake said: "He had been speaking to the union 
president before the event and he mentioned then that he read the 
British press and had been following George Galloway's comments.

"People were fairly surprised when he brought him up though."

'Terrorism climate'

The actor did not explain exactly why he disliked Mr Galloway. He said 
only that Mr Galloway did not tell the truth.

Mr Galloway said he was astonished that the actor should have such 
animosity against him.

The MP said he assumed that his outspoken criticism of American policy 
in the Middle East, Afghanistan and Iraq was behind the outburst.

"In the current climate of terrorism and violence and so on, if it was a 
joke it is not very funny and if it wasn't a joke, he will be hearing 
from my lawyers," he added.

"We can have a high noon at the Old Bailey if he likes.

'Very strange man'

"His comments are especially dangerous because in a couple of days' 
time, I will be in the Palestinian Authority visiting President Arafat 
and there are a lot of bullets flying around there."

Malkovich is in the UK filming Johnny English with Rowan Atkinson and 
Natalie Imbruglia.

Mr Galloway asked: "Who can get inside the head of John Malkovich, a 
very strange man offering a dangerous liaison - indeed, offering a 
killing field?"

Last month, Mr Galloway renewed his call for people in Scotland to 
boycott goods from Israel in response to violence in the Middle East.


From sabocat59 at mac.com  Thu Feb  5 11:41:00 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (Greg McDonald)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 13:41:00 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Bernie Madoff Public Service
Message-ID: <0835E239-6B47-4427-BF32-CF8B9DD26FEB@mac.com>


<Mr Galloway asked: "Who can get inside the head of John Malkovich, a
very strange man offering a dangerous liaison - indeed, offering a
killing field?">

Malkovich's portrayal of Ripley in "The Talented Mr. Ripley" was VERY  
convincing, maybe too much so.  Maybe he really is Ripley.

Greg McDonald


From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb  5 12:06:44 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 14:06:44 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Info on Kluge's Das Kapital
Message-ID: <498B38C4.2080902@panix.com>

(From Greg Elich)

> Hi Lou,
>   I saw that someone posted an article about Kluge's Das Kapital. If any of
> your readers understand German, it might be of interest to note that there
> is a DVD available (sans subtitles):
> http://www.suhrkamp.de/titel/titel.cfm?bestellnr=13501
> 
> Greg



From skeyesvogt at gmail.com  Thu Feb  5 12:33:27 2009
From: skeyesvogt at gmail.com (Sky Keyes)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 14:33:27 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Family of man shot to death by police is suing NOPD
Message-ID: <de3b89110902051133r5c262818gdac1dcdda68d2db5@mail.gmail.com>

Just as is the case with every other murder committed by police, the powers
that be take it upon themselves to slander the victim - in this case Adolph
Grimes III - as much as possible.  We see it happening with Oscar Grant, we
saw it happen with Justin Elmore.  It never stops.  Here we have a Black man
shot over 9 times by police in his back...

http://www.malcolm-che.com/2009/02/05/family-of-man-shot-to-death-by-police-is-suing-nopd/

From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb  5 12:54:01 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 14:54:01 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Israeli ambassador victim of Swedish shoe
Message-ID: <498B43D9.4050509@panix.com>

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/05/benny-dagan-israel-ambass_n_164289.html


From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb  5 13:04:58 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 15:04:58 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Democracy Now debate on whether Obama ended renditions
Message-ID: <498B466A.80005@panix.com>

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/2/5/despite_celebrated_orders_closing_gitmo_and


From durable at earthlink.net  Wed Feb  4 23:39:56 2009
From: durable at earthlink.net (Barry Brooks)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 14:39:56 +0800
Subject: [Marxism] Theorizing Deliverance from the Labor- and
	Commodity-Centered Society
In-Reply-To: <498B43D9.4050509@panix.com>
References: <498B43D9.4050509@panix.com>
Message-ID: <498A89BC.4090002@earthlink.net>

This is should not be missed or read slowly...

Barry
.

http://www.truthout.org/article/theorizing-deliverance-labor-and-commodity-centered-society

Theorizing Deliverance from the Labor- and 
Commodity-Centered Society

Tuesday 25 September 2007

?

by: Andr? Gorz, Mouvements

Born Gerhard Hirsch in Vienna to a Jewish 
father and a Catholic mother, French 
philosopher Andr? Gorz, also known as G?rard 
Horst and Michel Bosquet, was a cofounder of 
"Le Nouvel Observateur," journalist and 
theorist who above and before all else was a 
committed humanist.
(Photo: Sydney Morning Herald)
Editor's note: After spending a literal month 
of Sundays with this text by Andr? Gorz, I 
have been haunted by his prescience, 
inhabited by his ideas and charmed by his 
engaged humanism.


IDEA FACTORY - Philosopher Andr? Gorz 
returns, in one of the last texts to appear 
before his death, to the dynamic of financial 
capitalism and the reasons why we may see 
guaranteed social income as an opportunity to 
exit capitalism.

     Is the universal allocation of a 
guaranteed social income (RSG [in French]) 
compatible with capitalism? If so, is the RSG 
objective to consolidate capitalist society, 
even save it? If not, can it undermine the 
bases of this society or smooth the 
transition from an economic system based on 
commercial value towards a fundamentally 
different system? I continue to encounter 
these questions since the end of the 1970s. I 
was convinced from the outset that the global 
system based on commodity production could 
not perpetuate itself indefinitely. Since the 
end of Fordism and the beginning of the 
information revolution, the system has been 
working with growing effectiveness towards 
the destruction of the foundations of its 
survival. "Les Chemins du Paradis" ["The 
Roads to Paradise," a 1983 work by Gorz] - a 
paradise in which, according to Leontief's 
prediction, people were going to die of 
hunger because commodity production will 
employ hardly any workers and will distribute 
hardly any more capital - was already 
subtitled, "The Agony of Capital" [1].

     My point of departure was actually the 
fact that the microelectronic revolution 
allows production of growing quantities of 
commodities with decreasing volume of work, 
in such a way that sooner or later the system 
will have to run up against its internal 
limits [2]. This capitalism that automates 
itself to death will have to look for a way 
to survive itself through distribution of 
purchasing power that does not correspond to 
the value of a job. Unconditionally 
distributed purchasing power will, however, 
not be able to take the normal form of money. 
It will not be able to be a transfer payment, 
deducted from taxes on consumption and 
primary incomes. It is effectively impossible 
to increase fiscal deductions on consumption 
and income when production, even though 
growing in volume, distributes less and less 
money to fewer and fewer people. Consequently 
the RSG will have to come in the form of a 
different currency, of a "consumption 
currency," as Jacques Duboin called it. He 
proposed that all commercial production be 
automatically accompanied by the issuance of 
its "monetary equivalent," that is, the 
quantity of consumption currency allowing the 
purchase of the merchandise produced. The 
currency issued in this manner could only be 
used one time: it would be revoked as each 
purchase was made.


From cdb1003 at prodigy.net  Thu Feb  5 13:45:48 2009
From: cdb1003 at prodigy.net (Charles Brown)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 12:45:48 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Proletarianization and Overaccumulation
Message-ID: <935643.68483.qm@web180103.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Let us examine the matter a little more closely. "Overproduction" and 
"Underconsumption" are two sides of the same coin. "Over" or too much 
production of what and relative to what ? Too much is produced when 
the rate of profit starts to fall. Too much _from the perspective of 
the capitalists_. Not from the perspective of the working class.
 What is overaccumulation and what is over accumulated 
so as to cause the rate of profit to fall ? 


So, what is it that makes the amount of production or accumulation 
cause the rate of profit to start falling ? Socalled 
"overproductionists" emphasize the operation of Marx "Law of the 
tendency of the rate of profit to fall " or the FROP, falling rate of 
profit, for short. Marx reasons ( In Vol. I of _Capital_ that increase in the Organic 
Composition of Capital or OCC causes a tendency for the rate of profit 
to fall. Why ? The OCC is the ratio of the Constant Capital (means of 
production, plant, equipment, raw materials, instruments of 
production) to Variable Capital ( human labor): Constant Capital 
(numerator)/Variable Capital(denominator) of a mathematical fraction. 
As the numerator increases and the denominator decreases, the OCC goes 
up; it goes down vica versa, of course 


Marx explained in Vol. I of _Capital_, in the discussion of Relative 
Surplus value ( as opposed to Absolute Surplus Value) that capitalists 
are constantly trying to increase relative surplus value by looking 
for ways to "revolutionize the instruments of production" . The 
_Manifesto of the Communist Party_ had said the same thing. The 
bourgeoisie are constantly revolutionizing the instruments of 
production. Individual capitalists are always looking for innovations 
in the instuments of production, constant capital, so as to get a leg 
up on the competition. "Revolutions" of instruments of production are 
inventions and innovations of machines of all types which increase 
productivity, that is, allow the production of the same number of unit 
commodities, with fewer hours of labor , or more unit commodities with 
the same hours of labor. This increases the rate of surplus value 
relatively ( absolute surplus value is increased by lengthening the 
workday). Eventually, the innovations spread to the whole industry, 
reducing the workforce size. This is a critical process to Waistline's 
analysis of what is happening with robotization in industry today. It 
also increases the OCC in an industry. 


The increase in the OCC eventually tends to lower the average rate of 
profit when it goes industry wide, because labor, variable capital, is 
the only source of new value and new surplus value, which is the basis 
of profit. Capitalists accrue surplus value and profit from their 
variable capital investment, their investment in labor, not from their 
investment in constant capital, in more efficient machines and other 
instruments of production ( well , of course the one capitalist who gets the leg up on the rest with innovative instruments of production increases profit compared to others until they catch up) 


Thus, Marx concludes this all creates a tendency for the rate of 
profit to fall. He discusses this in Vol. III ,under the law of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall.


It is the accumulation of too much constant capital relative to 
variable capital that causes the rate of profit to fall in the 
law of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall. 


Overproduction is production of more commodities than can be sold. In 
other words, it is production of more commodities than the mass of 
consumers, the mass of wage-laborers, can buy. This is the sense in 
which overproduction and underconsumption are two-sides of the same 
coin. This is a second way in which the rate of profit tends to fall. 
It creates the classic situation of "inventories growing, warehouses 
filling up with unsold goods" It is also the point of contradiction of 
the famous anarchy of production. Many different companies just 
produce in an uncoordinated or overall unplanned manner. It is the 
point at which supply and demand don't equal each other. This mismatch 
is inherent in exploitation. 


It is inherent in exploitation because societies' wage-laborers as a 
whole are not paid enough to buy all that they produce. 

"Overproduction" does not refer to the OCC/FROP logic above. There is not too much _production_ of constant capital, of too much constant capital relative to variable capital. There is too much _accumulation_ or deployment of constant capital relative to variable capital. It is purchase and deployment of constant capital in increased ratio to variable capital that raises the Organic Composition of the total capital and causes the FROP. It is not production of commodities that raises the Organic Composition of the total capital and leads to the FROP. So, it is overaccumulation, not overproduction that causes the FROP, or the falling rate of profit.

But also lowering the rate of profit constantly is the unrealized profit due to exploited wage-laborers in society as a whole not being paid enough to buy all the personal consumption goods that they produce. The price of labor power is less than the total value of the commodities that expended labor power produces (Vol. I _Capital_, first sections). The difference between these being surplus value, exploited by the capitalist. The workers therefore aren't as I said paid enough to buy all they produce. Our reform solution is to give the workers back the surplus value, so they can buy the rest of what they produce. This like all reforms won't work or at least won't happen short of more fundamental change of power and state power, state laws. But demanding its institution, puts everybody right up to the wall at the end of capitalism. It exposes more readily the basic foundation of exploitation of capitalism, wage-labor etc.

So, I'd say S Artesian is an overaccumulationist, not an 
overproductionist, in that he relies on the law of the tendency of the 
rate of profit to fall, the FROP underlying his analysis. 

Of course, it is a specific instance of the FROP that causes the capitalists to start a given recession by getting rid of constant capital. That should be noted in discussions with workers. But, focus on that overaccumulation suggest that the solution to any given crisis should be sought in trying to raise the profit rate "back up". No, we say seek the solution to a crisis in giving the mass of workers money to buy the "surplus" commodities produced that correspond to surplus value exploited by the capitalist. End the "poverty and restricted consumption of the masses" to end a crisis ! That should be the Marxist demand. 


Charles 





From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb  5 13:51:42 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 15:51:42 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Proletarianization and Overaccumulation
In-Reply-To: <935643.68483.qm@web180103.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <935643.68483.qm@web180103.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <498B515E.7070607@panix.com>

Charles Brown wrote:
> Let us examine the matter a little more closely. "Overproduction" and 
> "Underconsumption" are two sides of the same coin.

That might be true, but the real debate has always been between the role 
of overaccumulation versus underconsumption (or overproduction). Just 
read Henryk Grossman to get a handle on this:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/grossman/1929/breakdown/ch02.htm


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Thu Feb  5 13:57:55 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 21:57:55 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Manufacturers' Shipments Inventories and Orders
Message-ID: <FD0B6253CEEE44F8A0C93311F5D544E7@dmsthinkpad>

Summary 
New orders for manufactured goods in December, down five consecutive months, decreased $14.8 billion or 3.9 percent to $362.4 billion, the U.S. Census Bureau reported today. This was the longest streak of consecutive monthly decreases since the series was first published on a NAICS basis in 1992 and followed a 6.5 percent November decrease.

http://www.census.gov/indicator/www/m3/index.htm



From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb  5 14:33:05 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 16:33:05 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] =?iso-8859-1?q?Report_Examines_Economy_and_Social_Indic?=
 =?iso-8859-1?q?ators_During_the_Ch=E1vez_Decade_in_Venezuela?=
Message-ID: <498B5B11.7080504@panix.com>

http://www.cepr.net/index.php/press-releases/press-releases/report-examines-economy-and-social-indicators-during-the-chavez-decade-in-venezuela/


From adambrichmond at yahoo.com  Thu Feb  5 14:35:36 2009
From: adambrichmond at yahoo.com (Adam Richmond)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 13:35:36 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Kapital-the movie
In-Reply-To: <705008.16158.qm@web180116.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <463053.71236.qm@web54603.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

I wrote to the publishers of the Das Kapital DVD to inquire about an English translation version.? They reported that they are planning to produce an English translation but had not done so yet and did not yet know when it would be released.



      

From sartesian at earthlink.net  Thu Feb  5 14:42:39 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 22:42:39 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Why analyze the economic crisis
References: <17A64F06-FB26-4FF6-874E-90CA70E8C645@mac.com>
Message-ID: <221F7A0A36B54E36A4FFF4C76DB3F181@dmsthinkpad>

Well, I'm kind of flattered, and very gratified, by your agreement-- 

Nothing wrong with having your cake and eating it too-- all that means is 
that you've gotten beyond the value form and need the cake for its 
usefulness and not for its encapsulation of expropriated wage-labor.  So go 
ahead and eat.  And always remember to share your food.  The usefulness of 
the cake is not just in its personal consumption but also in its social 
consumption.

Anyway, regarding your question-- I think there are obvious instances-- with 
the emphasis on instances-- where underconsumption is a factor for a 
specific enterprise or a specific industry. But again, even in those 
specific instances, if we look more closely,  we can see the 
"underconsumption" is not due to the restrictions of wage-labor upon the 
laborer, but due rather to the "overconsumption" of socially unnecessary 
labor in the production and reproduction of those specific commodities, 
which must go unpurchased and unconsumed as capitalism apportions the 
socially produced profit along the lines of the most effective producers, 
and through that establishes the general rate of profit.

The commodity has to prove its social value, has to realize its appropriated 
surplus value, in the markets.   It, the commodity, can only do that at one 
and the same time in concert with all other commodities and in competition 
with all other commodities.  So a particular industry, or sector even, may 
push its commodities into the markets where the surplus value is unrealized 
due to the inefficiency, the expense of production, and even the lack of 
usefulness of product.  In these cases we see that it is the genetic 
composition of the commodity, of its contradiction between exchange and use 
values, that drives the process of (un)realization, not the ability of the 
workers to consume the products.

When we come to capitalist reproduction as a whole, and with the breakdown 
of that reproduction, then we have moved from socially necessary labor of a 
commodity or type of commodity, and from the social usefulness of a 
commodity,  and TO the social necessity of the commodity producing system 
itself.  So we must look to its core contradiction, its conflict between 
means and relations of production, between the accumulation of the means of 
production as capital and the ability to maintain the ratio of profit 
required to sustain more accumulation.

Historical aside: Several months ago, when the US Congress and the UK 
parliament were debating bailing out the banks, the Financial Times, moaning 
about the resistance to the bailouts asked-- if rescuing the banks is not a 
socially worthwhile endeavor, then what is?  Can you believe it, it's like 
they almost understood the dual nature of the commodity?   Part of the 
answer that should have been given right back to the FT was that the markets 
were telling everybody that far too much socially unnecessary labor time had 
been expended in this sector and that subsidizing the banks, expending more 
socially unnecessary living labor on this socially unnecessary dead labor 
was akin to, no... was identical to throwing bad money after worse money.

Anyway, Let me give an example, one Charles Brown brought up on Julio 
Huato's Marxist-Debate list.  The old story goes that Henry Ford was talking 
to Walter Reuther about his plans and dreams for automation of the 
production process and replacing the workers with machines:

Said Henry to Walter:  "Who will you organize then, Walter, the machines?"

Replied Walter to Henry:  "Who will you sell your cars to then, Henry, the 
machines?"

And this by the way is the problem with underconsumptionism-- it leaves 
unchallenged the ownership, the property of production, the relations of 
capital, requiring the continued existence of capital in the mistaken belief 
that capital requires consumption.

Anyway, the answer to Walter is that Henry could have continued to sell his 
machine produced machines, garnering profit from the other manufacturers 
whose appropriated surplus value would flow to the Ford capital given the 
apportioning of profits through price mechanisms in the market.  The reduced 
socially necessary labor time involved in the Ford product as compared to 
all others, would guarantee its claim on the total appropriated surplus 
value.  So the maximally restricted consumption of the Ford no-workers would 
be offset. .

If we take this further-- to the point where all of capitalism produces all 
its commodities with no workers,  would the problem then be one of 
"underconsumption"?  Not at all.  The problem would be one of no capitalism 
at all, because there is no surplus value with no wage labor; there is no 
profit with no surplus value; there is no accumulation with no profit; there 
is no commodity without labor-power existing in its wage form.  There 
wouldn't be capitalism period.

Hope I haven't just cured you of ever agreeing with me again.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Greg McDonald" <sabocat59 at mac.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 2:38 PM
Subject: [Marxism] Why analyze the economic crisis


>  This exacerbates the original causal factor of
> overproduction, making the crisis worse.  Or am I just trying to have
> my cake and eat it too?
>
> Greg McDonald



From davidrail68 at yahoo.com  Thu Feb  5 16:14:23 2009
From: davidrail68 at yahoo.com (David Walsh)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 15:14:23 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Mandel, Lambert, Percy,Proyect,Camejo et al...
Message-ID: <769740.73324.qm@web45311.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

The problem with the approaches of all the above in there frantic race to avoid being "sectarian" is that they all share the idea that we must re-create at least the First International on the lowest common denominator.
This has failed for all of them for many years. It's not just "The dreaded Trots" that hold to outlived schemas.
Most want to found broad networks, fronts, parties or whatever based on reform politics as a way forward or try to copy the Brazilian Workers Party or the Nicaraguan FSLN. All these roads lead nowhere. Look at the results. After all these years we can draw a balance sheet.
As the class struggle heats up and we all agree it will then policies will be tested in life and solid regroupments similar to what we saw in the Workers Party in the 30's. will be on the agenda. And the Cannon led Communist League was able to begin a process, maybe imperfect, to build a revolutionary alternative to the Social-Dems and CP. Were there any alternatives? No one ever point to one.
Most on this list agree on the need for an authentic marxism. We must be open to the forms that rebuilding takes and not substitute schemas for what we cannot just predict will transpire organizationally. 

www.socialistviewpoint.org

If you tremble with indignation at every injustice then you are a comrade of mine.
Che


      


From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Feb  5 16:36:41 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 18:36:41 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Mandel, Lambert, Percy,Proyect,Camejo et al...
In-Reply-To: <769740.73324.qm@web45311.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <769740.73324.qm@web45311.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <498B7809.10707@panix.com>

David Walsh wrote:
The problem with the approaches of all the above in there frantic race 
to avoid being "sectarian" is that they all share the idea that we must 
re-create at least the First International on the lowest common denominator.

Response: I saw Lambert in the subject heading. I can only assume that 
you are referring to Constant Lambert, the supremely witty British 
composer who was influenced by American jazz and who died in 1951. I 
particularly adore his Rio Grande. 
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxB1Maf4Xro).

David Walsh:
This has failed for all of them for many years. It's not just "The 
dreaded Trots" that hold to outlived schemas.

Response:
I think we should give my ideas on party-building a shot. Next week I am 
introducing sales quotas. I will be putting the weekly archives of 
Marxmail into a PDF format and requiring it to be sold at $1 per issue. 
Those who sell less than 10 issues per week will be brought before a 
control commission and charged with disloyalty. Punishment will consist 
of being forced to listen to the same Michael Bolton record 25 times in 
a row.

David Walsh:
Most want to found broad networks, fronts, parties or whatever based on 
reform politics as a way forward or try to copy the Brazilian Workers 
Party or the Nicaraguan FSLN. All these roads lead nowhere. Look at the 
results. After all these years we can draw a balance sheet.

Response:
I just love drawing balance sheets. It reminds me of how my dad kept his 
accounts in one of those old hard-cover ledger books. The anal 
retentiveness I inherited from him has served me well over the decades 
in my chosen profession of computer programming.

David Walsh:
As the class struggle heats up and we all agree it will then policies 
will be tested in life and solid regroupments similar to what we saw in 
the Workers Party in the 30's. will be on the agenda. And the Cannon led 
Communist League was able to begin a process, maybe imperfect, to build 
a revolutionary alternative to the Social-Dems and CP. Were there any 
alternatives? No one ever point to one.

Response:
Then I plan to be the Trotskyist's worst nightmare. I must sit down 
right now and read James Burnham.

David Walsh:
Most on this list agree on the need for an authentic marxism. We must be 
open to the forms that rebuilding takes and not substitute schemas for 
what we cannot just predict will transpire organizationally.

Response:
Well, all right. Just make sure you continue to find time to write those 
stellar movie reviews.



From cdb1003 at prodigy.net  Thu Feb  5 16:44:53 2009
From: cdb1003 at prodigy.net (Charles Brown)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 15:44:53 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Proletarianization and Overaccumulation
Message-ID: <531407.77993.qm@web180106.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Perhaps we can get an understanding of the issues on this thread by 
imagining Waistline's totally robotized or automated factory. 


As Walter Reuther said (to Ford ?) if automobile production is 100% 
robotized, then who will buy the cars produced ? This refers to a zero 
profit realization problem for capitalists when there is zero 
consumption. If workers aren't paid anything the masses are in 
absolute poverty and absolutely restricted consumption, and they can't 
buy anything. So, the capitalists have zero realized profit. 


It is also an absolute overaccumulation situation. The rate of profit 
is zero because the OCC is mathematically undefined or maybe infinite, 
as the denominator in the OCC fraction is zero. Constant capital/ 
variable capital is 1/0 - "one over zero". Since there is no varible 
capital, no human labor all robots, there is no source of value, no 
new value, so there is no surplus value and no profit. If there is no 
exploitation there is no profit. The rate of profit is zero. If there 
is no profit, there is no capitalism. So, as capitalism moves toward 
no variable capital and all constant capital, absolute 
overaccumulation , it moves toward its own negation. 


 Perhaps this extreme, and imaginary * example demonstrates the truth 
of both overaccumulation ( OCC of infinity/undefined, robots can't be 
exploited, so zero surplus value) and overproduction/zero-consumption 
(robots can't buy cars, zero realization of profit ) 


How's my math ?


* 
(Of course, a perpetual motion machine is an impossibility because of 
the laws of physics, maybe one of the laws of thermodynamics) 


Jules Verne 





From davidrail68 at yahoo.com  Thu Feb  5 17:14:05 2009
From: davidrail68 at yahoo.com (David Walsh)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 16:14:05 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] You've wounded me :)
Message-ID: <848473.24171.qm@web45309.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Louis, Typical on your part. Shows that some of us can't even be respectful and talk, but, with this approach will come a healthy, democratic movement. 
You are as witty as you were when you were in the Barnes camp straightening out the elected leaders of the Boston SWP branch.





      


From youcanemailbenhere at yahoo.co.uk  Thu Feb  5 17:27:06 2009
From: youcanemailbenhere at yahoo.co.uk (Ben Ben)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 00:27:06 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Marxism] Manchester Uni occupation blog
Message-ID: <803204.36903.qm@web26302.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>

A lot of police activity circa 8pm this eve --- I can't work out whether they've ended the occupation; I hope to get over there shortly.

http://manunioccupation.wordpress.com/

Judith Butler, who talked at Manchester University today, gladly sent a message of solidarity to comrades occupying a building almost next door to where she was addressing circa 2000.


      


From youcanemailbenhere at yahoo.co.uk  Thu Feb  5 18:01:46 2009
From: youcanemailbenhere at yahoo.co.uk (Ben Ben)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 01:01:46 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Marxism] Manchester Uni occupation blog: update
Message-ID: <412473.61616.qm@web26307.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>

I've managed to speak to one of the occupiers; they've barricaded themselves in for the night, and the university postroom is now also occupied - thus substantially disrupting the workings of the university. Earlier today police physically removed two occupiers, and have now barred access to the building for other students (despite promises otherwise). The occupiers are in good spirits, have plenty of food (via fellow protestors), and have no intention of leaving until demands are met. 

Protest outside: 1.30 Friday. Spread the news.

These university occupations, which potentially might rocket in the next few days, need to be seen in the context of the current wave of wildcat strikes.

Solidarity!

Ben


      


From darrel.furlotte at gmail.com  Thu Feb  5 18:08:01 2009
From: darrel.furlotte at gmail.com (Darrel Furlotte)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 20:08:01 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] "cute sayings" signing posts
In-Reply-To: <531407.77993.qm@web180106.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <531407.77993.qm@web180106.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <2B64364F33C744839F4C52825601E39B@DarrelLenovo>

If comrades really feel it's important to add quotes that add something to 
their "identity" at the end of their signatures, I must say that, on a 
Marxism list, I prefer quotes that are in some way relevant or accurate. For 
a good example, from a post today:  "If you tremble with indignation at 
every injustice then you are a comrade of mine.
Che"

CB"s is neither relevant nor accurate. "Pure" idealism, it seems to me. Laws 
don't cause anything; they only describe the relationships/reactions of 
matter/energy in various states/levels of organization which, not 
incidentally, ARE in perpetual motion. Time, Einstein's relativistic 
space-time, Charles, to move into the 21st century, "present"!!

Darrel


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Charles Brown" <cdb1003 at prodigy.net>
> (Of course, a perpetual motion machine is an impossibility because of
> the laws of physics, maybe one of the laws of thermodynamics)
>
>
> Jules Verne



From markalause at gmail.com  Thu Feb  5 18:37:19 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 20:37:19 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Mandel, Lambert, Percy,Proyect,Camejo et al...
In-Reply-To: <769740.73324.qm@web45311.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <769740.73324.qm@web45311.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0902051737r45067562o5bfce418cb632898@mail.gmail.com>

I don't understand grouping all these people in the subject line
together as a way of saying they share some kind of opportunistic
predisposition.  What would it mean for me to say that "Santa Claus"
and "Charlie Manson" are both opportunists...except that both of them
have pissed me off somehow...

Certainly, this approach can hardly be a prelude to much of a
coherent, intelligent critique of any of them individually or of the
nature of opportunism generally....

ML


From markalause at gmail.com  Thu Feb  5 18:41:58 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 20:41:58 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Depression era histories
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0902051741w61c0a2b1y437694f3c9afaafe@mail.gmail.com>

Has anybody encountered anything recent and new that freshmen might
find particularly enlightening in this area?  I've got a stack of
oldies, of course....

ML


From michael at ecst.csuchico.edu  Thu Feb  5 19:09:58 2009
From: michael at ecst.csuchico.edu (Michael Perelman)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 18:09:58 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Depression era histories
In-Reply-To: <b16d8daf0902051741w61c0a2b1y437694f3c9afaafe@mail.gmail.com>
References: <b16d8daf0902051741w61c0a2b1y437694f3c9afaafe@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20090206020958.GA21014@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu>


Rauchway, Eric. 2008. The Great Depression and the New Deal: A
   Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press).


On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 08:41:58PM -0500, Mark Lause wrote:
> Has anybody encountered anything recent and new that freshmen might
> find particularly enlightening in this area?  I've got a stack of
> oldies, of course....
> 

-- 
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  Thu Feb  5 19:26:15 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 21:26:15 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Depression era histories
In-Reply-To: <20090206020958.GA21014@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu>
References: <b16d8daf0902051741w61c0a2b1y437694f3c9afaafe@mail.gmail.com>
	<20090206020958.GA21014@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu>
Message-ID: <498B9FC7.80002@panix.com>

Michael Perelman wrote:
> Rauchway, Eric. 2008. The Great Depression and the New Deal: A
>    Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
> 
> 

Studs Terkel, "Hard Times: An Oral History of the Great Depression"


From jayroth6 at cox.net  Thu Feb  5 19:38:25 2009
From: jayroth6 at cox.net (J Rothermel)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 21:38:25 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] The Capitalist Crash and the New Challenges Facing
	Socialists
Message-ID: <498BA2A1.30404@cox.net>

http://www.socialistvoice.ca/?p=365

excerpt:

*Ending the long retreat*

Through more than two decades of capitalist attacks, working people in 
Canada have been on the defensive. Unions have lost members and 
strength, social programs have diminished, and repressive and racist 
policies have gained ground. The challenge today is to wage effective, 
broad-based struggles for immediate gains that can help end the retreat 
and inspire working people with new hope and confidence.

This will be achieved not through deals with capitalist parties but 
through independent struggles that can shift the relationship of forces. 
Such struggles can open the possibility of challenging capitalist rule 
and establishing a government of working people and the oppressed that 
can abolish capitalism.

There is no way to foresee what issues and struggles will spark such a 
movement. However, we can already identify central themes of a socialist 
agenda in Canada as the capitalist crisis unfolds:

   1. No government handouts to capitalist profiteers. Governments
      should take control of imperilled enterprises as a basis for
      planned economic recovery and ecological protection. The
      environmentally and socially destructive Alberta tar sands must be
      shut down, with full protection of displaced workers? livelihoods.
   2. Protect the victims of capitalism?s crisis through support to the
      unemployed, education and retraining opportunities for displaced
      workers, and improvements to other social programs. Raise minimum
      wages and social assistance rates.
   3. Focus government ?stimulus? spending on education, health care,
      social services, social housing, and ecology infrastructure.
      Decent homes for all. Draw the entire population into a
      democratically planned transition to an ecologically sound and
      sustainable economy.
   4. Abolish restrictive anti-labour legislation and protect striking
      workers from replacement or dismissal. Adopt new laws to assist
      workers in joining trade unions and achieving collective agreements.
   5. Take action to assist victims of racial and national oppression.
      Defend all victims of gender-based oppression. End restrictions on
      immigration and grant full legal rights to all residents of
      Canada. End violations of civil liberties and human rights enacted
      as part of a phoney ?war on terror.?
   6. Take emergency action to eliminate the calamitous social and
      economic conditions forced on Indigenous peoples by Canadian
      colonialism. Unconditional support for Indigenous sovereignty and
      the fight for an end to Canadian colonialism. (See Mike Krebs,
      /For the Land,
      <http://www.socialistvoice.ca/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/for-the-land.pdf>
      /PDF)
   7. Self-determination and sovereignty for Quebec.
   8. Oppose Canadian imperialism. End Canada?s war in Afghanistan and
      its support to the Israeli-led genocide against the Palestinians.
      For boycott, divestment and sanctions against the apartheid
      Israeli state.
   9. Cancel the Third World debt, and cancel pro-imperialist trade
      treaties. Make Canadian technological and resources available to
      help break the cycle of imperialist-imposed poverty.
  10. Support freedom struggles around the world, including the
      initiatives of Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, and their partners in the
      ALBA alliance to build an alternative to neoliberal devastation.
  11. Press labour and its allies, including the NDP, to break with the
      capitalist ruling class and enter onto a road of struggle for a
      workers? and farmers? government.


February 5, 2009


From pieinsky at igc.org  Thu Feb  5 20:13:57 2009
From: pieinsky at igc.org (Jay Moore)
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 22:13:57 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Depression era histories
In-Reply-To: <498B9FC7.80002@panix.com>
References: <b16d8daf0902051741w61c0a2b1y437694f3c9afaafe@mail.gmail.com>	<20090206020958.GA21014@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu>
	<498B9FC7.80002@panix.com>
Message-ID: <498BAAF5.7090708@igc.org>

Thanks for me, too.  I'm putting together a freshman seminar on this 
topic myself.  Does Rauchway cover the different interpretations of what 
caused the Depression, including Marxist?  I'm taking a comparative 
approach, and I'm also going to be using some of the recent articles 
from "Monthly Review" for the current crisis.  That Elmer Altvater piece 
that Louis posted was excellent, bringing so much together in one place, 
but I think it might be way over the heads of my students.  What else?
jay

Louis Proyect wrote:
> Michael Perelman wrote:
>   
>> Rauchway, Eric. 2008. The Great Depression and the New Deal: A
>>    Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
>>
>>
>>     
>
> Studs Terkel, "Hard Times: An Oral History of the Great Depression"
>
>   


From davidrail68 at yahoo.com  Thu Feb  5 20:21:05 2009
From: davidrail68 at yahoo.com (David Walsh)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 19:21:05 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Santa Claus and Charlie Manson
Message-ID: <737690.26194.qm@web45302.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Mark, You said it best. "they share some kind of opportunistic
predisposition." no, not "predisposition" - a similar schematic, formal approach. That is the building of groups crafted artificially after other currents as if it was the answer to building a group in their country.
That's so hard to get?

Mark: "What would it mean for me to say that "Santa Claus"
and "Charlie Manson" are both opportunists...except that both of them
have pissed me off somehow..."

Yes, I guess you could say opportunist. I'm not pissed off. Maybe you have a crystal ball that clued you in to come to that conclusion. I didn't write that. I have a position that disagrees with all of their approaches which share a commonality. That's concretely what I stated.

What seems to be the problem is that you don't just come out and say that you share that opinion. Again, doesn't seem to me that means I'm pissed off. That's fine. I respect what you say and learn from the discussion sometimes.

Well, I guess since Walters gone...





      



From michael at ecst.csuchico.edu  Thu Feb  5 20:34:16 2009
From: michael at ecst.csuchico.edu (Michael Perelman)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 19:34:16 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Depression era historiesy
In-Reply-To: <498BAAF5.7090708@igc.org>
References: <b16d8daf0902051741w61c0a2b1y437694f3c9afaafe@mail.gmail.com>
	<20090206020958.GA21014@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu>
	<498B9FC7.80002@panix.com> <498BAAF5.7090708@igc.org>
Message-ID: <20090206033416.GB21110@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu>

He is not a Marxist.  He tells a history story very well.  Very short.  
Very clear.


On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 10:13:57PM -0500, Jay Moore wrote:
> Thanks for me, too.  I'm putting together a freshman seminar on this 
> topic myself.  Does Rauchway cover the different interpretations of what 
> caused the Depression, including Marxist?  I'm taking a comparative 
> approach, and I'm also going to be using some of the recent articles 
> from "Monthly Review" for the current crisis.  That Elmer Altvater piece 
> that Louis posted was excellent, bringing so much together in one place, 
> but I think it might be way over the heads of my students.  What else?
> jay
> 

-- 
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 markalause at gmail.com  Thu Feb  5 21:15:23 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 23:15:23 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Santa Claus and Charlie Manson
In-Reply-To: <737690.26194.qm@web45302.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <737690.26194.qm@web45302.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0902052015n794e0714hb5582c8cc1b1cbfe@mail.gmail.com>

I can't recall if it was here or on the other list, David, that you
asked about results.  That is an excellent question that needs to be
asked across the board...including about the orthodox approach to
party building.

The old truism about opportunism and sectarianism being flip sides of
the same problem is apt.  When elements of the masses do go into
motion, we can take our politics to them...as did Camejo and many of
us when the opportunity presented itself.   Or we can take what is the
easiest and most comfortable of all possible approaches behind a
barricade of truthful irrelevancies, and complain that the masses
aren't following.

ML


From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Thu Feb  5 22:29:22 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 00:29:22 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban writer: world's view of Obama to be determined by
 deeds, not words
Message-ID: <F7A08B76C2B449B1A9537FD2C078EDAD@office1pc>

Obama: Change or continuity? (Part III)

By El?ades Acosta Matos
http://progreso-weekly.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=800&Ite
mid=\1


The election of Barack Obama as the United States' 44th president and his
inauguration on Jan. 20 have placed on the table of public opinion the topic
of symbols and their possible readings. If anyone is fully aware of the
enormous cultural and political weight of symbols, it's Obama.

The figure and discourse of the new president, his charisma, brilliance,
composure, boldness, charm, cold blood and intelligence return, on a
symbolic level, a leadership its country lost due to the clumsiness and
mediocrity of George W. Bush. The alliances have renewed themselves
automatically, and an almost unanimous applause greets him at all his public
appearances. With notable exceptions, among them one of Fidel Castro's
reflections, titled "Against the current," and an article by Ignacio Ramonet
that analyzed, with fair concern, the composition of Obama's Cabinet, few
have stopped to scrutinize with a critical eye the first measures taken by
his administration.

In the specific case of the Israeli aggression against the Palestine people
of Gaza, Obama defended his silence alleging political reasons and explained
that the country should have only one authoritative voice. But he forgot two
essential principles: one, that it is legitimate and excusable to raise
one's voice against crime, because it is a matter of ethical principles,
rather than political principles. Two, that if the voice of the nation had
to be the voice of the departing president, the world would prefer that he
would keep his mouth shut.

This lack of rigorous and objective analyses of the projections and
decisions of the new U.S. president remind us that few things are as
dangerous in the contemporary world and in world politics than to write a
blank check to the president of the world's most powerful nation. This was
dramatically demonstrated after the events of Sept.11, 2001.

On a symbolic level, Obama's rhetoric operates with arguments and concepts
taken from some "left lite" close to social-democracy.
Categories such as "social justice" and "change" were never before wielded
with such force by any U.S. politician of Obama's level.
Independently from the fact that in his public speeches he has never fully
explained where social injustice emerges from and how it reproduces itself
(and consequently against what economic and political forces we must
struggle to fully uproot it), it remains to be seen how the president of the
most overwhelming capitalist and imperialist nation wants to carry out such
concepts -- or can do so.

The constant repetition of such concepts in his speeches clarifies nothing
but leave a cloud of ambiguities and confusions, especially among the
less-informed and less-militant sectors of the left itself.
We are reminded of the actions of the cultural war, so appreciated by
today's neoconservatives, who were toppled and are now in flight.

Obama's statements that in his presidency and under his leadership the
differences between Democrats and Republicans, between left and right, will
be erased are subtle and very adequate to introduce elements of confusion
from capitalism, because they constitute a deceitful call to halt the
political and ideological struggle for the sake of a false and impossible
reconciliation of things that are opposed by their nature. This involves, in
the first place, social classes that were counter to each other ever since
the genesis of capital.

To accept this affirmation without a challenge is the equivalent of
jettisoning all the revolutionary theory and practice of the past 150 years,
especially the theory that began with Marx and Engels'
"Communist Manifesto." That document made its debut in the field of ideas by
speaking out loudly and clearly and not being ashamed to point out the true
causes of poverty, exploitation and social injustice.

Another symbolic element to bear in mind with regard to Obama is his
biography, cleverly exploited by the hagiographers and political pundits. It
matters little that he lived with his Kenyan father only until the age of 2
and that he met with him again only once, just before the father's death.
This element has been trotted out to gain the support of the most humiliated
and offended citizens of his country and the Third World. On the other hand,
the image of the American white mother with a history of counter-cultural
rebellion and affinity with the left has also been widely used.

It is unimportant if a man with this background is today part of power elite
or if he was yesterday a student at Columbia University, an institution in
the aristocratic and selective Ivy League. We have been oversold the idea
that, through elections, the discriminated and progressive groups have
finally achieved power in the United States through this new president. He
has carried out, we are told, something similar to a peaceful and democratic
revolution that (oh, what a
coincidence) leaves a feeling in the air that it is a superior and mature
system, because it respects the people's will and is capable of rectifying a
long history of errors.

This young man (barely 47) has proclaimed himself the representative of a
different and innovative way of doing politics, even though the novelty is
not only that he sends personalized messages to the cell phones of millions
of Americans. For generational reasons, he is not related to the major
confrontations of the 20th Century, among them the Cold War and the Vietnam
war, so therefore he is seen as much more capable of understanding
post-modern sensitivities and the challenges and opportunities of our times.

His ambiguous anecdotes about his moderate consumption of alcohol and drugs
during his student years humanized him in the eyes of the public, converted
him in an example of self-improvement and publicized the facilities his
country provides for people to succeed and reinsert themselves into society.
And his archetypical image -- which reflects and represents almost every
social class, race and profession -- is enhanced when he publicly describes
himself as an educated, well-informed man who is not ashamed of being an
intellectual and being familiar with the new technologies, as happens with
the younger generations, because much of his success is due to the fact that
he understands that today's politics and ideas cannot succeed without the
Internet.

What I've said so far is intended to activate the rational and analytical
thinking of people who face new times, times that are coming with this new
administration and will force a rethinking of many previous certainties and
discourses. The days of the Cold War, when a handful of creative youngsters
working for U.S. government agencies could transform the perception of
reality through cartoons, radio broadcasts, the spreading of rumors and the
distribution of magazines, today seem like the days of a prehistoric past.

Today, everything is more complex and at the same time simpler.
However, the certainty remains that the cultural tools are most useful to
advance, promote, impose and defend the interests of a superpower such as
the United States. Tools of ideological and cultural struggle are the
concepts of the "soft and intelligent power" that back the international
projections of Barack Obama's administration. The ideological challenges
this implies for countries like Cuba and Venezuela, for example, are
enormous.

For the Cuban Revolution, for its people, its artists and intellectuals,
moments of testing are at hand. The battle of ideas will enter a brand-new
phase. The self-preservation instincts of a system like capitalism, which is
being flogged by a crisis of an unprecedented magnitude, will impose itself
over its imperial dreams, which have foundered on the streets of Baghdad or
the Afghan mountains. Imperialism knows that if it doesn't evolve it will
disappear. That is why we are witnessing and well-thought-out rescue
operation, not only in the field of finance but also in the fields of ideas
and symbols.

Barack Obama's presidency, aside from its positive or negative results,
shows that the system is willing to transform anything that does not alter
its essence, willing to articulate its habitual hegemonic methods, so long
as they remain untouchable.

But in the field of ideas and culture, which is where the real extent of the
promised changes will be measured, there is no infallible or invincible
formula. The proposals of soft and smart power are neither infallible nor
invincible, either. An interesting article by Josef Joffe, published in The
New York Times on May 14, 2006, under the headline "The perils of soft
power," is illustrative.

"Soft power does not necessarily increase the world's love for America. It
is still power, and it can still make enemies. [...] Hundreds of millions of
people around the world wear, listen, eat, drink, watch and dance American,
but they do not identify these accouterments of their daily lives with
America [...] These American products shape images, not sympathies, and
there is little, if any, relationship between artifact and affection." (1)

Certainly, what will prompt humanity to believe in the United States under
the government of Barack Obama, and to believe in Obama himself, will not be
the rhetoric of a soft and intelligent power, well-packaged though it may be
or pacifying though it may be, compared with the apocalyptic statements of
the previous administration. What will be essential will be the practical
policies that the current administration will enact; they need to be
sufficiently honest, effective, fair and timely, so they may help remedy the
huge ills that corrode the planet.

If the United States under the new presidency insists on continuing to be
what it has been until now -- an imperialist and hegemonic power -- then the
vote of confidence given by the American voters and the rest of the world to
that young, black, brillian and charismatic man who entered history by
wielding the word "change" was worthless, simply because it changed nothing.

In the days of Rome, especially for the Gauls, Jews and Germans, Rome was
Rome, no matter who sat on the imperial throne -- Caesar, Nero or
Constantine.

The time has come to find out if the man who holds in his hands the reins of
the world's most powerful nation symbolizes continuity or change.

Let's hope it's change. April 30 will mark the first 100 days of the new
mandate of the United State's 44th president.

As our grandmothers used to say: "Works are love." Let's hope that the black
lady who lived on the shores of Lake Victoria, or the white lady in Kansas,
taught the same to their grandson, Barack Hussein Obama.

1. Josef Joffe: "The perils of soft power", The New York Times, May 14,
2006.

El?ades Acosta Matos is a Cuban writer and essayist. He has written numerous
essays and books, among them "Apocalypse according to St.
George," "From Valencia to Baghdad." His latest book, "21st Century
imperialism; The cultural wars," will be launched at the 2009 Havana Book
Fair. Acosta was chief of the Department of Culture of the Central Committee
of the Communist Party of Cuba.







From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Thu Feb  5 23:32:35 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 01:32:35 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] "Gaza war changes Middle East equation at Israel's
	expense"
Message-ID: <3072F433AC424B52896D82E73D031B67@office1pc>

http://mondediplo.com/2009/02/02gazawar

The long march of folly that began in 1967
Gaza war changes Middle East equation at Israel?s expense 
The European Union?s policy of funding Gaza?s development is just one casualty of Israel?s unprecedented attack, which has weakened the Palestinian Authority but left Hamas politically stronger than ever
 
By Alain Gresh 
 

?They?re still living in the War of Independence (1948) and the Sinai campaign (1956). With them, it?s all about tanks, about controlling territories or controlled territories, holding this or that hill. But these things are worthless. (?) The Lebanon war (2006) will go down in history as the first war in which the military leadership understood that classical warfare has become obsolete? (1).
 
This view, expressed in September 2008, comes not from an Israeli pacifist but the country?s prime minister, Ehud Olmert. It would take a highly sophisticated analyst to fathom the subconscious of this politician, who is responsible both for the catastrophic war in Lebanon in 2006 and the recent offensive in Gaza, and who at the same time claims his country needs to abandon its narrow vision of security.
 
He and the majority of those who govern Israel probably share the view bluntly expressed in 2002 by Israel?s then chief of staff, general Moshe Yaalon: ?The Palestinians must be made to understand in the deepest recesses of their consciousness that they are a defeated people? (2). With each new war comes the same old refrain from Israel?s leaders: the Arabs only understand force; teach them a lesson and peace will at last be possible. ?We?re going to keep our finger on the trigger? (3) was how foreign minister Tzipi Livni put it. Olmert and his government are in favour of peace in the same way that the US government in the 19th century was in favour of the peace 
they decided to impose on the Native American tribes.
 
The shelling of Gaza came to a provisional halt on 18 January. The Israeli government wanted its troops out of Gaza before Barack Obama was sworn in and Hamas gave Israel a week to withdraw its soldiers and reopen crossing points with Gaza. Beyond the deliberate destruction of vital infrastructure ? which includes ministry buildings and fire stations, the parliament and the university ? the human cost shown on TV screens the world over has been overwhelming. Even the French media, which has previously been very timid, hasn?t been able to obscure the extent of the catastrophe. Leaving to one side a moral reckoning and the crimes which may mean that Israeli leaders one day face an international tribunal, how has the fighting changed the political landscape at local and regional level?
 
The prime objective of the Israeli government was to permanently weaken Hamas politically and militarily. It claims to have succeeded in this and taught the ?terrorists? a lesson. But is it that simple? The tactic of massive bombardments and avoidance of close combat limited Israeli army losses ? the third phase of the operation, which was never put into action, would have been an infantry assault of towns ? but hasn?t broken up the military core of Hamas, which comprises between three and five thousand fighters. Like Hizbullah in 2006, Hamas was able to keep firing rockets until the very last moment and its arms supply lines held up, albeit at a reduced level.
 
Whatever the criticisms of Hamas?s strategy, including their rocket attacks on civilian targets, the vast majority of the Palestinian population holds the Israeli government responsible for the destruction. As Elena Qleibo, a Gaza-based aid worker from Oxfam and an ex-Costa Rican ambassador to Israel says: ?People are extremely angry, and the level of hate against Israel is very high. I have lived and worked in Gaza for many years, and I have never seen such hatred from the population? (4).
 
The Palestinians also resent the Palestinian Authority?s passivity during the war. The internal crisis in Fatah, which was already factionalised, has deepened, in spite of the call for unity and resistance made by Marwan Barghouti from prison. President Mahmoud Abbas, who is himself weakened and marginalised, has called for the creation of a government of national unity. So the Gaza of tomorrow will either remain under Hamas control or will be governed by a national authority in which Hamas plays a central role. Surely not what Israel wanted.

The next phase
The focus of the next phase will be the reconstruction of Gaza, which the Israeli government wants to control tightly. No project will be accepted and not a dollar will reach Gaza without their agreement, according to Israeli officials. In addition, Hamas are to be prevented from claiming this aid. Israel has gained support on this from the EU commissioner for external affairs, Benita Ferrero-Waldner (5), but as there is no other authority in Gaza but Hamas, reconstruction risks being limited to humanitarian aid. All the conditions for renewed hostilities against Israel will once again be met; the Israeli blockade was one of the principal causes for the last escalation.
 
The war has profoundly altered the regional order, too, though not in the way that Israel wished. First, it has confirmed the isolation of the Palestinian Authority. It has encouraged the consolidation of a resistance front based in Qatar (site of the biggest US base in the region) and Syria. This alliance was made concrete at a meeting in Doha, in which 12 Arab countries took part (among them Algeria, Morocco, Lebanon and Iraq, America?s supposed ally) along with Senegal (which holds the presidency of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference), Turkey, Indonesia, Venezuela and Iran. Mauritania has suspended diplomatic relations with Israel and Qatar has broken off economic links. Venezuela and Bolivia have also severed their diplomatic relations.
 
A few days later, on 19 and 20 January, the Arab summit in Kuwait brought a fragile reconciliation even if it didn?t remove differences of opinion. This was made easier by Israel?s refusal to negotiate a ceasefire as proposed by president Hosni Mubarak of Egypt. Angered by this rebuff and by the signing of a separate US-Israeli agreement to combat arms imports to Gaza (and therefore control the border with Egypt), Mubarak toughened his stance.
 
Turkey, Israel?s traditional ally, has confirmed its growing importance on the regional stage. Like Mubarak, Turkey?s prime minister, Recip Erdogan felt humiliated by Olmert, who kept quiet about his intentions regarding Gaza when he saw his Turkish counterpart during a visit to Ankara on 22 and 23 December. The day after the offensive was launched on 27 December, Erdogan said: ?This attack, coming while we are making such efforts for peace, is a blow against peace? (6). Not only did Turkey, the mediator which had brought Israel and Syria to the verge of resuming direct negotiations, suspend its efforts, it also called for Israel?s suspension from the UN the day after it fired on UN buildings in Gaza.
During the crisis, Turkey has strengthened its relations with Hamas and is hoping to mediate between it and the Palestinian Authority. And Turkish popular opinion has translated into demonstrations in which several million people have taken to the streets in Turkish towns 
and villages.
 
Iran has also seen its regional position strengthened. It has extended its alliances in the Arab and Islamic world. Its radical discourse has been increasingly echoed within the region and it is now in a position of strength vis-?-vis the new US administration. However, Tehran has shown restraint in the crisis. Iranian supreme leader ayatollah Ali Khamenei has even declared that ?our hands are tied on that terrain? (7). The firing of rockets from Lebanon prompted fears that a second front might open up. Although this didn?t happen, the incident can be taken as a warning: Iran has told the Egyptian government through diplomatic channels that it will not allow Hamas to be crushed.

Contempt for Arab opinion
Western governments have nothing but contempt for Arab popular opinion. This was clear when they challenged Hamas?s victory in the democratic elections held in Palestine in 2006. They simply shrugged when in a communiqu? on 12 January the Saudi government condemned the ?racist genocide? in Gaza. They ignore the extent of protest in the Arab and Muslim world, especially in Egypt (despite the state of near-siege in Cairo) and in Afghanistan. Yet which Arab government would now be willing to sit down to peace talks with Israel? The Saudi king has announced that the 2002 Arab initiative for a comprehensive peace between the Arab world and Israel in exchange for the creation of a Palestinian state on territory occupied by Israel in 1967 won?t remain on the table for much longer.
 
Meanwhile, on Sunday 18 January, while Western journalists broadcast images of Gaza?s lunar landscape, prime minster Olmert was to be seen expressing his pleasure to six European leaders, including Nicolas Sarkozy, over their ?extraordinary support for the state of Israel and their concern about its security?. More than in any other conflict since 1967, the European position, especially that of France, has been aligned with the Israeli government?s (see ?A people abandoned?). In retrospect, the upgrading of relations between the EU and Israel in early December 2008 looks like a green light to the operation in Gaza. In spite of the Israeli offensive, the EU (and France) will strengthen their bilateral relations with Tel Aviv (8).
 
This Western alliance engaged in the fight against ?Islamic terrorism? has more than a hint of the crusades about it. Without going as far as Silvio Berlusconi, who explained in Jerusalem: ?When I heard about the rocket fire at Israel, I felt that it was a danger to Italy, and to the entire West? (9), or the director of L?Express, who wrote that the Israeli army was fighting ?for our peace? (10) ? some on the right used to explain in the 1980s that the apartheid government was fighting ?for us? in southern Africa, against communism, the Soviet Union and Cuba ? president Sarkozy has explained on many occasions that Hamas bore a heavy responsibility for this war as it had broken the truce, which is untrue (see ?Reasons for war: lies, lies and more lies ?, opposite).
 
In spite of Sarkozy?s flying around on numerous foreign trips, France has lost a great deal of credit, as demonstrated by the unprecedented attacks on it in the Arab press, including in moderate countries, where it is now bracketed with the US of George Bush. The Saudi daily Al Watan wrote on 11 January ?all the great powers have supported Israel?s position, including France, which has thus far been the symbol of balance in regional causes?. And France?s decision to fight against smuggled arms in Gaza can only be construed as an operation to protect an occupying power: no one has called upon Israel to stop re-arming itself.
 
?A pointless war has led to a moral defeat for Israel? ? so ran the headline in the British Sunday paper, the Observer on 18 January. The majority of moral barriers have crumbled in Israel during the Gaza offensive. A phrase sums up this vision: baal habayit histhtageya (?the boss has gone mad?). Its essence is captured by Giora Eiland, a former Israeli national security adviser: ?If our civilians are attacked by you, we are not going to respond in proportion, but will use all means we have to cause you such damages that you will think twice in the future? (11).
 
This tactic was used in Lebanon in 2006 and was referred to as the Dahiya doctrine, after the district in south Beirut where Hizbullah was based. The aim is to destroy an entire district or village as soon as it is believed to harbour terrorists who are firing on Israel. It was employed again in Gaza and constitutes what international law recognises as a war crime. Yet it is now openly demanded in Israel. In a letter to prime minster Olmert in 2007, the former Sephardic grand rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu explained ?there is absolutely no moral prohibition against indiscriminate killing of civilians during a potential massive military offensive on Gaza aimed at stopping the rocket launching? (12). The longer the occupation, the more it corrupts the occupier. One can only imagine what liberties would have been taken by France in Algeria if the war had gone on for 40 years.
 
The South African government, showing more determination than most, has condemned Israeli aggression against Gaza. The long experience of fighting the apartheid regime taught ANC leaders all about the hypocrisy of western rhetoric on violence and terrorism. Writing about his negotiations with the white South African government and its demands for the end to violence, Nelson Mandela said: ?I responded that the state was responsible for the violence and that it is always the oppressor, not the oppressed, who dictates the form of the struggle. If the oppressor uses violence, the oppressed have no alternative but to respond violently. In our case, it was simply a legitimate form of self-defence? (13).

Translated by George Miller

(1) As quoted in ?The time has come to say these things?, 
New York Review of Books, 4-17 December 2008.
(2) Rashid Khalidi, ?What you don?t know about Gaza?, 
New York Times, 7 January 2009.
(3) Interview with Le Monde, 18-19 January 2009.
(4) Mel Frykberg, ?Gazans Do Not Blame Hamas?, IPS, 
20 January 2009.
(5) Declaration of 19 January 2009.
(6) Today?s Zaman, Ankara, 29 December 2008.
(7) Trista Parsi, ?Israel, Gaza and Iran: Trapping Obama in Imagined Fault Lines?, The Huffington Post, 13 January 2009.
(8) The EU has decided, in agreement with Israel, to temporarily suspend this upgrading of relations. The Union for the Mediterranean has also been a victim of the war; all meetings have been put on hold at Egypt?s request.
(9) Haaretz.com, 19 January 2009.
(10) Christophe Barbier, ?Une guerre juste, juste une guerre?, L?Express, 14 January 2009.
(11) International Herald Tribune, 20 January 2009.
(12) Jerusalem Post, 30 May 2007.
(13) Nelson Mandela, A Long Walk to Freedom, Little, Brown, New York and London, 1994, p545.

English language editorial director: Wendy Kristianasen - all rights reserved ? 1997-2009 Le Monde diplomatique. 




From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Fri Feb  6 00:00:37 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 02:00:37 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Krugman hits panic button as Pres.,
	Sen. Dems retreat on "stimulus"
Message-ID: <552710A5F15A416FBC6324E74239035F@office1pc>

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/06/opinion/06krugman.html
February 6, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist
On the Edge 
By PAUL KRUGMAN
A not-so-funny thing happened on the way to economic recovery. Over the last
two weeks, what should have been a deadly serious debate about how to save
an economy in desperate straits turned, instead, into hackneyed political
theater, with Republicans spouting all the old clich?s about wasteful
government spending and the wonders of tax cuts. 

It?s as if the dismal economic failure of the last eight years never
happened ? yet Democrats have, incredibly, been on the defensive. Even if a
major stimulus bill does pass the Senate, there?s a real risk that important
parts of the original plan, especially aid to state and local governments,
will have been emasculated.

Somehow, Washington has lost any sense of what?s at stake ? of the reality
that we may well be falling into an economic abyss, and that if we do, it
will be very hard to get out again.

It?s hard to exaggerate how much economic trouble we?re in. The crisis began
with housing, but the implosion of the Bush-era housing bubble has set
economic dominoes falling not just in the United States, but around the
world. 

Consumers, their wealth decimated and their optimism shattered by collapsing
home prices and a sliding stock market, have cut back their spending and
sharply increased their saving ? a good thing in the long run, but a huge
blow to the economy right now. Developers of commercial real estate,
watching rents fall and financing costs soar, are slashing their investment
plans. Businesses are canceling plans to expand capacity, since they aren?t
selling enough to use the capacity they have. And exports, which were one of
the U.S. economy?s few areas of strength over the past couple of years, are
now plunging as the financial crisis hits our trading partners.

Meanwhile, our main line of defense against recessions ? the Federal
Reserve?s usual ability to support the economy by cutting interest rates ?
has already been overrun. The Fed has cut the rates it controls basically to
zero, yet the economy is still in free fall. 

It?s no wonder, then, that most economic forecasts warn that in the absence
of government action we?re headed for a deep, prolonged slump. Some private
analysts predict double-digit unemployment. The Congressional Budget Office
is slightly more sanguine, but its director, nonetheless, recently warned
that ?absent a change in fiscal policy ... the shortfall in the nation?s
output relative to potential levels will be the largest ? in duration and
depth ? since the Depression of the 1930s.?

Worst of all is the possibility that the economy will, as it did in the
?30s, end up stuck in a prolonged deflationary trap.

We?re already closer to outright deflation than at any point since the Great
Depression. In particular, the private sector is experiencing widespread
wage cuts for the first time since the 1930s, and there will be much more of
that if the economy continues to weaken.

As the great American economist Irving Fisher pointed out almost 80 years
ago, deflation, once started, tends to feed on itself. As dollar incomes
fall in the face of a depressed economy, the burden of debt becomes harder
to bear, while the expectation of further price declines discourages
investment spending. These effects of deflation depress the economy further,
which leads to more deflation, and so on. 

And deflationary traps can go on for a long time. Japan experienced a ?lost
decade? of deflation and stagnation in the 1990s ? and the only thing that
let Japan escape from its trap was a global boom that boosted the nation?s
exports. Who will rescue America from a similar trap now that the whole
world is slumping at the same time?

Would the Obama economic plan, if enacted, ensure that America won?t have
its own lost decade? Not necessarily: a number of economists, myself
included, think the plan falls short and should be substantially bigger. But
the Obama plan would certainly improve our odds. And that?s why the efforts
of Republicans to make the plan smaller and less effective ? to turn it into
little more than another round of Bush-style tax cuts ? are so destructive.

So what should Mr. Obama do? Count me among those who think that the
president made a big mistake in his initial approach, that his attempts to
transcend partisanship ended up empowering politicians who take their
marching orders from Rush Limbaugh. What matters now, however, is what he
does next. 

It?s time for Mr. Obama to go on the offensive. Above all, he must not shy
away from pointing out that those who stand in the way of his plan, in the
name of a discredited economic philosophy, are putting the nation?s future
at risk. The American economy is on the edge of catastrophe, and much of the
Republican Party is trying to push it over that edge. 






From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Fri Feb  6 01:05:27 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 03:05:27 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] How Rome's endless "war on terror" ended up -- an
 ahistorical thought for today
Message-ID: <9C9A0CD935804062AAB13556D01867A6@office1pc>

This is an excerpt from a review in the latest London Review of Books, now
online. I include the concluding paragraphs, but the whole review is a very
fun read. My fascination with this kind of thing is one of the reasons why
Edward Gibbon is one of my all-time favorite writers.
Fred Feldman


http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n03/kuli01_.html
London Review of Books
Bed-Hopping and Coup-Plotting
Michael Kulikowski 
Attila the Hun: Barbarian Terror and the Fall of the Roman Empire by
Christopher Kelly. Bodley Head,  290 pp., ?17.99, September 2008

[snip]
A year rarely goes by without a new version of the Attila story, whether
told in its own right or as part of the story of Rome?s fall. Given that all
the thorny historical problems were worked out decades ago, each new version
differs from the last mainly by way of emphasis, artistic colour, and the
author?s competence as a historian. Kelly?s well-told and reliable account
is the best to have come along in years, showing a judicious approach to
archaeological evidence that one could wish more widely imitated. Its
subtitle and some of its conclusions, however, stand rather too close to a
revenant ?it were the Huns wot done it? school of analysis: no Huns means no
Goths means no fall of the Roman Empire. 

The revival of this external catastrophist model, last popular immediately
after the Second World War, is no doubt a response to the rose-tinted,
EU-inspired interpretations of the 1990s, which at their height could
construe the fall of the empire as a Mediterranean break from which the
barbarian holidaymakers forgot to return. Yet I suspect that barbarian
hordes have come back into vogue because they are, in their way, a
comforting explanation. If only the aliens had been kept out, if only the
empire had had the sense to strike back in time, then Rome wouldn?t have
fallen. 



In a Western world that feels itself increasingly under assault from
mystifying outside forces, from multiculturalism where once there was
monoculture, and from Islamism where once there were colonies, the model of
barbarian invasion spares us having to contemplate a far queasier
proposition: the worrying capacity of an entire society to collapse, and a
whole culture to disappear, through stupidity, greed, indifference and the
weight of its own unsustainable contradictions.

That is precisely what happened to the Roman West. Its great magnates would
not countenance the rise of a new elite of petits fonctionnaires ? of the
sort that took over in the East, newly rich and deeply invested in the
empire?s success, if indifferent as a class to the fortunes of any
particular emperor. Unwilling to pay the taxes that might have sustained a
professional army, the West?s senatorial magnates forced the state to rely
on warbands with no connection to it save the general who employed them.
Small wonder that earlier generals had relied on barbarian recruits the way
Aetius relied on Hun mercenaries, or that his soldiers guaranteed his
authority rather better than his imperial rank did. Small wonder, too, that
every other would-be strongman in the West followed suit, and that the
officer?s uniform of the Pyrenean macaque replaced civilian finery as the
visible symbol of genuine power. The old civilian magnates of the West
discovered too late that their unwillingness to support the emperor?s
administration might cause the imperial structure that sustained their own
position to collapse. As the emperor and his supposed representatives grew
weaker, so local sources of power ? the warlords, the bandit chiefs, the
barbarian kings on Roman soil ? came to look more attractive and less alien.
It took only a couple of decades for a generation to realise, with genuine
surprise, that they had created a world that no longer needed an emperor. As
for Attila, he and his Huns were spume on the waves of the historic,
catastrophic implosion of ancient society. It was his inadvertent
achievement to have razed Aquileia to the ground, and create a world in
which Venice could be born. But the Western Roman Empire had already settled
on a method of destroying itself that would have been effective had Attila
never existed.

Michael Kulikowski is Riggsby Director of the Marco Institute for Medieval
and Renaissance Studies at the University of Tennessee. His books include
Late Roman Spain and Its Cities and Rome?s Gothic Wars.
  From the archive
Every Single Document
Inga Clendinnen on Raul Hilberg?s Sources of Holocaust Research

Mr Shepperd to you
R.W. Johnson on Classes and Cultures: England 1918-51 by Ross McKibbin

Taking Sides
John Mullan: on the high road with Bonnie Prince Charlie

Reasons to be Miserable
James Meek: The Day My Pants Froze

Stewing Waters
Tim Parks salutes Garibaldi






From laracrete at verizon.net  Fri Feb  6 02:05:14 2009
From: laracrete at verizon.net (lara crete)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 04:05:14 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Depression Era Histories
Message-ID: <e55c10f3186eba17e9833006896f1f6c@verizon.net>

My  personal  contact with the Great Depression era in America started 
with the very informative book  "Only Yesterday" by  Frederick Lewis 
Allen.
In keeping with its  subtitle " An Informal History of the 1920's", 
F.L. Allen gently introduces the reader into the atmosphere of that 
time, where the character of the nation as whole becomes vivid and 
recognizable to everyone, who, not being a native to America, is 
learning about  it nowadays . The book  first was published in 1931 . 
Indeed, it is ONLY YESTERDAY!
  
      



From glparramatta at greenleft.org.au  Fri Feb  6 02:51:22 2009
From: glparramatta at greenleft.org.au (glparramatta)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 20:51:22 +1100
Subject: [Marxism] New left party -- Power of the Masses Party -- formed in
 Philippines | Links
Message-ID: <498C081A.7040804@greenleft.org.au>

By *Peter Boyle*

Manila, February 1, 2009 ? More than a thousand people, including 920 
elected delegates, attended the inaugural congress of Partido Lakas ng 
Masa (literally "Power of the Masses Party") on January 30, 2009. They 
represented the mass organisations of workers, urban poor, peasants, 
students, street vendors, jeepney and tricycle drivers, women and senior 
citizens ? a mass base estimated at 300,000 according to PLM leaders. 
The congress adopted a target of 1 million members in Manila and 2 
million in the country as a whole by 2010 (when presidential elections 
are due).

The slogan "PLM: A new party for our time, a party of change, a party of 
socialism" set a confident tone for the congress.

Sonny Melencio, who was elected chairperson of the PLM, describes the 
new party as a "combination mass movement and electoral party" that was 
inspired by the recent Latin American experiences which have put into 
power progressive and socialist parties in countries like Venezuela and 
Bolivia.

Full articles plus three-part video interview at 
http://links.org.au/node/893

Subscribe free to /Links - International Journal of Socialist Renewal/ -
at http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373


From ecosocialism at gmail.com  Fri Feb  6 05:41:00 2009
From: ecosocialism at gmail.com (Ian Angus)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 07:41:00 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] New on Socialist Voice
Message-ID: <733b65360902060441x4ed781deqc338c6f59d714332@mail.gmail.com>

SOCIALIST VOICE
Marxist Perspectives for the 21st Century
www.socialistvoice,ca

Recent additions:

Roger Annis and John Riddell
THE CAPITALIST CRASH AND THE NEW CHALLENGES FACING SOCIALISTS
<http://www.socialistvoice.ca/?p=365>

Ian Angus
CHARLES DARWIN AND MATERIALIST SCIENCE
<http://www.socialistvoice.ca/?p=366>


From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Feb  6 07:37:45 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 09:37:45 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Panetta approves of "tougher" interrogation methods and
	renditions
Message-ID: <498C4B39.6030504@panix.com>

NY Times, February 6, 2009
Panetta Open to Tougher Methods in Some C.I.A. Interrogation
By MARK MAZZETTI

WASHINGTON ? Leon E. Panetta, the White House pick to lead the Central 
Intelligence Agency, on Thursday left open the possibility that the 
agency could seek permission to use interrogation methods more 
aggressive than the limited menu that President Obama authorized under 
new rules issued last month.

Under insistent questioning from a Senate panel, Mr. Panetta said that 
in extreme cases, if interrogators were unable to extract critical 
information from a terrorism suspect, he would seek White House approval 
for the C.I.A. to use methods that would go beyond those permitted under 
the new rules.

?If we had a ticking bomb situation, and obviously, whatever was being 
used I felt was not sufficient, I would not hesitate to go to the 
president of the United States and request whatever additional authority 
I would need,? Mr. Panetta said in his nomination hearing before the 
Senate Intelligence Committee.

He gave no specifics about what interrogation methods he would suggest, 
but he said that the agency would always abide by the law. He also said 
he believed that interrogators could reliably get information from 
detainees using noncoercive means.

?We can protect this country, we can get the information we need, we can 
provide for the security of the American people and we can abide by the 
law,? Mr. Panetta said. ?I?m absolutely convinced that we can do that.?

Mr. Panetta would inherit a spy agency governed by rules somewhat more 
restrictive than under President George W. Bush, because of the 
executive orders issued by Mr. Obama last month that would shut agency 
prisons and require agency interrogators, for the time being, to abide 
by the same noncoercive interrogation techniques as those used by the 
military.

Some critics of the new administration, including former Vice President 
Dick Cheney, have said that limiting the agency?s role in 
counterterrorism could backfire and leave the United States more open to 
a terrorist attack.

In his testimony, Mr. Panetta said that under the rules issued by Mr. 
Obama, the C.I.A. is still allowed to detain and question terrorism 
suspects before transferring them to a military jail. But he said that 
unlike during the Bush administration, the International Committee of 
the Red Cross would be granted access to C.I.A. prisoners.

Mr. Panetta also said the agency would continue the Bush administration 
practice of ?rendition? ? picking terrorism suspects off the street and 
sending them to a third country. But he said the agency would refuse to 
deliver a suspect into the hands of a country known for torture or other 
actions ?that violate our human values.?

A task force appointed by Mr. Obama is to investigate whether any 
interrogation methods beyond those currently allowed ought to be 
approved. Mr. Panetta did not hesitate Thursday to label as torture the 
interrogation technique known as waterboarding, which C.I.A. 
interrogators used on three terrorism suspects in 2002 and 2003 and has 
since prohibited.

But Mr. Panetta said no agency operatives should be prosecuted for 
waterboarding ? which induces the feeling of drowning ? or any other 
interrogation method that had been authorized by the Justice Department.

Before the same Senate panel last month, Dennis C. Blair, who is now the 
director of national intelligence, declined to say that waterboarding is 
torture, telling senators that it would be awkward for him to lead 
intelligence operatives he had accused of carrying out an illegal act.

For years, C.I.A. officials have argued that the agency?s detention and 
interrogation program not only helped thwart terrorist attacks, but also 
was the government?s most valuable resource for gaining insight into Al 
Qaeda.

Mr. Panetta pledged to examine the harsh interrogation techniques used 
by the spy agency after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to determine whether 
any damage done to America?s reputation abroad ?counterbalanced? the 
intelligence gained during the interrogations.

Although the C.I.A. can no longer hold prisoners indefinitely, and can 
no longer hide prisoners from the Red Cross, the exact rules governing 
agency detention operations remain murky. For instance, Mr. Obama has 
yet to spell out exactly how long the C.I.A. can detain a prisoner, and 
how long a detainee can be in C.I.A. custody before the agency notifies 
the Red Cross.

Obama administration officials said the agency was likely to follow a 
Pentagon rule that requires Red Cross notification within a few weeks of 
a prisoner?s capture.

Mr. Panetta is scheduled to testify further on Friday, but is expected 
to be easily confirmed by the Senate, which would make him the final 
member of Mr. Obama?s national security team to join the administration. 
Mr. Obama did not choose him for the job until early January, after 
other candidates for the job were passed over because of their 
association with controversial Bush administration counterterrorism 
policies.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Feb  6 07:40:18 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 09:40:18 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Le Monde reports on LCR/NPA
Message-ID: <498C4BD2.5080701@panix.com>

http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/zappi050209.html
France: LCR Dissolves Itself to Form NPA
by Sylvia Zappi

The Revolutionary Communist League (LCR) will soon be no more.  On 
Thursday, 5 February, its activists will vote for its self-dissolution 
to create the New Anti-Capitalist Party (NPA).  Some seven hundred 
delegates are expected at a four-day conference, 5-8 February, in la 
Plaine-Saint-Denis (Seine-Saint-Denis), to launch the new party of 
Olivier Besancenot.

The death certificate won't be issued without squeaks or critiques. 
Some veterans of the LCR won't be ready for it without four hours of 
discussions to settle their accounts.  And, for true Trotskyites, having 
to accept a truncated program and a line judged "too vague" -- no, that 
can't happen.  "We are making a big mistake setting up a 'party of 
struggle.'  This spontaneist decision (driven by the social movement) 
puts us at the mercy of events," writes Gilles Suze, a long-time member, 
in a letter to the LCR leaders.  "It feels more like attending a 
congress to liquidate the party than one to surpass it," moans Christian 
Picquet, of the party minority.

Enthusiasm is indeed palpable in the entourage of Mr. Besancenot.  The 
young spokesman's popularity rating has not declined (60% have positive 
opinions about him on the scorecard of Paris Match, 22 January).  Nor 
has his success in demonstrations: the last big march on 29 January saw 
him mobbed by the curious as well as his fans.  He remains the "best of 
the Left" in the eyes of his associates and does not intend to leave 
this space -- too big for the LCR -- vacant, when the economic crisis 
seems to prove him right.

It's time to think big and broad.  The NPA claims 9,000 founding 
members, three times more than the "League."  One won't hear "comrades" 
at its meetings -- the public has changed.  There are indeed a handful 
of veterans of Lutte ouvri?re, friends of Jean-Marc Rouillan, founder of 
Direct Action, some members of the Bov? committees, anti-growth 
environmentalists, and alter-globalization activists.  But most are 
novices in politics.  "Their membership base are those who are just fed 
up with Sarkozy and see Besancenot as the only real personality of the 
Left," says Alain Krivine, one of the LCR founders.

The NPA is a new radical party whose two identifiers are the "break with 
capitalism" and the "total independence from the Socialist Party."  Plus 
a touch of ecology, re-baptized "ecosocialism."  Gone is the reference 
to Trotskyism as communism: the party of Olivier Besancenot is no longer 
affiliated with the Fourth International founded by Leon Trotsky.  Only 
the LCR militants remain members.  "We made the decision to create the 
NPA from the bottom up, without another political partner, and we have 
succeeded.  This is not an LCR Lite," assures Pierre-Fran?ois Grond, Mr. 
Besancenot's right-hand man.

The change is visible: the membership profile has changed, more 
rebellious and less "intellectual."  But the ideological positioning and 
the essentials of the organizational structure remain those of the LCR. 
  The line of self-assertion and demarcation vis-?-vis the Socialist 
Party -- "The true Left is us," Mr. Besancenot continues to proclaim -- 
in fact echoes the beginnings of the Revolutionary Communist League 
which, with its Red committees, thought it could alone capture "the 
spirit of May" 1968.

As for the new governing bodies, their nucleus include a half of the 
League leaders.  "We will be a minority," Mr. Grond says in explanation. 
  "It's Besancenot's friends who are in control of the core structure," 
Mr. Picquet disputes.

"The LCR is dead.  Long live the NPA!" the militants will chant on 
Sunday.  Their leaders have several months to demonstrate that they know 
how to make it live and prosper.

The original article "La LCR se dissout pour donner naissance au NPA" 
appears in the 5 February 2009 issue of Le Monde.  Translation by Yoshie 
Furuhashi.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Feb  6 07:45:56 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 09:45:56 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Did Mega-Dam in China lead to earthquake?
Message-ID: <498C4D24.9040007@panix.com>

NY Times, February 6, 2009
Possible Link Between Dam and China Quake
By SHARON LaFRANIERE

BEIJING ? Nearly nine months after a devastating earthquake in Sichuan 
Province, China, left 80,000 people dead or missing, a growing number of 
American and Chinese scientists are suggesting that the calamity was 
triggered by a four-year-old reservoir built close to the earthquake?s 
geological fault line.

A Columbia University scientist who studied the quake has said that it 
may have been triggered by the weight of 320 million tons of water in 
the Zipingpu Reservoir less than a mile from a well-known major fault. 
His conclusions, presented to the American Geophysical Union in 
December, coincide with a new finding by Chinese geophysicists that the 
dam caused significant seismic changes before the earthquake.

Scientists emphasize that the link between the dam and the failure of 
the fault has not been conclusively proved, and that even if the dam 
acted as a trigger, it would only have hastened a quake that would have 
occurred at some point.

Nonetheless, any suggestion that a government project played a role in 
one of the biggest natural disasters in recent Chinese history is likely 
to be politically explosive.

The issue of government accountability and responsiveness has boiled 
over in China in the past year. The grieving parents of thousands of 
schoolchildren killed in the disaster have already made the 
7.9-magnitude earthquake a political issue, charging that children died 
needlessly in unsafe school buildings approved by negligent or corrupt 
officials.

More public anger erupted last year when the government failed to 
prevent the sale of tainted milk powder that sickened nearly 300,000 
children and killed six.

?Any kind of government-related disaster presently is very, very 
damaging and politically extremely sensitive,? said Cheng Li, the China 
research director at the Brookings Institution.

If it is proved that the earthquake ?was related to a man-made situation 
and not just a natural disaster, the government will be very 
uncomfortable with that kind of report because of the whole issue of 
government accountability,? Mr. Li said.

Questions about the Zipingpu Dam are especially delicate because China 
is building many major hydroelectric dams in the southwest, a region 
which has abundant water resources but is considered prone to earthquakes.

In a petition to the government in July, a group of environmentalists 
and scholars said the fact that government scientists had underestimated 
the risk of the May earthquake raised questions about a host of other 
dams built in the same valley and along five other major rivers, 
according to an article published by Probe International, an 
environmental advocacy group. Chinese authorities have steadfastly 
dismissed any notion that reservoir-building in Sichuan Province placed 
citizens at any added risk, and they have blocked some Web sites of 
environmental groups that suggest that dangers have been overlooked.

In a December article in the Chinese magazine Science Times, two 
scientists from the Chinese Academy of Sciences strongly denied that the 
dam played any role in the earthquake. ?The earthquake research 
community outside and inside China has widely accepted the notion that 
the May 12 Wenchuan earthquake was a huge natural disaster caused by 
massive crustal movement, because no reservoir triggered-quake with a 
magnitude eight has ever occurred in history,? said Pan Jiazheng, an 
expert in hydroengineering, according to a translation published by 
Probe International.

Scientists generally agree that a reservoir, no matter how big, cannot 
by itself cause an earthquake. But Leonardo Seeber, a senior scientist 
with the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, said 
the impact of so much water could hasten an earthquake?s occurrence if 
geological conditions for a quake already existed. He said the best 
known example was a 1967 earthquake triggered by the Koyna Dam in a 
remote area of India, with a magnitude of about 6.5 and a death toll of 
about 180 people.

Mr. Seeber said that while the link between the Sichuan earthquake and 
the Zipingpu Dam was not yet proved, work by Christian Klose, a Columbia 
University researcher specializing in geophysical hazards, suggested the 
stress caused by the water?s weight might have hastened the quake by a 
few hundred years.

?It would have occurred anyway,? Mr. Seeber said. ?But of course the 
people who were affected might think the timing is an important difference.?

Mr. Klose estimated that the weight of the water in the Zipingpu 
reservoir amounted to 25 times the natural stress that tectonic 
movements exert in a year. The added pressure, he wrote in an abstract 
to an unpublished study, ?resulted in the Beichaun fault coming close to 
failure.?

Fifty stories tall and big enough to hold more than one billion cubic 
meters of water, the Zipingpu Dam astride the Minjiang River was billed 
as one of China?s biggest water control projects.

Officials said the $750 million project, part of a grand plan to develop 
regions in China?s south and west, would generate 760,000 kilowatts of 
electricity, irrigate more farmland, help control flooding and provide 
more water to industries and residents of nearby Chengdu, a city of more 
than 10 million.

Almost as soon as construction got under way in 2001, one expert, Li 
Youcai, voiced fears that officials were underplaying the risk of a 
major earthquake in the region, but government officials rejected his 
argument, according to an article published last year on China Dialogue, 
a Web site devoted to environmental news.

Officials allowed the reservoir to fill with water in late 2004. Fan 
Xiao, a chief engineer with the Sichuan Geology and Mineral Bureau, said 
that from late 2004 to late 2005, the data showed 730 minor earthquakes, 
with magnitudes of 3 or less.

When the major earthquake struck last May, it originated 3.4 miles from 
the reservoir. The rupture in the Earth?s crust stretched for 185 miles, 
initially moving in a direction that Mr. Klose said was consistent with 
the pressure from the water?s weight.

Mr. Fan, the chief engineer for the regional geology investigation team, 
told reporters soon afterward that he believed that the reservoir 
influenced the timing, magnitude and location of the earthquake.

?The main lesson is that in building these kinds of projects we need to 
give more consideration to scientific planning and not simply consider 
the electricity or water or the economic interests,? Mr. Fan said.

The debate reignited in December when two scientists with the China 
Earthquake Administration and three other researchers published a study 
in the Chinese journal Seismology and Geology. They concluded only that 
the weight of the reservoir?s water and diffusion of water from the 
reservoir below the Earth?s surface ?clearly affected the local 
seismicity? over a period of nearly four years before the fault ruptured.

The Chinese researchers called for further study to see whether the 
reservoir helped trigger the earthquake. One of them, Du Fang, with the 
Sichuan Earthquake Administration, said Thursday that it was impossible 
to know whether the reservoir influenced the earthquake without more 
research. ?The possibility exists,? she said.

Ms. Du said she and other scientists were free to research the issue 
fully. ?We scientists are free to research the topic we proposed, as 
long as it is worth studying,? she said. ?I don?t feel any restrictions 
on access to the data from the government.?


From lueko.willms at t-online.de  Fri Feb  6 08:03:04 2009
From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (Lueko Willms)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 16:03:04 +0100 (MEZ)
Subject: [Marxism] Le Monde reports on LCR/NPA
Message-ID: <000.4072070028518c49.006.lueko.willms.dialin@t-online.de>

On Fri, 06 Feb 2009 09:40:18 -0500, Louis Proyect wrote:

> The Revolutionary Communist League (LCR) will soon be no more.  On 
> Thursday, 5 February, its activists will vote for its self-dissolution 
> to create the New Anti-Capitalist Party (NPA).  Some seven hundred 
> delegates are expected at a four-day conference, 5-8 February, in la 
> Plaine-Saint-Denis (Seine-Saint-Denis), to launch the new party of 
> Olivier Besancenot. 

  The dissolution has been approved by 87.1% of the about 150
delegates, 
11.5% have voted against, 1.4% have abstained, one can read in an AFP
note 
presented on the LCR-Rouge website 
> <http://www.lcr-rouge.org/spip.php?article2950>

  The website of the NPA congress is <http://www.npa2009.org> 

  On the dissolution of the LCR see their website
<http://www.lcr-rouge.org/> 
with videotaped speeches from their dissolution congress e.g. by
Alain Krivine 
and more. 

  Sounds all quite good. But I am tempted to ask the comrades the
question 
which Che Guevara posed to the Colombian PC people he visited in
their 
office on his pre-Cuban tours thru Latin America: "How do you think
to take 
power?". 

  Taking power and the Cuban revolution are the two big invisible
elephants nobody dares to talk about in the room of this "New
Anticapitalist Party". 

  It is good to be against capitalism, but what is the party for? 

  Unfortunately I can't be there to get a feeling of the party
members ... no 
money for the train. 


Comradely yours, 
L?ko Willms
Frankfurt, Germany
--------------------------------
visit http://www.mlwerke.de Marx, Engels, Luxemburg, Lenin, Trotzki
in 
German



From markalause at gmail.com  Fri Feb  6 08:12:45 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 10:12:45 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Did Mega-Dam in China lead to earthquake?
In-Reply-To: <498C4D24.9040007@panix.com>
References: <498C4D24.9040007@panix.com>
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0902060712h5bc8567k9ed49ea3e5646b3b@mail.gmail.com>

This is not at all far-fetched.  The same sort of link has been
suggested, in the inverse, by scientists studying global warming.  The
polar caps have been a weighty consideration in achieving what
tentative balances exist between tectonic plates.  As the ice melts
and the weight decreases, stresses earlier constrained by the weight
are much more likely to cause a slip between the plates or even along
any of the minor internal fissures within the plates.

ML


From nmgoro at gmail.com  Fri Feb  6 09:29:52 2009
From: nmgoro at gmail.com (Nestor Gorojovsky)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 13:29:52 -0300
Subject: [Marxism] Le Monde reports on LCR/NPA
In-Reply-To: <000.4072070028518c49.006.lueko.willms.dialin@t-online.de>
References: <000.4072070028518c49.006.lueko.willms.dialin@t-online.de>
Message-ID: <498C6580.1030108@gmail.com>

Lueko Willms escribi?:
> On Fri, 06 Feb 2009 09:40:18 -0500, Louis Proyect wrote:
> 
>> The Revolutionary Communist League (LCR) will soon be no more.  On 
>> Thursday, 5 February, its activists will vote for its self-dissolution 
>> to create the New Anti-Capitalist Party (NPA).  Some seven hundred 
>> delegates are expected at a four-day conference, 5-8 February, in la 
>> Plaine-Saint-Denis (Seine-Saint-Denis), to launch the new party of 
>> Olivier Besancenot. 

[...]

> 
>   Sounds all quite good. But I am tempted to ask the comrades the
> question which Che Guevara posed to the Colombian PC people he visited in
> their office on his pre-Cuban tours thru Latin America: "How do you think
> to take power?". 

Ernesto Guevara was clearly aware of the role played by the CParties in 
Latin America by those years. Though he had been no Peronist himself, he 
had been very sympathetic to Peronist achievements (indeed, and this is 
something not even Cubans, who rarely understand Peronism, use to 
comment in public- while in Guatemala he was working for a news agency 
of Peronist Argentina -or at least getting a salary from such agency).

And he had witnessed the pathetic if not counter-revolutionary role of 
the Argentinean PC, who were at the first line in the generalized 
struggle of all of our "Left" against Peronism.

When the Punta del Este conference, he is famous for having greeted the 
Argentinean CP people who had gone to see him there with a "Hello, so 
that now what is the next revolution you will try to destroy?"

> 
>   Taking power and the Cuban revolution are the two big invisible
> elephants nobody dares to talk about in the room of this "New
> Anticapitalist Party". 
> 
>   It is good to be against capitalism, but what is the party for? 
> 
>   Unfortunately I can't be there to get a feeling of the party
> members ... no 
> money for the train. 

No money, no taking power...

:-)


From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Fri Feb  6 08:49:52 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 07:49:52 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Did Mega-Dam in China lead to earthquake?
Message-ID: <498C5C20.3020002@gmail.com>

Well, one of the obvious things, a good thing, is that the reservoir 
which *may* of stimulated the earthquake, itself survived *relatively* 
unscathed. There were, according to some of the Google News reports I 
looked at after Louis posted this, cracks that appeared in the dam 
itself. Later it seems the poised no threat to the integrity of the dam 
itself. But who knows for sure?

A mountain side collapsed into the reservoir as a byproduct of the earth 
quake.

China is building more dams and, like the 3 Gorges Dam that currently is 
the largest one in the world. The dams themselves represent massive 
mitigator to the building of coal plants, another scourge of Chinese 
economic growth. The reservoirs, for the first few years, represent 
methane producers as well as vegetation now underwater decomposes and 
releases the gas.

China is planning to build MORE of these massive dams. At least 10 more, 
around Eastern and Southern China. This issue is going to be ongoing for 
decades.

Speaking of dams, there is an international proposal to build the "Grand 
Inga Project" in Congo. It's is almost exactly *double* the size of the 
3 Gorges Project in electrical output.

David


From Waistline2 at aol.com  Fri Feb  6 09:27:10 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 11:27:10 EST
Subject: [Marxism] African American History Month 2209: Intro (2)
	dialectics of
Message-ID: <d54.458a88ef.36bdbede@aol.com>

II 
 
There is a need to speak of the precise meaning and definition of terms we  
use. 
 
The difference between a reform movement and a battle for concessions, with  
neither one more important than the other, is that a reform movement "realign  
social relations in society without changing the property relations,"  while  
concession battles do not involve realigning social relations; a  stop sign, 
wage struggles, housing, books in schools, etc. 
 
I for one cannot say what the new forms of struggle will be, that must take  
shape expressing the changes in the productive machinery of our society. Nor,  
can I say if capital has no more reform left within it, although all the 
signs  point to the beginning of the class struggle in America. Some comrades call 
any  struggle between worker and employer the class struggle or a 
manifestation of  the class struggle. 
 
I do not. 
 
Wage struggles, which communist must fight to keep on track and lead and  
complete their own logic have, hardly ever involve the working class as a class,  
at least his has been the case during all of American history. I suspect the  
same is the case with the British labor movement. 
 
This understanding leads to another law that departs with ideas that has  
been fundamental to the articulation of Marxism for the past century. 
 
The struggle between workers and capitalist express the most basic and  
fundamental contradiction of capital and capitalism. Capital rest exclusively on  
wage labor, its purchase as labor power and then deploying the worker as 
laborer  producing commodities. As the contradiction - (contradictory classes), 
governing  the entire process of reproduction in our society, neither can break 
their  relations - bond, with the other. 
 
Individual can cross the threshold or boundary of class, but just as it was  
impossible for the serf to walk out of his "serf ness," the industrial working 
 class could not walk out of "classness" as modern proletariat. The unity and 
 strife - contradiction, between worker and capitalist, their collision and  
collusion drives the capitalist system through all of its quantitative  
boundaries. What this struggle is about at all times is a struggle for either to  
secure a greater share of the social product and for greater political liberty,  
but neither can overthrow the system of which they constitute. 
 
The struggle to secure a greater share of the social product and to expand  
political liberty, is more or less an equality struggle. 
 
The projection that one of the two basic classes of any system - (mode of  
production), can overthrow the system, of which the two basic classes  
constitute, is wrong, for the exact same reason that the serf could not over  throw 
feudalism. Something else - another development had to happen to bring the  
quantitative expansion of the feudal system to an end. Even though it was the  
change in the form of wealth, from landed property to movable wealth in the form  
of gold that began the break-up of the landed property relations, it was the  
introduction of new machinery within the feudal order, that created new 
classes. 
 
Classes are formed by the introduction of new productive machinery -  
equipment, and the new classes generated within the feudal society were the  
capitalist and modern proletariat. The capitalist and modern proletariat of  which 
Marx writes are not birthed in contradiction with the feudal order.  
Contradiction is a concept of unity and strife within a thing rather than  between things. 
Only the serf was birthed in contradiction with the nobility, as  the unity 
and strife driving the system of feudalism.  Rather than being  birthed in 
contradiction with the feudal order, bourgeoisie and proletarian are  birthed in 
antagonism with the feudal order, but in contradiction with each  other. Being 
birth in antagonism with the feudal order meant a series of  conflicts in 
external collision with all the customs and ritual, the social  pecking order, 
that made feudalism, well feudalism. 
 
The dialectic of revolution, real social revolution is that contradiction  
between the two basic classes of society, drives the system through all its  
quantitative boundaries, and with the emergence and then increasing quantitative  
expansion of new class(es), the new classes collide in external collision or 
the  contradiction of feudal society is replaced, not extinguished, superseded 
by  antagonism of the new classes and this constitutes an era of political  
revolution.  A reexamination of all of Lenin?s writing on the Russian  
revolution conclusively reveals that his program in respects to the serf was to  win 
them over to the cause of proletarian revolution and this program became the  
heart of the doctrine of political Leninism, the worker-peasant alliance. A  
thousand years of rebellions by the serf could not overthrow feudalism, nor  
could the serf conceive of himself outside his feudal character and nature. In  
the historical meaning of class, the modern industrial working class was/is no  
different. 
 
How does Marx and Engels explains this external colliding, that is  
antagonism? 
 
The bourgeoisie, wherever it has got the upper hand, has put an end to all  
feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations. It has pitilessly torn asunder the  
motley feudal ties that bound man to his "natural superiors", and has left  
remaining no other nexus between man and man than naked self-interest, than  
callous "cash payment". It has drowned the most heavenly ecstasies of religious  
fervour, of chivalrous enthusiasm, of philistine sentimentalism, in the icy  
water of egotistical calculation. It has resolved personal worth into exchange  
value, and in place of the numberless indefeasible chartered freedoms, has set  
up that single, unconscionable freedom ? Free Trade. In one word, for  
exploitation, veiled by religious and political illusions, it has substituted  naked, 
shameless, direct, brutal exploitation. 
 
The bourgeoisie has stripped of its halo every occupation hitherto honoured  
and looked up to with reverent awe. It has converted the physician, the 
lawyer,  the priest, the poet, the man of science, into its paid wage labourers. 
 
The bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and has  
reduced the family relation to a mere money relation. 
 
The bourgeoisie has disclosed how it came to pass that the brutal display  of 
vigour in the Middle Ages, which reactionaries so much admire, found its  
fitting complement in the most slothful indolence. It has been the first to show  
what man?s activity can bring about. It has accomplished wonders far 
surpassing  Egyptian pyramids, Roman aqueducts, and Gothic cathedrals; it has 
conducted  expeditions that put in the shade all former Exoduses of nations and 
crusades.  
_http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch01.htm_ 
(http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch01.htm)  
 
The mode of production peculiar to the bourgeoisie, known, since Marx, as  
the capitalist mode of production, was incompatible with the local privileges  
and the privileges of estate as well as with the reciprocal personal ties of 
the  feudal system. The bourgeoisie broke up the feudal system and built upon 
its  ruins the capitalist order of society, the kingdom of free. competition, of 
 personal liberty, of the equality, before the law, of all commodity owners, 
of  all the rest of the capitalist blessings. Thenceforward the capitalist 
mode of  production could develop in freedom. 
_http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/anti-duhring/ch24.htm_ 
(http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/anti-duhring/ch24.htm)  
 
Lastly 
 
Originally an oppressed estate liable to pay dues to the ruling feudal  
nobility, recruited from all manner of serfs and villains, the burghers  conquered 
one position after another in their continuous struggle with the  nobility, 
and finally, in the most highly developed countries, took power in its  stead; 
in France, by directly overthrowing the nobility; in England, by making  it 
more and more bourgeois and incorporating it as their own ornamental head.  And 
how did they accomplish this? Simply through a change in the "economic  
situation", which sooner or later, voluntarily or as the outcome of combat, was  
followed by a change in the political conditions. The struggle of the  bourgeoisie 
against the feudal nobility is the struggle of town against country,  
industry against landed property, money economy against natural economy; and the  
decisive weapon of the bourgeoisie in this struggle was its means of economic  
power, constantly increasing through the development of industry, first  
handicraft, and then, at a later stage, progressing to manufacture, and through  the 
expansion of commerce. During the whole of this struggle political force was  
on the side of the nobility, except for a period when the Crown played the  
bourgeoisie against the nobility, in order to keep one estate in check by means  
of the other [71]; but from the moment when the bourgeoisie, still 
politically  powerless, began to grow dangerous owing to its increasing economic power, 
the  Crown resumed its alliance with the nobility, and by so doing called 
forth the  bourgeois revolution, first in England and then in France. The 
"political  conditions" in France had remained unaltered, while the "economic 
situation" had  outgrown them. Judged by his political status the nobleman was 
everything, the  burgher nothing; but judged by his social position the burgher now 
formed the  most important class in the state, while the nobleman had been 
shorn of all his  social functions and was now only drawing payment, in the 
revenues that came to  him, for these functions which had disappeared. Nor was that 
all. Bourgeois  production in its entirety was still hemmed in by the feudal 
political forms of  the Middle Ages, which this production?not only 
manufacture, but even handicraft  industry?had long outgrown; it had remained hemmed in 
by all the thousandfold  guild privileges and local and provincial customs 
barriers which had become mere  irritants and fetters on production. The bourgeois 
revolution put an end to  this. Not, however, by adjusting the economic 
situation to suit the political  conditions, in accordance with Herr D?hring's 
precept?this was precisely what  the nobles and the Crown had been vainly trying 
to do for years?but by doing the  opposite, by casting aside the old mouldering 
political rubbish and creating  political conditions in which the new 
"economic situation" could exist and  develop. And in this political and legal 
atmosphere which was suited to its  needs it developed brilliantly, so brilliantly 
that the bourgeoisie has already  come close to occupying the position held by 
the nobility in 1789: it is  becoming more and more not only socially 
superfluous, but a social hindrance; it  is more and more becoming separated from 
productive activity, and, like the  nobility in the past, becoming more and more a 
class merely drawing revenues;  and it has accomplished this revolution in 
its own position and the creation of  a new class, the proletariat, without any 
hocus-pocus of force whatever, in a  purely economic way. Even more: it did 
not in any way will this result of its  own actions land activities?on the 
contrary, this result established itself with  irresistible force, against the will 
and contrary to the intentions of the  bourgeoisie; its own productive forces 
have grown beyond its control, and, as if  necessitated by a law of nature, 
are driving the whole of bourgeois society  towards ruin, or revolution. And if 
the bourgeois now make their appeal to force  in order to save the collapsing 
"economic situation" from the final crash, this  only shows that they are 
labouring under the same delusion as Herr D?hring: the  delusion that "political 
conditions are the decisive cause of the economic  situation"; this only shows 
that they imagine, just as Herr D?hring does, that  by making use of "the 
primary", "the direct political force", they can remodel  those "facts of the 
second order" {D. Ph. 538}, the economic situation and its  inevitable 
development; and that therefore the economic consequences of the  steam-engine and the 
modern machinery driven by it, of world trade and the  banking and credit 
developments of the present day, can be blown out of  existence by them with Krupp 
guns and Mauser rifles. [72] 
 
_http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/anti-duhring/ch14.htm_ 
(http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1877/anti-duhring/ch14.htm)  
 
For the last two decades we have witnessed the systematic ousting of the  
proletariat world wide from the productive machinery in society and the  
conversion of a full 30 % of our working class into temporary workers due  exclusively 
to the slow but steady development of a new technological regime.  Given that 
the blacks were the last ones to enter the industrial social order in  our 
country, and amongst the first pushed out, the color factor obscures what is  
profound changes in the productive machinery of our country. 
 
Classes are formed by the introduction of new productive machinery into the  
production process. This quantitative injection of a new quality of machinery  
brings to an end quantitative expansion of the productive forces on the old  
basis. Not all at one time but inexorably. Then begins a period of social  
revolution. 
 
We are a full decade or so into such an era. 
 
Our working class is in the process of finding its political legs. The  
communist are the teachers of the proletariat. 
 

Proletarians Unite.
 
WL
 
This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from 
_http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm_ (http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm) 
**************Stay up to date on the latest news - from sports scores to 
stocks and so much more. (http://aol.com?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000022)


From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Feb  6 09:37:01 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 11:37:01 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Geopolitics 101
Message-ID: <498C672D.4030002@panix.com>

NY Times, February 6, 2009
Analysis: US Base Falls Victim to Kyrgyz Crisis
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 11:21 a.m. ET

Kyrgyzstan may have felt it had no choice in expelling the U.S. from a 
base vital to the war in Afghanistan.

Months of crippling electricity shortages, soaring food prices and 
rampant unemployment have caused misery for much of the population. A 
reinvigorated opposition has threatened to stage nationwide protests 
against President Kurmanbek Bakiyev.

Against that backdrop, Russia pledged to help raise $1.7 billion for a 
much-needed hydropower plant and issue a $300 million low-interest 
40-year loan repayable over a 40-year period. Moscow also agreed to give 
$150 million in aid and cancel an outstanding $190 million debt.

But Russia has also made clear its objections to the Manas air base, 
saying it was only supposed to remain for two years after the U.S. 
invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.

Moscow has denied financial support was given in exchange for Kyrgyzstan 
evicting the U.S. air base. But since the unveiling of the assistance 
package and the announcement of the base closure came within minutes of 
each other, there is little doubt among most observers that the two 
issues were linked.

Now, flush with Russian cash, Bakiyev's government can hope to begin 
clawing back some public approval.

''Giving $2 billion is an act of political support for Bakiyev that will 
help him soften the impact of the economic crisis,'' said Kyrgyz 
political analyst Mars Sariyev.

Kyrgyzstan, a largely Muslim, mountainous former Soviet nation on 
China's western frontier, has long been viewed as a relative oasis of 
democracy in a region that boasts some of the world's most repressive 
dictatorships. But observers believe Bakiyev, who himself came to power 
in 2005 as the result of a nominally pro-Western popular uprising, is on 
a drive to strengthen his grip on power.

New York-based democracy watchdog organization Freedom House noted in 
its latest country report on Kyrgyzstan that democratic rights and press 
freedoms have steadily worsened over the last year.

In recent weeks, several prominent opposition activist have been 
subjected to criminal investigations that their supporters say are 
politically motivated. In the most high-profile case, police last month 
opened a criminal investigation against the main opposition leader, 
Omurbek Tekebayev, over an alleged weapons offense.

In December, Tekebayev and several other opposition representatives 
traveled to the United States, where they held meetings with U.S. 
officials -- a visit viewed with suspicion by the Kyrgyz authorities.

While Russia's financial assistance will help Bakiyev prop up his own 
domestic appeal, the announcement to close the Manas air base seems 
certain to create irritation in the West, with which Kyrgyzstan has 
enjoyed healthy relations since gaining independence in 1991.

Many suspected that Kyrgyzstan's posture on Manas may have been a ploy 
to pressure the United States into paying more rent. Gen. David 
Petraeus, commander of U.S. operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, said 
last month that the U.S. pumps $150 million annually into Kyrgyzstan's 
economy, including $63 million in rent for Manas.

But Kyrgyz officials insisted Friday that the government will not 
reverse its decision, dashing U.S. hopes of a last-minute reprieve.

----------

Peter Leonard is AP's Central Asia correspondent based in Almaty, 
Kazakhstan.

----------

Associated Press writer Leila Saralayeva in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, 
contributed to this report.


From elishastephens at hotmail.com  Fri Feb  6 10:18:13 2009
From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 09:18:13 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Fidel: Obama no longer a virgin
Message-ID: <COL112-W1504D4D3438139C32CBAC9D7C10@phx.gbl>


The immediate response

THE response came barely a few hours later. Rahm Emmanuel, the White House chief of staff, spoke. It is of no importance that he failed to mention my modest Reflection. What is important is the response.

He told journalists that what interests President Obama is the Cuban-American community. It was the first time that he mentioned the subject since assuming power. Among those Cubans qualified to do so, they had voted 3 to 1 for the Democratic candidate in the state of Florida. The almost 12 million Cubans inhabiting the island do not interest him (Obama).

When they asked him to specify his candidate in Cuba, the man closest to the president did not wish to go into the subject in depth: "I think that the least said on Cuba, the better."

"He will authorize Cuban-Americans to travel to Cuba and send remittances."

Regarding the right of U.S. citizens to travel, he didn't even mention it.

For him, the Cuban Adjustment Act and the blockade were not worthy of any reference whatsoever.

Thus, sooner rather than later, Obama's politics are losing their virginity.

Fidel Castro Ruz

February 5, 2009


_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live?: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect. 
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t2_allup_explore_022009

From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Feb  6 10:34:13 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 12:34:13 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Castro's Socialism in Crisis
Message-ID: <498C7495.7040206@panix.com>

 From http://www.counterpunch.org/habel02062009.html

Why is the economy not working? What is the relationship between the 
state and the market in an economy where socialism replaces communism? 
What lessons can Cuba draw from China's and -- more importantly -- 
Vietnam's experience? Replies differ between those who still see 
themselves as Fidelistas and those who are Raulistas. If they don't 
necessarily represent their mentors, they certainly express the real 
differences between those leading the nation.

Ever the pragmatist, Raul stresses the need to get the economy out of 
its current rut and to improve agricultural productivity (more than half 
of arable land is uncultivated), while pushing for a better-organized 
public service, more respectful of institutions often short-circuited by 
his elder brother. His intention is to perpetuate the system by economic 
reform, preparing it to survive post-Castroism.

That explains the interest in Vietnam, which borrowed from capitalism 
the elements that work, like the market economy, without questioning the 
status quo and one-party rule. But it's unlikely that Cubans would 
accept the social costs involved after so many tough years. When the 
case for shock treatment has been discarded, the idea of a slow, gradual 
transition begins to take shape. However, Raul is 77 years old and his 
days are numbered.

Market reforms are opposed by some because of the threat they might pose 
to the system. Fidel has never hidden his dislike for "capitalist 
mechanisms" and what he sees as their political consequences. He has 
always stressed the importance of individual and social action.

The political analyst Juan Valdes Paz sets out the differences. "For 
some, the revolution is a continuing series of leaps forward which, to 
make progress, must attempt the impossible. This is a very strong strain 
of thought, perhaps the revolution's strongest legacy. Others are more 
realistic: they understand that certain scenarios are too difficult. 
It's an absorbing debate between utopian Marxists and more down-to-earth 
activists focused on concrete objectives in the present circumstances." 


Significantly, Cuba Socialista, the political and theoretical organ of 
CCP's central committee, has republished two of Fidel's historic 
speeches . One from 1988, "still very applicable" according to the 
review's editor, underlines the importance of national security and of 
the ideological battleground: "Now and then people ask if we shouldn't 
concentrate all our energy, all our efforts, all our resources, into 
building socialism and into developing the country... But that would be 
a serious delusion, even a criminal one, because (the battle) is the 
price that our country must pay for its revolution, its liberty and its 
independence." The Cuban economy was already in difficulty when this was 
written.



From larrydamms at yahoo.com  Fri Feb  6 10:42:54 2009
From: larrydamms at yahoo.com (Larry Damms)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 09:42:54 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Did Mega-Dam in China lead to earthquake?
Message-ID: <808447.85232.qm@web58506.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

David says,
?
"China is building more dams and, like the 3 Gorges Dam that currently is 
the largest one in the world. The dams themselves represent massive 
mitigator to the building of coal plants, another scourge of Chinese 
economic growth"
?
Larry?Damms:
?
IIRC, throughout the long process of Three Gorges' planning, building, and operation, storing surface water?for diversion to parched northern provinces has been as or more important an?aspect of the dam?than the hydro-power aspect.?Predictably the pharaonic south-to-north canal (hey! there's a Mike Davis turn of phrase) has been subject to?a?host?of?bureaucratic delays, cost overruns, unseen engineering challenges, neglected environmental fiascos, illegal dislocations, etc.
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?


      

From jjonas at nic.fi  Fri Feb  6 10:49:47 2009
From: jjonas at nic.fi (Joonas Laine)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 19:49:47 +0200
Subject: [Marxism] New Icelandic PM the first openly gay PM in the world
Message-ID: <498C783B.8010108@nic.fi>

Iceland's PM marks gay milestone
By Vanessa Buschschluter
BBC News
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7862804.stm

Johanna Sigurdardottir, named as Iceland's prime minister on Sunday, is 
the first openly lesbian head of government in Europe, if not the world 
- at least in modern times.

The 66-year-old's appointment as an interim leader, until elections in 
May, is seen by many as a milestone for the gay and lesbian movement.

Up until now, if a gay man or woman has been prime minister, they have 
done their best to conceal the fact.

In Iceland itself, however, the new prime minister's sexual orientation 
appears to be causing less excitement than it is abroad.

[..]


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Fri Feb  6 10:58:24 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 18:58:24 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] New Icelandic PM the first openly gay PM in the world
References: <498C783B.8010108@nic.fi>
Message-ID: <CF7E43AEEE4E46B78ECE157AB39AA81B@dmsthinkpad>

Obama in the US, Johanna in Iceland-- things are really looking better 
everyday.

Love that bit about the new PM's sexual orientation causing excitement.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joonas Laine" <jjonas at nic.fi>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2009 6:49 PM
Subject: [Marxism] New Icelandic PM the first openly gay PM in the world


> Iceland's PM marks gay milestone
> By Vanessa Buschschluter
> BBC News
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7862804.stm
>
> 



From cdb1003 at prodigy.net  Fri Feb  6 11:05:12 2009
From: cdb1003 at prodigy.net (Charles Brown)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 10:05:12 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Why does the rate of profit have a tendency to fall ?
Message-ID: <46827.48941.qm@web180102.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

> >> Perhaps we can get an understanding of the issues on this thread? by
> 
> imagining Waistline's totally robotized or automated factory.
> 
> >> As Walter Reuther said (to Ford ?) if automobile production is? 100%
> 
> robotized, then who will buy the cars produced ? This refers to a? zero
> profit realization problem for capitalists when there is? zero
> consumption. If workers aren't paid anything the masses are? in
> absolute poverty and absolutely restricted consumption, and they? can't
> buy anything. So, the capitalists have zero realized? profit.<<<
> 
> Comment
> 
> Autoworkers did not buy 17? million vehicles a year in the American market,
> each year between 2001 - 2007.? 

^^^^^^^^
CB: That's right. You have to think about all the other industries, and the workers in all those industries. Pile up the 17 million cars, millions of television sets, millions of computers, millions of tables, chairs, coats, hats, shoes, bicycles, widgets, wodgets,? etc, etc, etc. , all the commodities of all types. If they are all made by robots then there is nobody to buy any of them. 100% overproduction.
?Similarly, if they are made by exploited human workers, all of the workers in all of the industries don't have enough money to buy all that they make. If the rate of exploitation is 50% average overall ( I think it's rate of exploitation; have to look back at _Capital_ I)?, they can buy half of what they make.? The capitalists pay themselves big bucks, but since these are personal consumption goods, the few capitalists aren't going to buy half the 17 million cars. So, there is overproduction of a large fraction of the total produced in the sense that a large fraction of what is produced in personal consumption goods won't be bought (consumed; underconsumed). Overproduction and underconsumption are two sides of the same coin. The impact of overproduction/underconsumption on profit is that the surplus exploited from the workers can't be realized, because not all the commodities produced can be bought, because of what I said above. This UNDERREALIZATION
 causes the rate of profit to fall, but it is not the FROP.
The FROP comes in in a different way through the increase in the organic composition of capital (OCC),?overaccumulation of constant capital. Constant capital - means of production, instruments of production , factory buildings and machines- is not a source of new value, and therefore not? a source of surplus value. The value added to commodities by constant capital is limited to the value "in it" from the labor of workers in the departments of the economy that produce means of production. Above we are discussing the department of the economy that produces means of personal consumption. As machines are used they, little by little add the value in them to the commodities produced by the machines. But none of this is a source of profit for the capitalist. The capitalist in the department of personal consumption pays the capitalist in the department producing means of production fully for the means of production, machines, etc. bought. For the car
 producing capitalist, the machines and factory building are not sources of profit. Only the auto workers are sources of profit.
So, the smaller and smaller the variable capital component, the workers component of the auto capitalists' total capital, the higher the organic composition, the smaller and smaller the source of surplus value/profit. This is why the higher and higher the organic composition of the total capital, there? is a TENDENCY OF THE RATE OF PROFIT TO FALL, S artesian's favorite fact ,and it is a fact, don't get me wrong. But the rising OCC is not the only source of the tendency of the rate of profit to fall. The underealization mentioned above is also a reason for the rate of profit to fall, the rate of realized profit falls. ?The rising OCC causes the rate of profit to fall because of the shrinking proportion of variable capital or shrinking source of surplus value in the total.?The underrealization aspect causes the rate of profit to fall because less profit is realized ,even though it was theoretically produced as surplus value. We might say it is inchoate
 surplus value ( there's a legal term for you S artesian, "inchoate")
And S artesian is also correct that it is the falling rate of profit that directly causes the capitalists to start a recession by "destroying" capital, closing plants or underusing plants . Can't destroy constant capital without destroying variable capital. Can't close a plant without laying off workers.?But the purpose of closing the plant is to disgorge of the constant capital which is not a source of surplus value or profit. The capitalists don't close the plant because they think "oh the workers don't have enough money, are poor, and there consumption is restricted "( as in the infamous one and only one quote from Marx), but that is one of the underlying causes of the profit rate falling , the rate of profit realized falling because the mass consumer , the other hat the worker wears, can't consume all that they produce, because they aren't paid enough to consume all they produce , because a part is exploited from them. Of course, the capitalists
 don't say "pay or give them more money"? Be we, the Communists _do_ say this as a reform demand.? That's why it is important for us to raise the "poverty and restricted consumption of the msses" in our propaganda. Leave it to the capitalists to cry about their falling rate of profit.
> 

From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Feb  6 11:06:43 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 13:06:43 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] New Icelandic PM the first openly gay PM in the world
In-Reply-To: <CF7E43AEEE4E46B78ECE157AB39AA81B@dmsthinkpad>
References: <498C783B.8010108@nic.fi>
	<CF7E43AEEE4E46B78ECE157AB39AA81B@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <498C7C33.4030002@panix.com>

S. Artesian wrote:
> Obama in the US, Johanna in Iceland-- things are really looking better 
> everyday.
> 

Well, we don't know anything about her politically but let's remember 
that the present government in Iceland came to power as a result of 
militant street demonstrations. That's a whole lot different than 
Obama's Goldman-Sachs funded effort.


From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Fri Feb  6 11:33:41 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 10:33:41 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Did Mega-Dam in China lead to earthquake?
Message-ID: <498C8285.50002@gmail.com>

Larry, flood control is the No. 1 issue, for sure. That's the history of 
3 Gorges from the get go. But, that it produces 23 GWs of power (23000 
MWs) or about the power of 40 Chinese sized coal plants, is nothing to 
sneeze at. In fact, almost all Chinese hydro projects are motivated by 
flood control since floods have historically been the biggest natural 
killers in China outside the plague. Dams have also been the cause of 
some of the biggest disasters as well. I believe the big one in 1975 
killed well over 100,000 people.

The biggest single problem with the Chinese infrastructure projects is 
the political disenfranchisement of public input, which, to my 
knowledge, is non-existent. They do a lot of 'committee' stuff with 
experts but not much from the average Joe. I note this on my blog on 
Chinese nuclear today at davidwalters.dailykos.com . It really is the 
major issue.

David


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Fri Feb  6 11:52:55 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 19:52:55 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] New Icelandic PM the first openly gay PM in the world
References: <498C783B.8010108@nic.fi><CF7E43AEEE4E46B78ECE157AB39AA81B@dmsthinkpad>
	<498C7C33.4030002@panix.com>
Message-ID: <AF937C21477044308889A1AB0E8A136D@dmsthinkpad>

Point taken.  Prior to prime ministership, she was formerly a flight 
attendant, organizer of the flight attendant's union, member of the 
social-democratic party, resigned her ministership, left the SD party, 
returned, and has been a minister in the government since 2007, and will now 
be Iceland's first female prime minister.

Somewhere in there there probably is a Goldman-Sachs connection, but that 
might just be more cynicism on my part.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Louis Proyect" <lnp3 at panix.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2009 7:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] New Icelandic PM the first openly gay PM in the world


> S. Artesian wrote:
>> Obama in the US, Johanna in Iceland-- things are really looking better
>> everyday.
>>
>
> Well, we don't know anything about her politically but let's remember
> that the present government in Iceland came to power as a result of
> militant street demonstrations. That's a whole lot different than
> Obama's Goldman-Sachs funded effort.
>
> ________________________________________________
> 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 jjonas at nic.fi  Fri Feb  6 12:04:01 2009
From: jjonas at nic.fi (Joonas Laine)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 21:04:01 +0200
Subject: [Marxism] Samir Amin on Nepal
Message-ID: <498C89A1.6000603@nic.fi>

Some time ago I read the news that the Maoist-led Nepali government had 
banned strikes for the time being. <http://www.cmaq.net/node/31987>
It doesn't sound good, though it's difficult to tell what the actual 
context is, or what the political setting in Nepal is even in general.

On the good news front there's the CPN-M outlawing slavery:
<http://southasiarev.wordpress.com/2008/09/11/nepal-maoists-abolish-slavery/>

and changing their official view on homosexuality:

Kathmandu, Dec 11th Nepal?s ruling Maoist party, which till a year ago 
regarded homosexuality as a threat to a future socialist society, will 
strike a blow for gay rights at the UN later this month, marking a 
sea-change in the organisation that took up arms to seize power. Nepal?s 
first Maoist Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal Prachanda, has asked the 
foreign ministry and Nepal?s ambassador to the UN to support a statement 
that will be tabled at the UN General Assembly this
month recognising human rights violations on sexual orientation and 
gender identity.
<http://southasiarev.wordpress.com/2008/12/20/nepal-maoists-stand-up-for-lgbtq-rights/>

Concerning other political issues more to do with the economic side of 
things, I don't have good suggestions how to proceed in a country where 
there apparently is no strong proletariat to speak of and (so it seems) 
not too many opportunities to spread the revolution abroad. Maybe Indian 
comrades on the list might shed further light on developments there..?

---

Nepal, a Promising Revolutionary Advance
Samir Amin
http://monthlyreview.org/090202amin.php

Authentic Revolutionary Progress

Imagine. A liberation army that supports a generalized revolt of the 
peasantry reaches the gates of the capital, where the people, in their 
turn, rise up, drive the royal government from power and welcome as 
their liberator the Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (CPN-M), whose 
effective revolutionary strategy needs no further demonstration. What is 
involved here is the most radical victorious revolutionary advance of 
our epoch, and, for this reason, the most promising.

[..]


From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Feb  6 13:29:40 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 15:29:40 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Black is...Black ain't; Adam Clayton Powell
Message-ID: <498C9DB4.8070509@panix.com>

In conjunction with Black History Month, Docuramafilms, a distribution 
company that specializes in cutting-edge movies, sent me  a couple of 
first-rate documentaries that are available from Netflix. The first was 
Marlon Riggs?s ?Black Is?Black Ain?t?, an examination of the 
contradictions of Black identity that first aired on PBS in the late 
1990s. As a gay African-American, Riggs was particularly attuned to 
homophobia in the Black community. He died of AIDS in 1994 and the film 
was completed by his supporters. The second is ?Adam Clayton Powell?, an 
absolutely stunning portrait of the U.S.?s most powerful Black 
politician from the 1930s to his death of cancer in 1972. Seen together, 
these films help us understand the complexities of Black identity and 
politics.

full: 
http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2009/02/06/black-isblack-aint-adam-clayton-powell/


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Fri Feb  6 13:38:42 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 21:38:42 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Savings Glut
Message-ID: <B024EB6383B6435BA22D171A07776214@dmsthinkpad>

G.19                                                        CONSUMER CREDIT 
For release at 3 p.m. (Eastern Time)
1                                                            December 2008 
February 6, 2009

Consumer credit decreased at an annual rate of 3 percent in the fourth 
quarter. Revolving credit decreased at an annual rate of
5-1/2 percent, and nonrevolving credit decreased at an annual rate of 1-3/4 
percent. In December, consumer credit decreased at an
annual rate of 3 percent.


Full at:  http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/g19/Current/ 



From gdunkel at mindspring.com  Fri Feb  6 14:09:28 2009
From: gdunkel at mindspring.com (Greg Dunkel)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 16:09:28 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [Marxism] Le Monde reports on LCR/NPA
Message-ID: <3716035.1233954568673.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

On news.google.fr the collection on the creation of the NPA contains 311 articles as of a few minutes ago.
 ....


From elishastephens at hotmail.com  Fri Feb  6 14:18:43 2009
From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 13:18:43 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban Five Attorney on Democracy Now
Message-ID: <COL112-W14F57BD884C8EC2D1F9484D7C10@phx.gbl>


Thomas Goldstein, the lead appeals attorney for the Cuban Five, appeared on Democracy Now this morning to discuss the recently filed appeal of the Cuban Five case to the Supreme Court. Audio, video, and transcript are posted at http://www.freethefive.org


_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live?: Keep your life in sync. 
http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t1_allup_howitworks_022009

From larrydamms at yahoo.com  Fri Feb  6 15:21:43 2009
From: larrydamms at yahoo.com (Larry Damms)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 14:21:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Did Mega-Dam in China lead to earthquake?
Message-ID: <314202.68940.qm@web58505.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

DW:
?
The biggest single problem with the Chinese infrastructure projects is?the political disenfranchisement of public input, which, to my knowledge, is non-existent.
?
LD:
?
Not to defend the CCP's brand of authoritarian capitalism (too simplistic a descriptor in any event), but the planning and operation of large scale and technically complex infrastructure projects is always the sternest test of democratic accountability, regardless of the mode of production.?Whatever his?theoretical limitations Donald Worster in Rivers of Empire makes a good case for the inherent connections between huge and complicated projects and top-down bureaucracy. Yeah, I know,?my Weberian Marxist slip is showing ;)
?
?


      

From Waistline2 at aol.com  Fri Feb  6 15:41:10 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 17:41:10 EST
Subject: [Marxism] New Icelandic PM the first openly gay PM in the world
Message-ID: <d39.41bd0de6.36be1686@aol.com>

>> Obama in the US, Johanna in Iceland-- things are really looking  better 
everyday.
 
Love that bit about the new PM's sexual orientation causing  excitement.<<
 
 
Comment
 
Better or clearer? 
 
Had I know it would take 34 years to complete a process (bound up with the  
emergence and role of the black leader in our history we leap beyond in Detroit 
 back in 1974), I would have invested a full decade in studying Capital and 
made  wiser investments for retirement. Instead, today I have to admit to 
myself that  for reasons still not clear enough for me, our working class had  to 
wage a battle within and with itself to overcome various quantitative  
distinctions once called "identity movements." 
 
I am not sure exactly why this is so. 
 
Marx in 1848  read much clearer today. 
 
"Our epoch, the epoch of the bourgeoisie, possesses, however, this distinct  
feature: it has simplified class antagonisms. Society as a whole is more and  
more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes 
directly  facing each other ? Bourgeoisie and Proletariat."
 
Seems to me the un relentless, and unrelenting hand of history is doing for  
us what we could not do for ourselves: collapse the political middle. Obama's  
election proves something to the working class itself: sides. 
 
Our working class is spontaneously moving - drifting, into direct  
confrontation with the bourgeois order. In respect to the black leader of a  by gone 
era, what issue can they dare champion today that is not a direct  question of 
concern to the proletarian masses and its lowest paid and most  destitute 
section? 
 
Pardon, while I escort another group of Black Leaders to the museum,  
alongside the industrial capitalist, the spinning wheel, the steam engine and  
several other signposts along our journey. 
 
I insist. 
 
WL.  
 
 
 
 
 
**************Who's never won?  Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on 
AOL Music. 
(http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?ncid=emlcntusmusi00000003)


From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Feb  6 15:59:06 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 17:59:06 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Japan on the brink
Message-ID: <498CC0BA.10205@panix.com>

http://www.japanfocus.org/_Andrew_DeWit-Japan_on_the_Brink_of_Abyss___Updated_
Japan Focus

Japan on the Brink of the Abyss? [Updated]
Andrew DeWit

The economic outlook in Japan is very grim, as these brief overviews 
(links below) indicate. Right now, Japan has the worst growth outlook in 
Asia. That is a surprising fact, if one recalls that this is a country 
presumably dusting itself off from the collapse of its own bubble nearly 
two decades ago. After such a long period of economic crisis, Japan 
should be renovated and ready to thrive. But instead, it may be in worse 
shape than even the US (though clearly not Iceland and much of Eastern 
Europe). Japanese financial institutions were not big players in the 
CDOs, CDSs and the other toxic assets that have ravaged the capital 
bases of banks in the US and much of Europe. Rather, Japan's key policy 
failure would appear to be over-reliance on exports as the engine of 
growth, while hoping that the fruits of this growth would trickle down 
into the rest of the economy and bolster demand. But in the rest of the 
economy, deregulation of labour and other markets had seen firms 
shifting to insecure employment (especially part-time and contractual 
staff) and rolling back pay, thus crimping the level of demand. And that 
weak domestic demand was of course blunting domestic-oriented 
businesses' incentives to invest (cf. export-oriented businesses' 
incentives to invest). With the startling 35% drop in exports in 
December 2008, it's as if someone kicked the chair away from a man who 
was standing on one to test out what it felt like to have a noose around 
his neck.


The LDP and PM Aso Taro are of course trying to assert that the problem 
is global, a once-in-a-century event. But the pattern of fallout varies 
among low toxic-asset countries (especially Asian), notably in 
accordance with their degree of reliance on the trade bubble. Japan 
seems to be suffering the legacy of the Koizumi Junichiro and Takenaka 
Heizo "structural reforms," in that the reformists were content to rely 
on exports (stimulated by ultra-low interest rates) and to use 
deregulation, privatization and (to some extent) tax cuts in order to 
eviscerate the public sector's role and let the market determine the 
strategic focus of the economy. They were loath to look at the 
Scandinavian model as a guide to building safety nets for encouraging 
labour mobility and laying a strong floor as the basis of the domestic 
economy (also by investing in education and encouraging higher 
remuneration and professionalization in elder care and other growth 
sectors). They disparaged the role of the public sector in framing 
markets and in sketching the strategic focus of the overall economy, 
such as in deciding targets in energy and environmental areas and thus 
giving incentives for market actors to achieve.

In the most recent edition of the Japanese weekly, ekonomisuto 
(economist), Koizumi's neoliberal brain Takenaka Heizo still trumpets 
the small state and deregulatory nirvana. Elsewhere he has blamed 
Japan's current crisis on insufficient deregulation.

But he and Koizumi were champions of low interest rates, even though 
these rates cost domestic savers some JPY 35 trillion per year (nearly 
12% of their previous income). This was not only a subsidy to the export 
industries. Low rates also helped keep zombie firms (about 20% of small 
and medium enterprises) in business, since low interest allowed them to 
roll over their loans even though they were effectively broke. A 
strategic investment focus from the central government, during the 
Koizumi "structural reform" years, would have put momentum into the 
recovery on the domestic side and allowed the ratcheting up of interest 
rates while softening the damage from failures of zombie firms that 
simply couldn't modernize fast enough as their low-interest security 
blanket was lifted. The extra income for savers (from normalization of 
interest rates) would have bolstered the domestic economy enough to 
provide new employment opportunities to the labour and capital shed by 
many inefficient enterprises and retraining could have been offered to 
the hard-core unemployed.

That's all hindsight of course, but it beats the hindsight on offer 
recently: many of the newly anti-market crowd are trumpeting "Edo" (old 
Tokyo) society and even the Jomon Era (14,000-400 BC) as models for the 
present, lauding their closeness to nature, stability, and community 
values. One Jomon booster is a former free-market cheerleader who got 
his economics PhD from Harvard and has been big in government 
deliberation councils. Japan's public debate still hasn't cut through 
the nonsense of idealizing the "free market" or the "unique Japanese" 
and come to focus on what the public sector of this advanced, 
industrialized country needs to be doing in the midst of the worst 
economic crisis since the 1930s.

See Edward Hugh, Japan's Grim And Bear It 2009 Outlook, Japan Economy 
Watch, January 26, 2009.

See Megan Ainscow, Retail Sales Set To Plummet As Economy Takes a Turn 
for the Worst, CEP News.

See the commentary and update at Naked Capitalism on February 2, 2009.

Andrew DeWit is Professor of the Political Economy of Public Finance, 
Rikkyo University and an Asia-Pacific Journal coordinator. With Kaneko 
Masaru, he is the coauthor of Global Financial Crisis published by 
Iwanami in 2008.

He wrote this commentary for The Asia-Pacific Journal. Posted on January 
29, 2009.

Recommended citation: Andrew DeWit, ?Japan on the Brink of the Abyss?? 
The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 5-4-09, January 29, 2009.


From nmgoro at gmail.com  Fri Feb  6 17:09:09 2009
From: nmgoro at gmail.com (Nestor Gorojovsky)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 21:09:09 -0300
Subject: [Marxism] Geopolitics 101
In-Reply-To: <498C672D.4030002@panix.com>
References: <498C672D.4030002@panix.com>
Message-ID: <498CD125.7070508@gmail.com>

Louis Proyect escribi?:
> NY Times, February 6, 2009
> Analysis: US Base Falls Victim to Kyrgyz Crisis
> By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
> 
> Filed at 11:21 a.m. ET
> 
> Kyrgyzstan may have felt it had no choice in expelling the U.S. from a 
> base vital to the war in Afghanistan.
> 
> Months of crippling electricity shortages, soaring food prices and 
> rampant unemployment have caused misery for much of the population. A 
> reinvigorated opposition has threatened to stage nationwide protests 
> against President Kurmanbek Bakiyev.
> 
> Against that backdrop, Russia pledged to help raise $1.7 billion for a 
> much-needed hydropower plant and issue a $300 million low-interest 
> 40-year loan repayable over a 40-year period. Moscow also agreed to give 
> $150 million in aid and cancel an outstanding $190 million debt.
> 
> But Russia has also made clear its objections to the Manas air base, 
> saying it was only supposed to remain for two years after the U.S. 
> invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.

Per? (that is the Quisling Peruvian regime of Alan Garc?a) may have felt 
it had no choice in admitting a U.S. naval base vital to the deployment 
of the Fourth Fleet in the war against Latin American unification.

Etc., etc., etc.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Feb  6 16:20:35 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 18:20:35 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Comment on Counterpunch article on Cuba in crisis
Message-ID: <498CC5C3.9010400@panix.com>

Hi Louis,

I read the original article in French, and the description of the late 
Celia Hart jumps out in the English translation.

In French: "D'une sensibilite politique favorable a M. Fidel Castro, 
Celia Hart declairait en aout 2008 craindre que <<Cuba suive la 
direction de la Chine>>.

In English: "Celia Hart, a Fidel apologist, said in August 2008 that she 
feared "Cuba following China's lead".

I'm no professional translator, but I know the French word for apologist 
is 'apologiste', and that this is a grotesque description of the late 
Celia Hart.

Derrick O'Keefe



From elishastephens at hotmail.com  Fri Feb  6 16:40:40 2009
From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 15:40:40 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Comment on Counterpunch article on Cuba in crisis
Message-ID: <COL112-W5761F7C4345CBD26BC5FAED7C10@phx.gbl>


Personally, I try to waste my time on articles whose title includes the words "Castro's socialism."



Eli Stephens
 Left I on the News
 http://lefti.blogspot.com


_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live?: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect. 
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t2_allup_explore_022009

From elishastephens at hotmail.com  Fri Feb  6 16:41:09 2009
From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 15:41:09 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] (no subject)
Message-ID: <COL112-W542554E2B15E78187890CFD7C10@phx.gbl>


Personally, I try not to waste my time on articles whose title includes the words "Castro's socialism."

[Left out the "not" in the previous version!! Ooops!]



Eli Stephens
 Left I on the News
 http://lefti.blogspot.com


_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live?: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect. 
http://windowslive.com/online/hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_AE_Faster_022009

From nmgoro at gmail.com  Fri Feb  6 18:18:13 2009
From: nmgoro at gmail.com (Nestor Gorojovsky)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 22:18:13 -0300
Subject: [Marxism] =?windows-1252?q?Nuevo_n=FAmero_de_=22Patria_Grande=22?=
 =?windows-1252?q?=2C_mensuario_on_line_de_Andr=E9s_Soliz_Rada?=
Message-ID: <498CE155.4090101@gmail.com>

Estimados compa?eras y compa?eros, amigas y amigos:

En www.patriagrande.org.bo <http://www.patriagrande.org.bo> encontrar?n
la revista "Patria Grande", correspondiente a fe. 09. Cordial saludo. ASR

   	
   	*Editorial(es)* 	
EL TEMA QUE DEFINE EL FUTURO: LA NACION O LAS NACIONES DE EVO MORALES
Eduardo Paz Rada
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=406>
AUSENCIA DEL PENSAMIENTO NACIONAL
Andr?s Sol?z Rada
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=407>

	
   	*Bolivia* 	
   		SUPUESTA INGERENCIA NAZI EN FUNDACION DE EMPRESA PETROLERA BOLIVIANA
Eduardo Paz Rada
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=413>
   		DESPU?S DEL REFERENDO CONSTITUCIONAL
Roger Ortiz Mercado
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=409>
   		DETR?S DE LA DESTITUCION DE SANTOS RAMIREZ
Evo, prisionero de si mismo
Editorial Peri?dico ?El Pa?s? (Tarija)
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=410>
   		EL VOTO DE HOY
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=363>
   		AUDITORIAS PETROLERAS: SECRETO DE ESTADO
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=368>
   		?ACTO POL?TICO ELECTORAL?: LA TERCERA NACIONALIZACI?N DE CHACO
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=365>
   		HIDROCARBUROS: LOS ANEXOS "D", ABANICOS Y AGUJEROS NEGROS
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=370>
   		RESERVAS: INVERTIR, NO GASTAR
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=367>
   		PURA POL?TICA ANTINACIONAL
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=405>
   		BOLIVIA, CON DERECHO, RECLAMA SU SALIDA AL MAR
F?lix Pe?aranda Ib??ez (*) (felixpda en yahoo.es).
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=375>
   		RECTIFICACION SOBRE LA GUERRA DEL PACIFICO
Rodolfo Becerra de la Roca
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=377>
   		LULA RECONOCE QUE GRAN PARTE DE LOS BRASILE?OS DEPENDE DEL GAS
BOLIVIANO
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=380>
   		BRASIL PREFIERE AGOTAR LAS RESERVAS BOLIVIANAS DE GAS, ANTES DE
CONSUMIR LAS SUYAS: LA VISION GEOPOLITICA DEL PRESIDENTE FERNANDO
HENRIQUE CARDOSO
Javier Lafuente
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=381>
   		LOS USOS Y COSTUMBRES Y LA JUSTICIA COMUNITARIA
Ramiro Loza Calder?n
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=386>

   	*Am?rica Latina* 	
   		HISTORIA DE LA NACI?N LATINOAMERICANA
JORGE ABELARDO RAMOS
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=387>
   		PER? Y COLOMBIA DESTRUYERON A LA CAN EN BENEFICIO DE EUROPA Y EEUU
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=388>
   		PROVINCIALIZACI?N Y ATRASO EN ARGENTINA
Federico Bernal
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=389>
   		KIRCHNER FINANCIA EL DESARROLLO INDUSTRIAL-MILITAR DE ISRAEL
APEMIA
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=390>
   		SOMETIMIENTO DEL GOBIERNO ARGENTINO A LOS FRAUDES Y ENGA?OS DE LA
DEUDA EXTERNA
Mario Cafiero y Javier Llorens
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=412>
   		SEG?N PINO SOLANAS, "LOS KIRCHNER PROFUNDIZARON EL DESPOJO QUE HIZO
MENEM"
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=369>
   		GALASSO DEFIENDE A LOS KIRCHNER
Los aliados posibles y el enemigo principal
Norberto Galasso
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=411>
   		NUEVO LIBRO DE NORBERTO GALASSO: ?COMO PENSAR LA REALIDAD NACIONAL?
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=391>
   		DEBEMOS CREAR EL CIADI DEL SUR
Roberto Irraz?bal
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=392>
   		GAS: BRASIL (ENRON) GANA LA PARTIDA
Editorial Peri?dico ?El Pa?s? (Tarija)
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=360>
   		LA EXPLOTACI?N COLONIAL Y NEOCOLONIAL DE NUESTRA AM?RICA LATINA
tribunalpazecuador en yahoo.com
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=362>
   		SIN ESTADO NO HAY NACI?N
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=364>
   		CHILE-PERU: OTRO QUIEBRE
Pedro Godoy
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=374>

   	*Estados Unidos y Europa* 	
   		CASI 800 DETENIDOS EN GUANT?NAMO DESDE EL 2002
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=376>
   		EL CONSUMISMO SUICIDA DE LA EUROPA RICA
Jubenal Quispe
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=379>
   		AS? SER? EL A?O 2009
Ignacio Ramonet
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=382>
   		EN ECONOMIA, EL ESTADO NORTEAMERICANO NO ES LIBERAL SINO
INTERVENCIONISTA
Vicen? Navarro
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=394>
   		OBAMA NO CUESTION? NUNCA A LAS GRANDES CORPORACIONES
Lissete Bustamante
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=395>
   		LOS CONSEJOS A OBAMA DEL PREMIO NOBEL DE ECONOMIA, PAUL KRUGMAN
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=396>
   		ABOGADO DE SANCHEZ DE LOZADA EN EL EQUIPO DE OBAMA
Atilio Bor?n
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=397>
   		LA LUCHA POR RECUPERAR LA MEMORIA HISTORICA EN ESPA?A
Cecilio Gordillo
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=398>
   		?QUIEN FUE MARTIN LUTHER KING?
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=399>

   	*Otros Continentes* 	
   		LA INVASI?N ISRAEL? DE GAZA Y LOS YACIMIENTOS MARINOS DE GAS
Michel Chossudovsky
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=400>
   		AFGANIST?N EN LA MIRA DE WASHINGTON
N?stor N??ez
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=401>

   	*Aportes Te?ricos* 	
   		GOBIERNOS POPULARES O GOBIERNOS POPULISTAS
(Cobos y el Opresor introyectado)
Miguel Longo
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=402>
   		VERDADES Y MITOS DEL LIBRE COMERCIO
Mario Rapoport
<http://www.patriagrande.org.bo/articulos.php?idrevista=16&idarticulo=403>


From nmgoro at gmail.com  Fri Feb  6 18:25:27 2009
From: nmgoro at gmail.com (Nestor Gorojovsky)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 22:25:27 -0300
Subject: [Marxism] [Mario Rappoport] VERDADES Y MITOS DEL LIBRE COMERCIO
Message-ID: <498CE307.9060401@gmail.com>

Gentileza de "Patria Grande", mensuario de la Izquierda Nacional de 
Bolivia dirigido por Andr?s Soliz Rada

   	
VERDADES Y MITOS DEL LIBRE COMERCIO
	
	
Por: Mario Rapoport
11 de Enero de 2009

   	

Entre los temas principales de debate en la historia econ?mica y en las 
relaciones internacionales, el dilema entre el proteccionismo y el libre 
cambio es uno de los m?s controvertidos. Las naciones que lideran el 
planeta han sido alternativamente partidarias del libre cambio o del 
proteccionismo cuando les convino y siempre en defensa del tipo de 
productos que quer?an proteger. Gran Breta?a se hizo librecambista a 
mediados del siglo XIX (m?s precisamente en 1846, con la abolici?n de 
las leyes de granos), cuando ya era la principal potencia industrial del 
mundo y pod?a colocar ventajosamente sus manufacturas y bienes de 
capital. El caso m?s importante de proteccionismo en la historia del 
capitalismo es el de los Estados Unidos. All?, los industrialistas y 
proteccionistas del Norte necesitaron una guerra civil para eliminar a 
los librecambistas sure?os, cuya base de sustentaci?n econ?mica era el 
sistema esclavista. La defensa de las industrias norteamericanas, 
utilizando altas barreras aduaneras, dur? pr?cticamente hasta la d?cada 
de 1930 y nunca se abandon? la protecci?n a los bienes agropecuarios. La 
diferencia es que lo que antes defend?a con tarifas o embargos (como el 
embargo de carnes de 1926 a la Argentina, que sent? las bases de un 
largo distanciamiento entre los dos pa?ses), hoy se hace con subsidios 
directos a los agricultores y leyes antidumping, aunque se retorne 
tambi?n, cuando se cree necesario, a la protecci?n de productos 
industriales.


Un ejemplo a volver a estudiar es la Conferencia de las Naciones Unidas 
sobre Comercio y Empleo, que se reuni? en la Habana desde el 21 de 
noviembre de 1947. Convocada en 1946 por iniciativa del Consejo 
Econ?mico y Social de las Naciones Unidas, buscaba plasmar los acuerdos 
angloamericanos presentes en la Carta del Atl?ntico de retorno pleno a 
un mercado mundial ?libre y abierto?. Este estaba fundamentado en el 
diagn?stico que hac?an los EE.UU.: eran el nacionalismo econ?mico, las 
barreras comerciales y el bilateralismo los que habr?an estado en el 
origen de la Segunda Guerra Mundial. Para evitar una depresi?n en la 
posguerra, se deb?a volver r?pidamente al multilateralismo, reducir 
aranceles aduaneros y bajar barreras comerciales. La potencia del Norte 
buscaba as?, olvidando su pasado anterior, el libre acceso a las 
materias primas del mundo y a la colocaci?n de sus bienes y capitales.


La Conferencia se bas? en un borrador norteamericano previo y las 
sesiones se prolongaron largamente hasta el 24 de marzo de 1948. El 
convenio final con ochocientas enmiendas no fue firmado por la Argentina 
y en Washington el propio Congreso no lo ratific? debido a la diluci?n 
de sus objetivos iniciales. Si bien constituy? el origen del GATT, de 
alcances mucho m?s limitados, all? naufragaron los planes de una primera 
Organizaci?n Mundial de Comercio. Las contradicciones surgidas en torno 
de este proyecto reflejaban la realidad econ?mica del mundo. Por un 
lado, los EE.UU., los pa?ses escandinavos y Canad?, buscaban el retorno 
r?pido al multilateralismo y la no discriminaci?n. Por otro lado, Gran 
Breta?a y Francia alegaban su coincidencia con ese objetivo para el 
largo plazo, pero planteaban que primero hab?a que reconstruir las 
econom?as europeas. Los pa?ses de Europa Oriental ?sin la Uni?n 
Sovi?tica, que no participaba? defend?an, a su vez, la planificaci?n 
econ?mica por parte del Estado y exig?an un acuerdo que la contemplara. 
Las naciones perif?ricas reclamaban pol?ticas a favor del desarrollo 
industrial, con aranceles protectores, cuotas de importaci?n y 
restricciones cuantitativas.


Desde un principio, la Argentina expres? posiciones encontradas con el 
borrador presentado por los Estados Unidos. Era delegado del gobierno 
peronista el senador Diego Luis Molinari, antiguo yrigoyenista y 
nacionalista. Dentro de Am?rica latina sus planteos confluyeron con los 
de la delegaci?n mexicana. Molinari, sobre la base del principio de 
defensa de la soberan?a y autodeterminaci?n de las naciones, reivindic? 
el derecho al comercio a trav?s de instituciones estatales y la acci?n 
sin restricciones de las empresas p?blicas. En el caso argentino, habr?a 
que recordar el cuestionamiento del IAPI (Instituto Argentino de 
Promoci?n del Intercambio, que regulaba el comercio exterior) por parte 
de EE.UU. Seg?n Molinari, se deb?a excluir a las empresas estatales de 
las regulaciones antimonop?licas, pues expresaban el inter?s superior 
del Estado en la doctrina argentina.

Las intervenciones del delegado argentino tuvieron un perfil 
nacionalista, que alcanz? su expresi?n m?s significativa cuando 
reivindic? el uso del espa?ol en la Conferencia. Molinari condicion? 
tambi?n el proceso de apertura comercial mundial a la recuperaci?n 
simult?nea de todas las naciones, no s?lo de las europeas, criticando 
oblicuamente el Plan Marshall, que colocaba en un plano privilegiado a 
las primeras en el comercio con EE.UU. Sus discursos tuvieron un 
pronunciado filo antiyanqui, denunciando al capitalismo norteamericano 
por su intento de impedir la industrializaci?n de Am?rica latina. Seg?n 
?l, durante el conflicto b?lico las j?venes industrias del continente se 
hab?an expandido y reclamaban ayuda o cooperaci?n, algo que la principal 
potencia mundial no estaba dispuesta a darles. En la Conferencia hubo 
tambi?n m?ltiples alusiones, recurrentes desde entonces, a la doble 
pol?tica de Estados Unidos con respecto al mercado mundial y a su 
mercado interno, que iba a contracorriente del fin proclamado. 
Especialmente se cuestionaban los subsidios agr?colas, las restricciones 
cuantitativas que el pa?s del Norte establec?a a las exportaciones e 
importaciones, la contradicci?n existente entre el discurso 
librecambista y las pol?ticas concretas de los pa?ses m?s desarrollados.

Pero los planteos latinoamericanos de enmiendas al proyecto inicial 
fueron rechazados. Cuba, que depend?a de las compras de az?car por parte 
de EE.UU., rompi? el frente com?n y otras naciones de Centroam?rica la 
acompa?aron, votando con Washington. En aquel momento se denunciaron 
presiones sobre esos pa?ses por parte de la diplomacia norteamericana. 
De todos modos, el documento de La Habana result? inconsistente y 
ambiguo. Por un lado, preconizaba el librecambio para las manufacturas, 
pero por otro permit?a acuerdos intergubernamentales para las materias 
primas, que la Argentina se neg? a firmar.

Como se ve en este caso, en el debate libre cambio-proteccionismo el 
discurso est? alejado de la realidad. Los pa?ses que defienden el libre 
cambio y se benefician m?s con ?l son los que se han industrializado y 
tienen claras ventajas en productos de mayor valor agregado, lo que no 
les impide defender tambi?n actividades productivas m?s ineficientes. 
Como se?ala Wallerstein, ?los pa?ses verdaderamente d?biles en lo 
econ?mico son por lo com?n naciones tambi?n d?biles pol?ticamente? y no 
pueden defender sus industrias. La m?s completa libertad de comercio 
resulta as? un mito o una falacia, y aquella Conferencia de La Habana 
as? lo demostr?.


From mdriscollrj at charter.net  Fri Feb  6 19:30:13 2009
From: mdriscollrj at charter.net (Ralph Johansen)
Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 18:30:13 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] # Re: Comment on Counterpunch article on Cuba in crisis
Message-ID: <498CF235.20305@charter.net>

Louis Project wrote:

In French: "D'une sensibilite politique favorable a M. Fidel Castro,
Celia Hart declairait en aout 2008 craindre que <<Cuba suive la
direction de la Chine>>.

In English: "Celia Hart, a Fidel apologist, said in August 2008 that she
feared "Cuba following China's lead".

I'm no professional translator, but I know the French word for apologist
is 'apologiste', and that this is a grotesque description of the late
Celia Hart.


I dunno, I remember I.F. Stone and Alex is no Izzy.

Ralph

//

From fred.fuentes at gmail.com  Fri Feb  6 22:21:34 2009
From: fred.fuentes at gmail.com (Fred Fuentes)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 16:21:34 +1100
Subject: [Marxism] Bolivia: COB Ratifies Support to Change
Message-ID: <b5a2a8180902062121ga63db07r462c84d5beb7b9fa@mail.gmail.com>

Bolivia: COB Ratifies Support to Change

La Paz, Feb 6 (Prensa Latina) Current Executive Secretary of the
Bolivian Worker's Center (COB) Pedro Montes ratified the support of
the sector to the actions began in Jan. 2006 towards Movement to
Socialism.

We will act in line with our historic struggles and the blood shed to
foster change in this country, he told media.

According to him, those views of the workers mean total support to the
Politic Constitution of the State, approved in the referendum held on
Jan. 25 by more than the 60 percent of the citizens.

That Magna Carta will improve the situation of workers and the
Bolivian peoples, so we will boost its implementation, Montes
announced.

ef gdb wmr

PL-37

--
REGISTER NOW AT www.worldatacrossroads.org/register

World at a Crossroads - Fighting for Socialism in the 21st Century

Easter 2009, April 10-13, Sydney Girls High, Sydney, Australia

A conference that brings together socialist and progressive activists
and thinkers from around Australia, Latin America, Asia-Pacific and
North America to discuss the urgent questions of our time.

For more info, email dsp at dsp.org.au or sydney.resistance at gmail.com, or
phone (02) 9690 1230.

Organised by the Democratic Socialist Perspective and Resistance.
Sponsored by Green Left Weekly.


From cdb1003 at prodigy.net  Fri Feb  6 22:41:19 2009
From: cdb1003 at prodigy.net (Charles Brown)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 21:41:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Proletarianization and Overaccumulation
Message-ID: <304741.50695.qm@web180111.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Proletarianization and Overaccumulation


?



Charles Brown wrote:
> Let us examine the matter a little more closely. "Overproduction" and 
> "Underconsumption" are two sides of the same coin.

That might be true, but the real debate has always been between the role 
of overaccumulation versus underconsumption (or overproduction). Just 
read Henryk Grossman to get a handle on this:

http://www.marxists.org/archive/grossman/1929/breakdown/ch02.htm
?
^^^^^^^
CB: Yes, but actually both cause 
the rate of profit to fall.
This is a case where the answer is "both".
?
But we should emphasize "underconsumption"
?in these
discussions?,?because it imples reform
?measures that
would be?in the nature of raising the
?consumption of the
working class. Focus on the falling
?rate of profit implies
measures should be taken directly
to raise the profit rate back up,
like tax cuts for business.?.
?
Also, it should be noted that 
this _is_ a debate
over reform.? Looking for the 
cause of crisis
within capitalist relations of 
production implies
looking for a fix ( limited of course) 
without
revolutionizing thos relations.

From cdb1003 at prodigy.net  Fri Feb  6 23:59:42 2009
From: cdb1003 at prodigy.net (Charles Brown)
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 22:59:42 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Marxism] Why analyze the economic crisis
Message-ID: <767246.10521.qm@web180113.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>









Greg McDonald: 

?
S. Artesian wrote:

<When we point to stagnating or declining 
real wages we need to link 
that not
with underconsumption but with the
?organization of the means of 
production
as capital, with capital's need for profit--
?that the attack on workers
wages, living standards is not because
?underconsumption somehow has led
capitalism to an abyss, so that now 
it must attack even less 
consumption in
order to... in order to what? We need
?to link it to the entire 
notion of
profit-- to capitalism's need for profit...
?
^^^^
CB: In the infamous "one and only one"
quote from Marx, "poverty and restricted
consumption" does not refer to workers
wages only when they? are being attacked
stagnating or declining. When wages
are at their highest, there is still exploitation.
So wages are _always_ restricted consumption
and impoverishing.
Most fundamental to Marx's theory is
_exploitation_. Exploitation is the source
of surplus value, which is the source of'
profit. What we must discuss with workers
is not just profit, but that exploitation
is the basis of profit.
?
^^^^^^^
?
because if the problem is
underconsumption then the nearest social democrat will absolutely 
agree and
say what we need is to "tame" capital, not replace it, to augment
consumption, to give capital a social, human, face and dimension.
?
^^^^^
CB: I agree with this. But focussing on
the fact that falling profit rates are
the trigger cause of every crisis
doesn't not imply that we need to 
get rid of capital. It implies we
should try to do something about
raising the profit rate back up.
?
^^^^^^^

And how does that get done? By feeding capital what it must consume in
order to reconstitute its mechanism of accumulation-- feeding bodies 
into
that great furnace of consumption called war.
?
^^^^^^
CB: Yes, expose the real motives
of war.
?
^^^^^

Bet on it. That's where this capitalism is going, and in a hurry. 
And to a
big one.>
?
^^^^^
CB: It seems they may be running
out of cover stories. Especially, since
they got caught in a big lie last time.
?
^^^^
^^^^

Greg McDonald :
Ok, so far I agree, having had the opportunity during these past few 
months to do some actual reading on Marx and economic crisis. Always, 
the driving force behind change under capitalism, is capitalism's 
need for profit. But could not underconsumption, or restricted 
consumption, as CB puts it, be a "second cut" contradiction? 
?
^^^^^^^
CB: Actually, Marx terms
the poverty and restricted
consumption of the masses
the "ultimate reason". So,
restricted consumption is
the "first cut". Falling profits
are?the "second cut" , a more
surface reason. As, I say above
this is
because restricted consumption
is due to exploitation, and exploitation
of workers is the basis for profit.
We are discussing this with workers,
so it makes sense to put their 
exploitation first. It's ok because'you
get to say that workers are the source
of all value, and workers are the source
of all the capitalists' profit.
It's a bit of a paradox, but:
?
Exploitation is the source of
profit, but ultimately, that
exploitation undercuts profit
?
Then , the replacement of
workers by machines ( rising
organic composition of capital
Explained here by Marx
?

Karl Marx. Capital Volume One


Part IV: Production of Relative Surplus Value
Chapter Twelve: The Concept of Relative Surplus Value
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch12.htm)
?
?
is a second basis that profit
rates fall. Our solution is use
machines to cut work time, toil,
but keep the same rate of pay, 
wages. Our solution is cut
profit (See Marx's _Wages,Price
and Profit_, a very popular presentation
of Marx's ideas by Marx himself)
?
^^^^^
?
?
In other 
words, if the restricted consumption of the masses is caused by the 
exploitive extraction of surplus value during the production process, 
could not then this effect further exacerbate the original cause, 
becoming in and of itself a second order causal factor?
?
^^^^^
CB: Yes, only Marx himself calls it
the first order cause, or "ultimate reason".
?
We want to say "profit is caused by
exploitation, yet exploitation ultimately
undercuts profit?realization?rates. "
?
^^^^^
?Capitalism 
needs to make a profit to survive, and it can only realize a profit 
in the process of exchange. It has to sell its commodities on the 
market. If it cannot sell, (due mainly to overproduction but also to 
the lack of purchasing power by the workers)
?
^^^^^
CB: Yes, but "overprofuction is the same
thing as lack of purchasing power
by the workers.? The "over" in "overproduction"
is producing over the amount that
workers can buy.? The "over" in "overaccumulation"
is accumulation?of?too much constant capital (
means of production,instruments of production) in
proportion to the variable capital (labor) of the
total capital. It's too much , because, constant
capital is not a source of surplus value, which
is the basis for profit. The reason the capitalists
accumulate "too much" constant capital is 
explained in Vol. I here
?
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch12.htm
?
Chapter Twelve: The Concept of Relative Surplus Value
?
The reason this overaccumulation causes a tendency for
the rate of profit to fall is explained here.
?
Capital Vol. III 
? 
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1894-c3/ch13.htm 
Part III. The Law of the Tendency of the Rate of Profit to Fall
Chapter 13. The Law As Such
?
Assuming a given wage and working-day, a variable capital, for instance of 100, represents a certain number of employed labourers. It is the index of this number. Suppose ?100 are the wages of 100 labourers for, say, one week. If these labourers perform equal amounts of necessary and surplus-labour, if they work daily as many hours for themselves, i.e., for the reproduction of their wage, as they do for the capitalist, i.e., for the production of surplus-value, then the value of their total product = ?200, and the surplus-value they produce would amount to ?100. The rate of surplus-value, s/v, would = 100%. But, as we have seen, this rate of surplus-value would nonetheless express itself in very different rates of profit, depending on the different volumes of constant capital c and consequently of the total capital C, because the rate of profit = s/C. The rate of surplus-value is 100%:
If c = 50, and v = 100, then p' = 100/150 = 66?%;
c = 100, and v = 100, then p' = 100/200 = 50%;
c = 200, and v = 100, then p' = 100/300 = 33?%;
c = 300, and v = 100, then p' = 100/400 = 25%;
c = 400, and v = 100, then p' = 100/500 = 20%. 
This is how the same rate of surplus-value would express itself under the same degree of labour exploitation in a falling rate of profit, because the material growth of the constant capital implies also a growth ? albeit not in the same proportion ? in its value, and consequently in that of the total capital.
If it is further assumed that this gradual change in the composition of capital is not confined only to individual spheres of production, but that it occurs more or less in all, or at least in the key spheres of production, so that it involves changes in the average organic composition of the total capital of a certain society, then the gradual growth of constant capital in relation to variable capital must necessarily lead to a gradual fall of the general rate of profit, so long as the rate of surplus-value, or the intensity of exploitation of labour by capital, remain the same. Now we have seen that it is a law of capitalist production that its development is attended by a relative decrease of variable in relation to constant capital, and consequently to the total capital set in motion. This is just another way of saying that owing to the distinctive methods of production developing in the capitalist system the same number of labourers, i.e., the same
 quantity of labour-power set in motion by a variable capital of a given value, operate, work up and productively consume in the same time span an ever-increasing quantity of means of labour, machinery and fixed capital of all sorts, raw and auxiliary materials ? and consequently a constant capital of an ever-increasing value. This continual relative decrease of the variable capital vis-a-vis the constant, and consequently the total capital, is identical with the progressively higher organic composition of the social capital in its average. It is likewise just another expression for the progressive development of the social productivity of labour, which is demonstrated precisely by the fact that the same number of labourers, in the same time, i.e., with less labour, convert an ever-increasing quantity of raw and auxiliary materials into products, thanks to the growing application of machinery and fixed capital in general. To this growing quantity of
 value of the constant capital ? although indicating the growth of the real mass of use-values of which the constant capital materially consists only approximately ? corresponds a progressive cheapening of products. Every individual product, considered by itself, contains a smaller quantity of labour than it did on a lower level of production, where the capital invested in wages occupies a far greater place compared to the capital invested in means of production. The hypothetical series drawn up at the beginning of this chapter expresses, therefore, the actual tendency of capitalist production. This mode of production produces a progressive relative decrease of the variable capital as compared to the constant capital, and consequently a continuously rising organic composition of the total capital. The immediate result of this is that the rate of surplus-value, at the same, or even a rising, degree of labour exploitation, is represented by a
 continually falling general rate of profit.
?
?
?
?
?there is no profit to be 
made, regardless of the surplus value embedded in the commodity 
itself. This exacerbates the original causal factor of 
overproduction, making the crisis worse. Or am I just trying to have 
my cake and eat it too?
?
^^^^^^
CB No you are correct.
As I just said to Lou, it's
both.

Greg McDonald


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sat Feb  7 00:17:50 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 08:17:50 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Marxism] Why analyze the economic crisis
References: <767246.10521.qm@web180113.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9EA8F030FB224445907055B4CE1012E2@dmsthinkpad>

If it's both, then we should be able to see a change in consumption 
relations, ratios PRIOR to the APPEARANCE, the MANIFESTATION of the crisis. 
We should be able to track and link that change in consumption relative to 
production, accumulation to the processes of capitalist contraction an 
expansion, prior to the actual contraction and expansion themselves.

And if it, underconsumption by the "masses," is the "first cut," then it has 
to be shown how this lack of consumption, rather than the internal exchange 
of capital between wage-labor and the already accumulated  "dead" labor 
specifically changes profitability; how it, underconsumption, prevents 
capitalism for reproducing itself as capital.

Since Charles is the advocate of the underconsumptionist position, it would 
seem to be his responsibility to provide us non-believers with some data 
regarding this.

And the explications of rates of relative surplus value tell us nothing 
about the ratios of consumption to reproduction.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Charles Brown" <cdb1003 at prodigy.net>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2009 7:59 AM
Subject: [Marxism] Marxism] Why analyze the economic crisis




From Waistline2 at aol.com  Sat Feb  7 01:26:36 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 03:26:36 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Marxism] Why analyze the economic crisis
Message-ID: <c6f.32d14bc8.36be9fbc@aol.com>

CB: I agree with this. But focussing on the fact that falling profit rates  
are the trigger cause of every crisis doesn't not imply that we need to get rid 
 of capital. It implies we should try to do something about raising the 
profit  rate back up.
 
Comment
 
To whom? 
 
I beg to differ. No to social democracy. 
 
I absolutely agree that the issue of consumption of socially necessary  means 
of life is paramount and have been screaming such for 10 years non-stop,  
only to be told in so many ways, I was an advocate for the lumpen proletariat,  
rather than the most destitute of the proletarian masses; the 30% of the  
workforce that are temporary workers and basically all those making less than  
roughly 25 K a year. Now that the middle classes are being squeezed by capital  
and we have a President who promises the middle class relief, all of a sudden  
consumption theory and "restricted consumption of the masses," is important as  
an explanation. . 

Everyone in America over 25 years old understands on one level of another  
the impact of the technological revolution, why and how it destroys jobs under  
capitalism. Everyone in America fear to one degree or another their job will 
be  wiped out and replace by a more efficient form of work. 
 
Speaking of being put of out of work by the revolution in the productive  
forces does not imply fighting to raise the profits for the capitalist. This is  
what I tell people and everyone always without exception agrees. I am in the  
supermarket and say, "
 
"yawl know that commercial where there are no more cashiers and the guy  
looks like he is stealing food and the guard chase him out the store, only to  
give him his receipt because an automatic scanner has scanned everything in his  
pocket?" 
 
Everyone in the store line hakes their head in agreement. 
 
"That is where America is heading. That is what is destroying the middle  
class and everyone else." 
 
I pull  out my old Chrysler badge and say, "we had these scanner  badges 
twenty years ago.
 
"It time for another Revolution, the 3rd edition of the American  
Revolution." 
 
That  is how our class and people think things out.   
 
 
No! 
 
The only way to transfer socially necessary means of life to people with  
little or no money is to give these things to those in need, regardless of class  
stratification. The reason for the crisis is capitalist property. The 
capitalist  our mortal enemy and destroying our country and wrecking the world. 8 
years of  Bush and before that Clinton destroying welfare as we know it lowered 
the  economic level that our working class is being pushed to; destroyed the 
social  safety net and now we have to make up for lost ground. I maintain that 
by 2030  no one in this country, most certainly no Marxist will be blind enough 
to deny  that the new technological regime is laying waste to our country and 
devastating  the working class. The uncritical thought of labeling the mass 
of destitute  proletarians lumpen proletarians will have long ago ceased. 
 
The fight for socially necessary means of life is the direct fight for  
economic communism in the here and now. This does not mean standing up in a  
meeting spouting complex theoretical formula no one can understand. Another  600,000 
people was unemployed and are going to hit the wall fast. The working  class 
has no economic reserves. Why on earth would a communist not tell the  whole 
truth? 

Marx theory cannot be applied as a program. Lenin did not raise on the  
banner of revolution "restricted consumption" or "organic composition of  capital." 
"Land, Bead and Peace" summed up the moment. It is impossible and was  not 
written for that purpose. A program of action is always generated on the  basis 
of the spontaneous demands of the workers themselves and this  understanding 
is the ABC of a fighting doctrine of combat. What people need in  our country 
is food and shelter, water bills paid. 
 
Trying to convert a theoretical postulate into a program is the road to the  
revision of Marx and total merger with social democracy.
 
Not because of a flaw in a comrade or a lack of revolutionary intention,  but 
because these postulates are only one aspect of the systems totality. This  
has been at the crux of the entire debate; raising one little paragraph of Marx 
 to the level of a system analysis. 
 
Not to directly point out the FROP - as the workers face it in job lose and  
falling wages, it to go over to social democratic politics American brand or 
the  Democratic Party and Obama-ism. Not to directly speak about over 
accumulation of  capital in the daily form of the banking crisis and the giveaway of 
billions  into the black hole of debt financing is to betray the spirit of Marx. 
 
Our working class is literate. It is us - the communist and Marxists, that  
have to get their act together and learn how to convey concepts in the 
framework  of how people think things out. 
 
 
WL. 
 
 
 
This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from 
_http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm_ (http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm) 
**************Who's never won?  Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on 
AOL Music. 
(http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?ncid=emlcntusmusi00000003)


From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Sat Feb  7 01:33:51 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 03:33:51 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] The Nation: "More bipartisanship, less stimulus"
Message-ID: <3A491B91F2B1441A8E73469DDC3A46B4@office1pc>

The main effect of the changes accepted by triangulating Democrats in order
to win the votes of the last two "moderate" Republicans on earth, Susan
Collins of Maine and the now antediluvian Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania (I
remember him when he seemed a mere boy, but then I was a mere boy myself) is
to cut sharply, if not gut, those aspects of the "stimulus" that help
working people survive in the crisis.

Some rather important parts appear -- I am not sure, because the details are
covered up in the official debate presented to media listeners and readers
--- to have basically made the cut. This includes support to state
unemployment insurance programs and relaunching of Head Start for pre-school
working-class (and other) children and expansion of food stamps (which is in
the direct interest of ranching, agribusiness, meatpacking and supermarket
chains). I don't know what happened to money for school lunch programs. Many
other programs have been cut or eliminated.

The whole thing is obscured by the media's practice of treating the
"stimulus" as a scary lump sum. Not one news report I saw on TV or in a
major newspaper even mentioned anything specific that was being cut in their
news stories. I would like to know what made the cut and what didn't. But
the Republican ability -- fostered by Obama's claims that he can bring
together all opposed forces as "Americans" -- to wield the filibuster as a
threat may be having its biggest success since the blocking of anti-lynching
laws in what is now Way Back When. Of course, the Republicans could not do
this without the Democrats, just as the Dixiecrats could not strangle
civil-rights legislation without the northern liberals.

A whopping 42 percent of the "stimulus" now consists of tax cuts, weighted
toward businesses and the rich who supposedly, in this environment, will
unfailingly invest any money that happens to come their way in
"job-creating" areas, which of course they don't. After all, unemployment
compensation doesn't directly create jobs -- it isn't capital -- but only
allows the strata of workers who receive it to more or less live through the
crash

In my opinion, these issues should be viewed as the heart of working
people's interests -- and they have some stake -- in the stimulus debate.

It is notable that the basically right-liberal Washington Post has supported
the attack on the stimulus plan, arguing that stuff like Head Start and
unemployment compensation have nothing to do with "job creation," -- as
though "jobs" of workers and not "profits" of bosses is what the stimulus is
ultimately all about -- but should be dealt with separately or (ideally) not
at all. The New York Times has taken an editorial stand in the other camp.

We should have in mind that this is about more, from our point of view, than
whether the stimulus will resolve the economic crisis or contribute to
resolving it. I have my doubts. But there are real stakes for working people
in this debate.
Fred Feldman


http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/406028/more_bipartisanship_less_stimu
lus?rel=hpbox

More Bipartisanship, Less Stimulus posted by John Nichols on 02/07/2009 @
12:02am

Determined to pass something in the way of a stimulus package, Senate
Democrats on Friday bartered away key elements of the more robust plan
approved by the House. 

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, and his caucus colleagues got
what will be called a "bipartisan agreement." But this is not a case of less
being more. 

The Senate's $780 billion plan is still a budget buster. 

However, in order to get two Republican votes (those of Susan Collins of
Maine and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania) that were needed to break a
threatened GOP filibuster, Reid surrendered an estimated $110 billion is
proposed stimulus spending. In doing so, they cut not just fat but bone. The
plan is now more weighted than before toward tax cuts (which will account
for more than 40 percent of the overall cost of the package) that will do
little or nothing to stimulate job creation for a country than lost almost
600,000 positions in January alone. As French President Nicolas Sarkozy, no
liberal, said Friday of countries that opt for tax cuts rather than
stimulus: The approach "will bring them nothing" in the way of economic
renewal. 

The Senate's increased emphasis on tax cuts comes at the expense of the sort
of aggressive spending that might actually get a stalled economy moving. 

Spending for school construction that would actually have put people to work
-- while at the same time investing in the future -- has been slashed. 

Title I funding increases have been cut. 

Supplemental transportation funding has been hacked. 

Axed, as well, has been $90 million that was to have been allocated to plan
for and manage a potential flu pandemic that economists and public health
experts worry could shutter remaining businesses, bring the economy to a
complete standstill and throw the country into a deep depression. 

The bottom line is that, under the Senate plan: 

* States will get less aid. 

* Schools will get less help. 

* Job creation programs will be less well funded. 

* Preparations to combat potential public health disasters -- which could
put the final nail in the economy's coffin -- will not be made. 

In every sense, the Senate plan moves in the wrong direction. 

At a time when smart economists are saying that a bigger, bolder stimulus
plan is needed, Senate Democrats and a few moderate Republicans have agreed
to a smaller, weaker initiative. 

And Republicans are still delaying passage. It could be Sunday, even Monday,
before a vote is taken. And who knows what more will be lost -- in time and
stimulus spending before President Obama signs a bill. 

These are the fruits of bipartisan fantasies and the compromises that follow
upon them. President Obama, who should have been on television addressing
the nation and doing everything in his power to rally support for a
sufficient stimulus plan, will be lucky if he gets anything by the
President's Day deadline he set. (Even after the Senate measure passes, a
difficult process of reconciling the very different House and Senate bills
must take place. Then there will be more votes before any legislation gets
to the president's desk.) 

The White House still wants to advance this measure, as do Senate Democratic
leaders. And, considering the urgency of the moment, they are probably right
to try to do something. But if the final "stimulus package" proves to be
insufficient to jump start the economy -- and if what is left of public
confidence in the prospect of turnaround collapses as a result -- this
Friday night compromise will be remembered with pained regret




From Jscotlive at aol.com  Sat Feb  7 01:47:03 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 03:47:03 EST
Subject: [Marxism] John Pilger On The Hype Surrounding Obama
Message-ID: <bbf.447b0e7a.36bea487@aol.com>

 
_http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news/features/surplus_of_bollocks_ 
(http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news/features/surplus_of_bollocks)  
Growing up in an Antipodean society proud of its rich variety of expletives,  
I never heard the word bollocks. It was only on arrival in England that I  
understood its magisterial power.  
All classes used it. Judges grunted it; an editor of the Daily Mirror used it 
 as noun, adjective and verb. Certainly, the resonance of a double vowel saw 
off  its closest US contender. It had authority.  
A high official with the Gilbertian title of Lord West of Spithead used it to 
 great effect on January 27.  
The former admiral, who is a security adviser to Gordon Brown, was referring  
to Tony Blair's assertion that invading countries and killing innocent people 
 did not increase the threat of terrorism at home.  
"That was clearly bollocks," said his lordship, who warned of a perceived  
"linkage between the US, Israel and the UK" in the horrors inflicted on Gaza and 
 the effect on the recruitment of terrorists in Britain.  
In other words, he was stating the obvious: that state terrorism begets  
individual or group terrorism at source.  
Just as Blair was the prime mover of the London bombings of July 7 2005, so  
Brown, having pursued the same cynical crusades in Muslim countries and having 
 armed and disported himself before the criminal regime in Tel Aviv, will 
share  responsibility for related atrocities at home.  
There is a lot of bollocks about at the moment.  
The BBC's explanation for banning an appeal on behalf of the stricken people  
of Gaza is a vivid example.  
Mark Thompson, the BBC's director general, cited the corporation's legal  
requirement to be "impartial ... because Gaza remains a major ongoing news story  
in which humanitarian issues ... are both at the heart of the story and  
contentious."  
In a letter to Thompson, David Bracewell, a licence-fee payer, illuminated  
the deceit behind this.  
He pointed to previous BBC appeals for the Disasters Emergency Committee that 
 were not only made in the midst of "an ongoing news story" in which 
humanitarian  issues were "contentious" but also demonstrated how the corporation took 
sides.  
In 1999, at the height of the illegal NATO bombing of Serbia and Kosovo, the  
TV presenter Jill Dando made an appeal on behalf of Kosovar refugees.  
The BBC web page for that appeal was linked to numerous articles meant to  
stress the gravity of the humanitarian issue.  
These included quotations from Blair himself, such as: "This will be a daily  
pounding until he (Slobodan Milosevic) comes into line with the terms that 
NATO  has laid down."  
There was no significant balance of view from the Yugoslav side and not a  
single mention that the flight of Kosovar refugees began only after NATO had  
started bombing.  
Similarly, in an appeal for victims of the civil war in the Congo, the BBC  
favoured the regime led by Joseph Kabila by not referring to Amnesty, Human  
Rights Watch and other reports accusing his forces of atrocities.  
In contrast, the rebel leader Laurent Nkunda was "accused of committing  
atrocities" and ordained the bad guy by the BBC.  
Kabila, who represented Western interests, was clearly the good guy - just  
like NATO in the Balkans and Israel in the Middle East.  
While Thompson and his satraps richly deserve the Lord West of Spithead  
Bollocks Blue Ribbon, that honour goes to the cheer squad of President Barack  
Obama, whose cult-like obeisance goes on and on.  
On January 23, the Guardian's front page declared: "Obama shuts network of  
CIA 'ghost prisons'."  
The "wholesale deconstruction (sic) of George Bush's war on terror," said the 
 report, had been ordered by the new president, who would be "shutting down 
the  CIA's secret prison network, banning torture and rendition..."  
The bollocks quotient on this was so high that it read like the press release 
 it was, citing "officials briefing reporters at the White House yesterday."  
Obama's orders, according to a group of 16 retired generals and admirals who  
attended a presidential signing ceremony, "would restore America's moral  
standing in the world."  
What moral standing?  
It never ceases to astonish that experienced reporters can transmit PR stunts 
 like this, bearing in mind the moving belt of lies from the same source 
under  only nominally different management.  
Far from "deconstructing the war on terror," Obama is clearly pursuing it  
with the same vigour, ideological backing and deception as the previous  
administration.  
George W Bush's first war, in Afghanistan, and last war, in Pakistan, are now 
 Obama's wars - with thousands more US troops to be deployed, more bombing 
and  more slaughter of civilians.  
Last month, on the day he described Afghanistan and Pakistan as "the central  
front in our enduring struggle against terrorism and extremism," 22 Afghan  
civilians died beneath Obama's bombs in a hamlet populated mainly by shepherds  
and which, by all accounts, had not laid eyes on the Taliban. Women and 
children  were among the dead, which is normal.  
Far from "shutting down the CIA's secret prison network," Obama's executive  
orders actually give the CIA authority to carry out renditions, abductions and 
 transfers of prisoners in secret without threat of legal obstruction.  
As the Los Angeles Times disclosed, "current and former US intelligence  
officials said that the rendition programme might be poised to play an expanded  
role."  
A semantic sleight of hand is that "long-term prisons" are changed to  
"short-term prisons" and while US personnel are now banned from directly  torturing 
people, foreigners working for the US are not.  
This means that the US's numerous "covert actions" will operate as they did  
under previous presidents, with proxy regimes, such as Augusto Pinochet's in  
Chile, doing the dirtiest work.  
Bush's open support for torture, and Donald Rumsfeld's extraordinary personal 
 overseeing of certain torture techniques, upset many in America's "secret 
army"  of subversive military and intelligence operators because it exposed how 
the  system worked.  
Obama's newly confirmed director of national intelligence, Admiral Dennis  
Blair, has said the Army Field Manual may include new forms of "harsh  
interrogation" which will be kept secret.  
Obama has chosen not to stop any of this. Neither do his ballyhooed executive 
 orders put an end to Bush's assault on constitutional and international law. 
 
He has retained Bush's "right" to imprison anyone, without trial or charge.  
No "ghost prisoners" are being released or are due to be tried before a 
civilian  court.  
His nominee for attorney general, Eric Holder, has endorsed an extension of  
Bush's totalitarian USA Patriot Act, which allows federal agents to demand US  
citizens' library and bookshop records. The man of "change" is changing 
little.  That ought to be front-page news from Washington.  
The Lord West of Spithead Bollocks Prize (Runner-Up) is shared.  
On January 28, a nationally run Greenpeace advertisement opposing a third  
runway at Heathrow airport in London summed up the almost wilful naivety that  
has obstructed informed analysis of the Obama administration.  
"Fortunately," declared Greenpeace beneath a Godlike picture of Obama, "the  
White House has a new occupant, and he has asked us all to roll back the 
spectre  of a warming planet."  
This was followed by Obama's rhetorical flourish about "putting off  
unpleasant decisions."  
In fact, the president has made no commitment to curtail the US's infamous  
responsibility for the causes of global warming.  
As with George W Bush and most other modern-era presidents, it is oil, not  
stemming carbon emissions, that informs his administration.  
His national security adviser General Jim Jones, a former NATO supreme  
commander, made his name planning US military control over the exploitation of  oil 
and gas reserves from the Persian Gulf and the Caspian Sea to the Gulf of  
Guinea off Africa.  
Sharing the Bollocks Runner-Up Prize is the Observer, which on January 25  
published a major news report headlined: "How Obama set the tone for a new US  
revolution."  
This was reminiscent of the Observer almost a dozen years ago when  
liberalism's other great white hope, Tony Blair, came to power.  
"Goodbye xenophobia" was the Observer's post-election front page in 1997 and  
"The Foreign Office says 'Hello World, remember us?'."  
The government, said the breathless text, would push for "new worldwide rules 
 on human rights and the environment" and implement "tough new limits" on 
arms  sales.  
The opposite happened. Last year, Britain was the biggest arms dealer in the  
world; currently, it is second only to the United States.  
In the Blair mould, the Obama White House "sprang into action" with its  
"radical plans."  
The president's first phone call was to that Palestinian quisling, the  
unelected and deeply unpopular Mahmoud Abbas.  
There was a "hot pace" and a "new era," in which a notorious name from an  
ancien r?gime, Richard Holbrooke, was despatched to Pakistan.  
In 1978, Holbrooke betrayed a promise to normalise relations with the  
Vietnamese on the eve of a vicious embargo ruined the lives of countless  Vietnamese 
children.  
Under Obama, the "sense of a new era abroad," declared the Observer, "was  
reinforced by the confirmation of Hillary Clinton as secretary of state."  
Clinton has threatened to "entirely obliterate Iran" on behalf of Israel.  
What the childish fawning over Obama obscures is the dark power assembled  
under cover of the US's first "post-racial president."  
Apart from the US, the world's most dangerous state is demonstrably Israel,  
having recently killed and maimed some 4,000 people in Gaza with impunity.  
On February 10, a bellicose Israeli electorate is likely to put Binyamin  
Netanyahu into power.  
Netanyahu is a fanatic's fanatic who has made clear his intention of  
attacking Iran.  
In the Wall Street Journal of January 24, he described Iran as the "terrorist 
 mother base" and justified the murder of civilians in Gaza because "Israel  
cannot accept an Iranian terror base (Gaza) next to its major cities."  
On January 31, unaware he was being filmed, Tel Aviv's ambassador to  
Australia described the massacres in Gaza as a "pre-introduction" - a dress  
rehearsal - for an attack on Iran.  
For Netanyahu, the reassuring news is that the new US administration is the  
most zionist in living memory, a truth that has struggled to be told from  
beneath the soggy layers of Obama-love.  
Not a single member of the president's team demurred from his support for  
Israel's barbaric actions in Gaza.  
Obama himself likened the safety of his two young daughters to that of  
Israeli children but made not a single reference to the thousands of Palestinian  
children killed with US weapons - a violation of both international and US law. 
 
He did, however, demand that the people of Gaza be denied "smuggled" small  
arms with which to defend themselves against the world's fourth-largest 
military  power.  
And he paid tribute to the Arab dictatorships, such as Egypt, which are  
bribed by the US treasury to help the United States and Israel enforce policies  
described by the UN special rapporteur Richard Falk, a Jew, as "genocidal."  
It is time the Obama lovers grew up. It is time those paid to keep the record 
 straight gave us the opportunity to debate informatively. In the 21st 
century,  people power remains a huge and exciting and largely untapped force for 
change,  but it is nothing without truth.  
"In the time of universal deceit," wrote George Orwell, "telling the truth is 
 a revolutionary act."  
This article appeared in the New  Statesman.

From russell.morse at yahoo.com  Sat Feb  7 04:28:13 2009
From: russell.morse at yahoo.com (Russell Morse)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 03:28:13 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Clearest explanation yet of the financial crash
Message-ID: <694523.31627.qm@web45315.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

http://www.gocomics.com/features/151/feature_items/409977


      


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sat Feb  7 04:42:02 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 12:42:02 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Clearest explanation yet of the financial crash
References: <694523.31627.qm@web45315.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <9C56ABFF28F3443F9AE7F61277BE0E3A@dmsthinkpad>

Picture is worth a thousand words, and all the op-ed columns ever.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Russell Morse" <russell.morse at yahoo.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2009 12:28 PM
Subject: [Marxism] Clearest explanation yet of the financial crash


> http://www.gocomics.com/features/151/feature_items/409977
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________
> 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 lnp3 at panix.com  Sat Feb  7 06:28:22 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 08:28:22 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Query from George Snedeker on dorm cameras
Message-ID: <498D8C76.904@panix.com>

I was wondering if anyone has any ideas or information about the following.

I've been concerned with the presence of new dorm cameras in the 
hallways and lounge areas of the dorms at the college where I teach. 
Some of the students feel this to be a violation of their rights to 
privacy. The cameras can see all the way down the halls passed the 
bathroom and up to the doors of students rooms. The cameras have the 
capacity to listen, but the students have been told by the university 
police that they don't routinely listen. The issue at stake here is 
whether or not dorm hallways are private space. In a recent appeals 
court in Washington State the court ruled that dorm hallways were 
private space because students must go out into the hall in order to get 
to their bathrooms. The Washington ruling is "persuasive", not "binding" 
in NY where I teach.

I'd like to know if anyone has any ideas about the right of privacy 
issue or knows of any other college that has these kind of cameras in 
dorms. George Washington University is one school that has these kind of 
cameras. I teach at SUNY/Old Westbury and we also have them.


The court ruling in Washington State had to do with the police making an 
illegal arrest, not dorm cameras. Nevertheless, it did define hallways 
of dorms as private space.

Please write to me offline at snedeker at verizon.net
George


From christopher.hutch at gmail.com  Sat Feb  7 06:39:47 2009
From: christopher.hutch at gmail.com (Christopher Hutchinson)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 08:39:47 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] General Strike Comics: Israel's Eye on Iran or More Fun
	with White Phosphorus
Message-ID: <c81bf1a60902070539u64ea59ffhfeefd32350493631@mail.gmail.com>

It looks as though Gaza was only the beginning...

www.GeneralStrikeComics.com <http://www.generalstrikecomics.com/>

keep well,

christopher

From sabocat59 at mac.com  Sat Feb  7 07:11:51 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (Greg McDonald)
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 09:11:51 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Domhoff, Marx, and the Ruling Class
Message-ID: <92C2311E-6D89-4208-9DF4-A4D6770CC63A@mac.com>


"In a dying civilization, political prestige is the reward not of the  
shrewdest diagnostician, but of the man with the best bedside manner.  
It is the decoration conferred on mediocrity by ignorance.

from "A Coffin for Dimitrios", by Eric Ambler


During a recent visit to my parent's home over the holidays, I was  
reminded of a comment by Marxmail contributor Anthony Boynton when I  
came across a book I had left there by William Domhoff titled "The  
Power Elite and the State" (1990).  Anthony had mentioned that  
Domhoff stood outside the marxist tradition. As it turns out, the  
truth of this assertion is both yes and no. I had picked this book up  
at a used bookstore some time ago and had never really read it. So I  
did, to see if it could tell me whether or not Domhoff is relevant  
for north american marxists, or to anyone who wants to understand the  
intersection of class and power in the USA.  Turns out both he, and  
this book, are of interest.

  The introduction offers a schema of different schools of political  
theory taught in US universities (probably a bit dated due to the  
influence of post-modernism there), and situates the author aligning  
himself with the 'plain marxists' over and against the liberal  
pluralists, the structural marxists, (or what  Mills called the  
"sophisticated marxists"), and the relative state autonomy  theorists  
like Skocpol.  Most of the essays which follow are mid-level  
empirical and historical studies that show Domhoff's kinship with  
what he calls the "plain marxist" school of dissident political and  
economic writing within the United States.

Domhoff combines an empirically-based institutional analysis with a  
class analysis. His original thesis was to see if Mill's power elite  
could be grounded in the marxian concept of the ruling class. First  
of all, he found a perfect overlap between Mill's power elite and  
'upper class' capitalists, and then he empirically demonstrated how  
capitalists both directly and indirectly influence policy making in  
the executive branch. He had achieved this synthesis by the mid-80's.  
On the other hand, although Domhoff does agree with Skocpol that the  
state has "potentially autonomous" counter-tendencies, he gives far  
less credence to state autonomy than the other authors within that  
camp, and he argues that the structural marxists in particular have  
wanted to give far more independent power to the state than reality  
merits.

Domhoff had drawn on marxist theory and praxis from the beginning of  
his academic career. He indicates his own early theoretical  
background as a mix of C. Wright Mills, Floyd Hunter, and the Monthly  
Review marxists: Paul Baran, Paul Sweezy, and Harry Magdoff.   
Domhoff  links his own early work to that of SNCC, SDS, and the early  
NACLA. See both "Who Rules America" (1967) and "The Higher  
Circles" (1970) for reference to that era. Domhoff mentions that the  
decline of this dissident movement within the academy occurred in  
tandem with the ebb of the New Left, and both the structural marxists  
and the more pluralistic "state autonomy" theorists filled the  
institutional and theoretical vacuum left in their wake:

"They shared the belief that plain marxists had a crude view of the  
state as the simple tool or "instrument" of capitalists. This  
"instrumentalist" view of the state was said to rest on personal  
linkages between capitalists and government officials, and to require  
the direct involvement of capitalists in the state. Instrumentalism  
was then contrasted with structuralism, which was said to be more  
sophisticated because it saw the state as an organizational entity  
within an overall system with underlying rules and imperatives. For  
the structural marxists, the state has relative autonomy from any  
specific capitalists or the capitalist class, but is in the general  
service of capitalism. For state autonomy theorists states are  
administrative, policing, and military organizations with a logic and  
interests of their own."

Although Domhoff clearly disagrees with the structuralists, he does  
argue that states may indeed supersede the authority of the dominant  
economic class to its own interests, and compete with it for  
resources. More recently, Domhoff has turned to historical work in  
the wake of the activist downturn and the lack of an audience for  
more contemporary appraisals of the ruling class, although recent  
history is clearly still within his purview. To that end, Domhoff has  
been influenced by one work in particular, "The Sources of Social  
Power: From the Beginnings of Civilization to 1760 A.D.", by Michael  
Mann.  According to Domhoff, Mann's theory of social power posits  
four interacting networks--ideological, economic, military, and  
political, none of which is inherently primary.  Domhoff revels in  
Mann's historical particularism, which argues that the european  
"miracle" was based on "a series of giant coincidences".   I have not  
read the book so cannot comment on it directly, merely to indicate in  
passing that it has influenced Domhoff's theoretical trajectory. He  
likes Mann's theory because it is "network based, historically  
focused, and empirical".

I notice that in reference to marxism, aside from the more positive  
attraction of his compatibility with the Monthly Review theorists,  
Domhoff tends to draw on second-hand sources for his understanding of  
Marx's historical work, and as I have not read those books I cannot  
comment on them, but at least one reference is critical of Marx's  
theory of Bonapartism.  Me, I'm still wading through Hal Draper.

That aside, the "mid-level" essays of the book are relevant, as they  
focus on key twentieth century political trends in US society, as  
reflected in specific legislation: the Social Security Act, the  
Wagner Act, the IMF, the Employment Act of 1946,  Class segments and  
Trade policy from 1917--1962, the rise of Reaganism, and the  
relationship between Democrats and the Ruling Class. The chapter on  
the Wagner Act is revealing in terms of the class struggle emphasis,  
and the intersection of competing ruling class interests leading to  
the development of ameliorating legislation. The section on capital- 
labor conflict and the rise of Reaganism is also an instructive read,  
and the essay on the Democrats has particular relevance to our  
current situation, as it compresses a history of the party into five  
pages.



Greg McDonald









From lnp3 at panix.com  Sat Feb  7 07:43:49 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 09:43:49 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] 90 year old Madoff victim forced to go back to work
Message-ID: <498D9E25.9080104@panix.com>

http://cbs5.com/local/elderly.madoff.victim.2.929316.html
Ben Lomond Madoff Victim, 90, Returns To Work
Kiet Do, Reporting.

Imagine working your whole life saving for retirement, then having your 
life savings disappear. It's reality for a Ben Lomond man, who at age 90 
is forced back to work to make ends meet.

Retired businessman Ian Thiermann is back on the job working 30 hours a 
week as a grocery store greeter.

Like thousands of people across the country, Thiermann invested with 
Wall Street financier Bernie Madoff, who is accused of allegedly running 
a $50 billion Ponzi scheme. Thiemann said he has lost all of his $738,000.

With house payments and medical bills piling up, Theirmann said he had 
no choice but to go back to work for $10 an hour.

Theirmann said, "You meet a situation like this, what are you gonna do, 
fold up? Instead of crying, yelling or being mad about it, face it and 
move on."

When the owner of the Ben Lomond Market heard the news, they offered 
Thiermann the job. Because in a grocery store, energy, attitude and 
punctuality can matter more than age.

"This is not a, woe is me, kind of man," said Barbara Loffer of Ben 
Lomond Market. "This is a community coming together and helping each 
other out in times of need."

After his first day on the job, the bosses gave him the next day off, 
because aftera ll, he's going to be 91 in May. They gave him a chair, 
because they figured he couldn't handle standing for six hours a day.

Thiermann was born in 1919, when Woodrow Wilson was president. He has 
lived through the Great Depression and all the wars since World War II 
and he sees no point in being bitter.

(? MMIX, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.)


From lnp3 at panix.com  Sat Feb  7 08:06:32 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 10:06:32 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Forwarded message on robotic weapons
Message-ID: <498DA378.1060406@panix.com>

(From Lara Crete. It bounced because it had a bunch of hex code 
attached. I am also supplying the indicated link to the Democracy Now 
segment below.)

"DemocracyNow!", February 6,2009. Please, post it.

It  should  save  comrades' time in the "waiting  period"  for  the
Obama's  "hope" to show  signs of life, and spare us from useless
con and pro discussions, in attempt to discover the Obama's
"enigmatic" personality.

It might  become clear after reading the Amy Goodman's interview with
P.W. Singer, that this kind of President is the transitional figure
from the Human's  to the Robotics' governing of the society.

Thank you for the list!

---

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/2/6/wired_for_war_the_robotics_revolution


From lnp3 at panix.com  Sat Feb  7 10:25:26 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 12:25:26 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] The obsession with Castro's health
Message-ID: <498DC406.5030408@panix.com>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/06/AR2009020603312.html

The Mystifying Life and Many Deaths of Cuba's Talisman
By William Booth
Washington Post Foreign Service
Saturday, February 7, 2009; A08

MEXICO CITY

On the front page of Cuba's state newspaper Granma last week, the lone 
star on the Cuban flag had mysteriously faded away in an old 
black-and-white photograph announcing a celebration of patriot Jos? 
Mart?. Copies quickly sold out as rumors flew across the island. What 
did it mean? Was it a portent? Had the inevitable finally happened?

As it turned out, Fidel Castro was not dead. Just as he has not been 
dead for more than 50 years, ever since the United Press reported that 
he had been killed by government soldiers on Dec. 2, 1956, hours after 
returning to Cuba to wage guerrilla war.

The missing star? Apparently a printing error.

But over the past two years, the subject of Castro's health has become 
an obsession among Cubans and Cuba watchers, and the fever peaked last 
month as word circulated that he was on his deathbed, which turned out 
not to be true. In fact, he was apparently up late Wednesday night, 
blogging about President Obama. Castro informed Obama that previous U.S. 
governments had pursued policies of criminal aggression, not that he was 
blaming Obama.

"On the contrary," Castro posted, "being born of a Kenyan Muslim father 
and a white American Christian deserves special merit in the context of 
U.S. society and I am the first to recognize that."

The speculation about his continued viability is fueled by the fact that 
Castro, 82, has not been seen in public since the summer of 2006, when 
he underwent what is believed to have been intestinal surgery. The 
whereabouts and medical condition of the reformed cigar smoker are state 
secrets, even though he formally transferred power to his younger 
brother Ra?l last year.

"The fixation about the health of Fidel is without parallel," said 
Daniel P. Erikson, an analyst at the policy group Inter-American 
Dialogue and author of a new book, "The Cuba Wars," whose first chapter 
is titled "Die Another Day."

"The death speculation, the death obsession, about Castro is varsity 
league; nothing else is close," said Erikson, adding that interest in 
North Korean leader Kim Jong Il, who disappeared from public view for 
months after reportedly suffering a stroke last summer, pales in 
comparison. "And this could go on for a very long time, for clearly 
Fidel is getting good health care, and it is, after all, Fidel Castro 
we're talking about. He does not give up easily."

Some Cuba experts say that the long, slow fade of Castro, rather than 
being a disaster for the communist government of Cuba, might serve to 
preserve the power of the ruling elite by easing the transition -- first 
from Fidel to Ra?l, then from Ra?l to a younger generation.

"It is as if Fidel has turned an actual crisis -- his inevitable death 
-- into another opportunity," said David Scott Palmer, a Cuba scholar 
and professor at Boston University, who says that Castro, in his essays, 
blogs and "reflections," is preparing the country for his final exit. 
"Little by little, Cuba gets used to the idea of life without Fidel. . . 
. He seems to be skillfully managing his own departure."

Palmer and his colleagues stress that no one can predict what will 
happen when Castro dies. It is the same lack of information that has 
made it impossible to know much about Castro's health -- which leaves 
Cuba watchers with only the faintest clues to work with. So they peer at 
official photographs released by the government after state visits and 
parse his blog entries, looking for signs of gathering frailty or 
renewed vitality.

"For so long, for half a century, the stability of Cuba has depended on 
Fidel to manage the country's affairs. And his government doesn't want 
to break the spell. He is the talisman," the protective charm, Erikson said.

And though many Cuban exiles will party in the streets of Miami on the 
day of his death, what happens on the island is the great unknown.

Being wrong about Castro's health is almost a tradition among U.S. 
officials. In 2005, CIA analysts concluded that Castro was suffering 
from Parkinson's disease. A few days later, Castro gave a five-hour 
speech to a group of Havana University students and said he never felt 
better.

In 2006, Director of National Intelligence John D. Negroponte said 
Castro was knocking on death's door. "Everything we see indicates it 
will not be much longer. . . . Months, not years," Negroponte said at a 
meeting of Washington Post editors and reporters.

Journalists have also had a tough time predicting the end. One of the 
most dedicated Cuba watchers, the Miami Herald and El Nuevo Herald 
columnist Andres Oppenheimer, foresaw a relatively rapid conclusion in 
his book "Castro's Final Hour." The book was published in 1992.

Writing about the recent rumors of Castro's imminent death, the Chicago 
Tribune in an editorial got the mood right with the headline: "Castro is 
dying, again."

In a commentary published Sunday about the latest rumors, Manny Garcia, 
a senior editor at the Miami Herald, wrote that "Fidel Castro is the 
journalistic equivalent of a kidney stone -- a constant pain who never 
seems to go away, and you pray that he passes, soon." Last month, based 
on the rumors, the Herald sent reporters to cover Castro's death, again.

Though he has not been seen in public, Castro does meet with visiting 
world leaders. He has been shown at undisclosed locations in photographs 
released by the government. Is he in a hospital room? A house? A 
government office?

In November, he was pictured with Chinese President Hu Jintao. Castro, 
as is his custom now, was wearing his zippered track suit. He looked 
okay. But then the photographs stopped.

Castro did not attend the 50th anniversary celebration of the revolution 
in Santiago on New Year's Day. Instead, he penned a very short note 
congratulating the Cuban people for their heroism. Then silence.

Venezuelan President Hugo Ch?vez, who is a close ally and frequent flier 
to Cuba, appeared to be saying something significant when he told his 
radio and television show audience last month: "We know that the Fidel 
who used to walk down streets and through towns at dawn, looking like a 
warrior, wearing his uniform and embracing his people, will not return." 
Instead, the Cuban leader "will remain in our memories."

On Jan. 21, Castro met with Argentine President Cristina Fern?ndez de 
Kirchner. Afterward, Ra?l Castro accompanied her to the Havana airport, 
where he told reporters, "Now you know that Fidel is fine." He said his 
brother spends days "exercising, thinking and reading a lot, advising 
me, helping me."

A few days later, a photograph was released showing Fidel Castro 
greeting Fern?ndez de Kirchner. He is standing and wearing his Adidas 
track suit. Fern?ndez de Kirchner told reporters that she and Castro 
spoke for an hour, that he seemed healthy and that they talked politics.

Later, Ch?vez admitted that, "sure, there are once again some rumors 
that Fidel died" but that his Cuban ally was still "alive and kicking."

So it seems. Because then Castro himself wrote one of his essays, 
explaining that he has been rereading all of his articles and other 
materials, reminiscing. "I have had the rare privilege to follow events 
for such a long time," he wrote. "I get information and think quietly 
about events.

"I don't expect to enjoy that privilege in four years, when Obama's 
first presidential term ends," he wrote. "I feel fine, but insist that 
no one should feel bound by my reflections, my state of health, or even 
my death."


From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Sat Feb  7 11:03:00 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 10:03:00 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] The obsession with Castro's health
Message-ID: <498DCCD4.9090800@gmail.com>

This reminds me of the rumors in the early 1970s when people thought 
Paul McCartney dead because he was walking across the street on the 
cover of Abby Road in bare feat, or he was standing backwards in The 
Lonely Hearts Club Band.

Number 9, Number 9, Number 9 anyone?

-DW


From lnp3 at panix.com  Sat Feb  7 11:06:37 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 13:06:37 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Interview with Robert Brenner on the current crisis
Message-ID: <498DCDAD.1060801@panix.com>

http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell/OPE/archive/0901/0357.html


From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Sat Feb  7 11:21:38 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 13:21:38 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Social wage ("safety net") proposals gutted as bipartisan
 moderates cut deal
Message-ID: <ECB5F624654A47A48A2AC9AFAF2EFE5C@office1pc>

What seems to be left is basically tax cuts for the rich plus scattered
construction contracts for big business, which may or may not lead them to
hire some people. Head Start is out. School lunches were widely ridiculed so
I assume they are out? 

What does feeding children have to do with stimulating the economy as a
theme? These people have gotten all too used to living by fictional capital.
The scope of seems to be one big difference between the bourgeois mentality
and, say, the 30s, when the position of such operations was less clearly
dominant than today.

Apparently expanded unemployment insurance is still in, including a weekly
increase of $25. Would have been awkward for the "moderates" to gut this on
the day the new jobs figures came out.

"The Senate's proposed cuts took aim at an array of popular spending
programs that critics said should not be part of a fiscal recovery bill,
even if they represent laudable policy goals, because they would not deliver
a quick enough jolt to the economy. 

Even Mr. Obama's signature tax cut for middle-class Americans was scaled
back as part of the deal. Under the new plan, tax credits of up to $500 for
individuals and $1,000 for couples would begin to phase out at lower income
levels than first proposed, saving the government $2 billion.

The biggest cut, roughly $40 billion in aid to states, was likely to spur a
fierce fight in negotiations with the House over the final bill. Many
states, hit hard by the recession, face wrenching cuts in services and
layoffs of public employees as they struggle to comply with laws requiring
them to balance their budgets."

I was actually inclined to go with the measure before, since giving away
money to the rich is simply business as usual while the social service
improvements would have represented a change in direction in that area. No
more, however. This measure should be protested by labor, unless the cuts
are reinstated. You can always dump most of the tax cuts if you want to save
revenue.
Fred Feldman




February 7, 2009
Senators Reach Deal on Stimulus Plan as Jobs Vanish 
By CARL HULSE and DAVID M. HERSZENHORN
WASHINGTON - Senate Democrats reached an agreement with Republican moderates
on Friday to pare a huge economic recovery measure, clearing the way for
approval of a package that President Obama said was urgently needed in light
of mounting job losses.

The deal, announced on the Senate floor, was a result of two days of tense
negotiations and political theater. Mr. Obama dispatched his chief of staff
to Capitol Hill to help conclude the talks and reassure senators in his own
party, and he called three key Republicans to applaud them for their
patriotism. 

Earlier, when it looked as if a vote might take place Friday night,
officials said, a government plane was dispatched to Florida to bring back
Senator Edward M. Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat who has brain cancer. 

The fine print was not immediately available, and the numbers were shifting.
But in essence, the Democratic leadership and two centrist Republicans
announced they had struck a deal on about $110 billion in cuts to the
roughly $900 billion legislation - a deal expected to provide at least the
60 votes needed to send the bill out of the Senate and into negotiations
with the House, which has passed its own version.

The pact, which is expected to be approved in the next few days, was
concluded just hours after the Labor Department announced that 598,000 jobs
were lost in January. The contraction in jobs is already steeper than in any
other recession since at least the early 1980s. And economists warn that
several more shoes are about to drop, a message that added urgency to the
Senate deliberations. 

As the negotiations were under way, lawmakers said it was time to stop
quibbling about the exact parameters of the legislation - which mixes
safety-net spending, tax cuts and a huge infusion of dollars into federal
programs - and to begin work toward a final agreement that could be sent to
Mr. Obama next week.

"Our country can't wait another day for another approach," said Senator Ben
Nelson, a Nebraska Democrat who is a leader of the bipartisan coalition that
worked out the agreement.

The details were negotiated at an afternoon meeting in the office of the
Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, involving Mr. Reid, other top
Democrats and two Republicans, Susan Collins of Maine and Arlen Specter of
Pennsylvania. After they came to terms, the senators brought in the White
House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, for assurance that the deal was
acceptable to the administration. Mr. Emanuel signaled it was.

"With today's unemployment numbers reaching more than 3.6 million workers,"
Mr. Emanuel said after the session, "delay and failure were not an option."

Mr. Obama called Ms. Collins and Mr. Specter, as well as Senator Olympia J.
Snowe of Maine, another Republican expected to support the deal, to
acknowledge they were acting against pressure from their party and, one
official said, to thank them for their patriotism in helping advance the
bill at a critical time.

Earlier in the day, Mr. Obama urged Congress to act expeditiously. "It is
inexcusable and irresponsible for any of us to get bogged down in
distraction, delay or politics as usual while millions of Americans are
being put out of work," said Mr. Obama, who has recently shown less patience
for Republican resistance to the bill.

Most Senate Republicans remained opposed to the measure, criticizing it as a
case study in excessive spending that would do little to lift the economy.
Some conservatives indicated Friday night that they would push for time to
study the new legislation before any final vote.

"We want to stimulate the economy, not mortgage the future of our children
and grandchildren by the kind of fiscally profligate spending embodied in
this legislation," said Senator John McCain of Arizona, the defeated
Republican presidential nominee, who has emerged as a chief opponent of the
proposal. 

Republicans were clearly irritated at the outcome and faulted those involved
in working out the bargain. "When you say this was the best we could do, I
disagree with you," Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said on the
floor. "This not remotely close to what we could have done if we had sat
down in a true bipartisan fashion and found a better way."

The Senate's proposed cuts took aim at an array of popular spending programs
that critics said should not be part of a fiscal recovery bill, even if they
represent laudable policy goals, because they would not deliver a quick
enough jolt to the economy. 

Even Mr. Obama's signature tax cut for middle-class Americans was scaled
back as part of the deal. Under the new plan, tax credits of up to $500 for
individuals and $1,000 for couples would begin to phase out at lower income
levels than first proposed, saving the government $2 billion.

The biggest cut, roughly $40 billion in aid to states, was likely to spur a
fierce fight in negotiations with the House over the final bill. Many
states, hit hard by the recession, face wrenching cuts in services and
layoffs of public employees as they struggle to comply with laws requiring
them to balance their budgets. 

When debate began this week, the price tag on the Senate version of the
stimulus bill was roughly $884 billion, but it grew to more than $900
billion as senators added provisions including tax breaks totaling $30
billion for purchases of homes and cars. 

Lawmakers said that by poring over the 736-page bill they had excised about
$110 billion, bringing the total cost to about $780 billion - $40 billion
less than the stimulus bill approved by the House last week. Because of
consumer tax breaks and spending for health research that had been added in
the Senate, the new total for the measure could be about $820 billion. But
even the senators behind the compromise were uncertain of the number.

In addition to the large cut in state aid, the Senate agreement would cut
nearly $20 billion proposed for school construction; $8 billion to refurbish
federal buildings and make them more energy efficient; $1 billion for the
early childhood program Head Start; and $2 billion from a plan to expand
broadband data networks in rural and underserved areas. 

The administration had initially hoped that it could win the support of as
many as 80 senators, but that goal disappeared after House Republicans voted
unanimously against the measure. As questions were raised about the total
spending, getting even three or four Republican senators to sign on became
difficult.

Ms. Collins said she believed the changes had significantly improved the
measure. Mr. Specter said that while he still had reservations, he had come
to accept Mr. Obama's push to enact the economic plan by mid-February. "I
believe we do have to act," Mr. Specter said, "and under the circumstances
this is the best we can do."

But several other Republicans who had taken part in the talks said they
could not support the compromise.

"Unfortunately, there was too much in the Democratic counterproposal that
was not stimulative," said Senator George V. Voinovich of Ohio, "and that
did not provide the jump-start our economy so desperately needs."

The Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said most
Republicans remained unconvinced that the package would reinvigorate the
economy.

"You have to balance the likelihood of success versus the crushing debt that
we're levying on the backs of our children, our grandchildren and, yes,
their children," Mr. McConnell said.

Mr. Reid urged Republicans to get behind the plan. "This is a critical day
for this new Congress and our country," he said. "Faced with this grave and
growing economic crisis, Republicans must decide today whether they will
join the president and Congressional Democrats on that road to recovery."






From tcod at hotmail.com  Sat Feb  7 11:21:55 2009
From: tcod at hotmail.com (Tom Cod)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 18:21:55 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] How Rome's endless "war on terror" ended up -- an
 ahistorical thought for today
In-Reply-To: <9C9A0CD935804062AAB13556D01867A6@office1pc>
References: <9C9A0CD935804062AAB13556D01867A6@office1pc>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W27E900B9DAAF8C0B6979B3D3BE0@phx.gbl>


Yeah but why are Asians or Near Easterners invading Europe always described as barbarians and a "horde" while when Europeans like Alexander the Great do the same to Asia they're not described as a "European horde"?



_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live?: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect. 
http://windowslive.com/online/hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_AE_Faster_022009

From tcod at hotmail.com  Sat Feb  7 11:47:28 2009
From: tcod at hotmail.com (Tom Cod)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 18:47:28 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Hitchens apologizes for Imperialist Plunder of Artifacts
In-Reply-To: <848473.24171.qm@web45309.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <848473.24171.qm@web45309.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W52FD1F9E4F37518ACBB54AD3BE0@phx.gbl>


Christopher Hitchens was in his usually stellar form as a neo-liberal philistine 
the other day on CSPAN apologizing for the the imperialist plunder of archeological
artifacts from Egypt and the Third World with barely disguised colonialist and racist 
arguments together with this clown who runs the Chicago Museum of Art, pillage that 
include the grossest vandalism like cutting out the heads of pharoahs from frescoes 
and shipping them to London.  Even the moderator was a little shocked, referring to 
these arguments as "self-serving" and apparently racist, the latter accusation 
being adamantly denied by Hitchens who claimed that in fact the Third World
countries' claims of sovereignty over these objects are "racist" to the extent that 
they rely on some national affinity with the long lost culture at issue.  These pharasaical
and basically criminal claims also include:

2. Europeans are more cultured and appreciative of these objects and thus can preserve them 
better whereas these locals are basically uncultured and bigoted riff raff who could care less about them.

3.  On the basis of the above, there is no moral argument in favor of the colonized people's claim.

4.  There is no legal claim because no laws existed prohibiting these taking at the time.

5.  Since there is no political continuity between the ancient regimes and the ones existing today
and various demographic changes have occurred since ancient times in that area, the claims 
of these countries and their regimes are obviously without merit.

Of course these arguments completly ignore the issue of sovereignty.  Moreover, genocide was no law against 
genocide until 1945.  One would think that Hitchens as a British chauvinist would be familiar with the traditions of 
the English common law where a famous case from the early 18th Century was as follows:

  An apprentice finds a ring with valuable jewels on the street and takes it into a master jeweler for an 
appraisal, the latter takes it into his shop in the back and returns it to the kid with the stones removed and
tells him to take a hike when he protests.  In court jeweler admits appropriating the gems but states that 
apprentice is an uncultured illiterate with no class who could neither appreciate or properly safeguard the same and
who had a dubious nexus with the original owner.  Held: jeweler committed theft from apprentice.

Thus, obviously while modern Egypt and it present regime are imperfect and have a distant nexus with Pharonic
times, they are its successors in interest in sovereingty over that area whose nexus with objects found therein is much closer than that of the imperialist robbers and hypocrites who stole them.

The grossest example of this pillage I saw on TV is a story where this railroad magnate in Maine circa 1900 came across a vein of thousands upon thousands of fossilized mummies of petty nobles and common folk rich enough to afford the mummification and burial that they received. He actually bought these for pennies each and used the corpses as fuel for his locomotives while selling the linen wrappings to a factory 
that made butcher and deli paper.  The railroad engineers complained the stiffs were poor fuel while workers in the paper factory began dying from an ancient plague carried by the linens, some said the work of the ancient gods in response to this outrage or maybe just "karma".



_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live?: E-mail. Chat. Share. Get more ways to connect. 
http://windowslive.com/howitworks?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t2_allup_howitworks_022009

From Shacht at aol.com  Sat Feb  7 11:54:07 2009
From: Shacht at aol.com (Shacht at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 13:54:07 EST
Subject: [Marxism] How Rome's endless "war on terror" ended up -- an
	ahistorical t...
Message-ID: <cd3.4d31bf66.36bf32cf@aol.com>

Well, what did the invaded peoples call Alexander? A freedom  fighter?
**************Great Deals on Dell Laptops. Starting at $499. 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1217883258x1201191827/aol?redir=http://ad.doubleclick.
net/clk;211531132;33070124;e)

From tcod at hotmail.com  Sat Feb  7 11:59:34 2009
From: tcod at hotmail.com (Tom Cod)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 18:59:34 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] How Rome's endless "war on terror" ended up --
	an	ahistorical t...
In-Reply-To: <cd3.4d31bf66.36bf32cf@aol.com>
References: <cd3.4d31bf66.36bf32cf@aol.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-W520BE58CFD9118EE4E3BD2D3BE0@phx.gbl>


Right, and the analogy becomes more apt when it's pointed out that 
it was it was Pakistan that became Alexander's quagmire and end game.



_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live?: Keep your life in sync. 
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_t1_allup_explore_022009

From markalause at gmail.com  Sat Feb  7 12:25:26 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 14:25:26 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] How Rome's endless "war on terror" ended up -- an
	ahistorical thought for today
In-Reply-To: <9C9A0CD935804062AAB13556D01867A6@office1pc>
References: <9C9A0CD935804062AAB13556D01867A6@office1pc>
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0902071125y1bedbc0m1697f36e6a735220@mail.gmail.com>

The terror question aside, the Roman model for degeneration through
imperial success is a very good one.

As had been pointed out, the reason the Republican Party of the 1850s
called itself "republican" not only because of the historic use of the
term in the US but because of the related indentification with the
contemporary European movements and to distinguish itself from
Democratic policies--the war of conquest against Mexico, the Indian
removals, the constant filibustering by the Southern faction,
etc.--all which the early Republicans tended to view as deplorably
"imperial."

The references to Roman history and the dangers of Ceasarism, etc.
were widely understood and accepted at one point in our history.
Regrettably, nowadays, this has all become Greek....or Latin.

ML


From cdb1003 at prodigy.net  Sat Feb  7 13:40:13 2009
From: cdb1003 at prodigy.net (Charles Brown)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 12:40:13 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Japan on the brink
Message-ID: <649332.64301.qm@web180107.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

) 



http://www.japanfocus.org/_Andrew_DeWit-Japan_on_the_Brink_of_Abyss___Updated_
Japan Focus

Japan on the Brink of the Abyss? [Updated]
Andrew DeWit

The economic outlook in Japan is very grim, as these brief overviews 
(links below) indicate. Right now, Japan has the worst growth outlook in 
Asia. That is a surprising fact, if one recalls that this is a country 
presumably dusting itself off from the collapse of its own bubble nearly 
two decades ago. After such a long period of economic crisis, Japan 
should be renovated and ready to thrive. 
^^^^^
CB; Hey, maybe the wall _will_ fall
without anybody pushing it (smile)
?
^^^^^
?
But instead, it may be in worse 
shape than even the US (though clearly not Iceland and much of Eastern 
Europe). Japanese financial institutions were not big players in the 
CDOs, CDSs and the other toxic assets that have ravaged the capital 
bases of banks in the US and much of Europe. Rather, Japan's key policy 
failure would appear to be over-reliance on exports as the engine of 
growth, while hoping that the fruits of this growth would trickle down 
into the rest of the economy and bolster demand. But in the rest of the 
economy, deregulation of labour and other markets had seen firms 
shifting to insecure employment (especially part-time and contractual 
staff) and rolling back pay, thus crimping the level of demand. And that 
weak domestic demand was of course blunting domestic-oriented 
businesses' incentives to invest (cf. export-oriented businesses' 
incentives to invest).
?
^^^^^^
CB: Oh no, no, no, It wasn't weak demand. It
was falling rates of profit.
?
^^^^^^
?
?
?With the startling 35% drop in exports in 
December 2008, it's as if someone kicked the chair away from a man who 
was standing on one to test out what it felt like to have a noose around 
his neck.


From shmage at pipeline.com  Sat Feb  7 13:57:50 2009
From: shmage at pipeline.com (Shane Mage)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 15:57:50 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] How Rome's endless "war on terror" ended up -- an
	ahistorical thought for today
In-Reply-To: <BAY123-W27E900B9DAAF8C0B6979B3D3BE0@phx.gbl>
References: <9C9A0CD935804062AAB13556D01867A6@office1pc>
	<BAY123-W27E900B9DAAF8C0B6979B3D3BE0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <E2CBECD3-0F3D-41E7-B1E4-DA39767B0878@pipeline.com>


On Feb 7, 2009, at 1:21 PM, Tom Cod wrote:
> Yeah but why are Asians or Near Easterners invading Europe always  
> described as barbarians and a "horde" while when Europeans like  
> Alexander the Great do the same to Asia they're not described as a  
> "European horde"?


"...But when the three-brained beings there, who arose and existed on  
the neighboring continent, now called Europe, then began taking part  
in the Asiatic wars, and when 'hordes' with the arch-vainglorious  
Greek called 'Alexander of Macedonia' at their head, were dispatched  
thence and passed almost everywhere over the continent  of Asia, they  
made, as it is said, a 'clean sweep' from the surface of that ill- 
fated planet of everything that had been established and had still  
been preserved..."
(G. I. Gurdjieff, "All and Everything: Beelzebub's Tales to His  
Grandson" [1927-29] p.404 [ch. XXVIII- "The Chief Culprit in the  
Destruction of All the Very Saintly Labors of Ashiata Shiemash"]

Shane Mage

> This cosmos did none of gods or men make, but it
> always was and is and shall be: an everlasting fire,
> kindling in measures and going out in measures."
>
> Herakleitos of Ephesos


From shmage at pipeline.com  Sat Feb  7 14:11:11 2009
From: shmage at pipeline.com (Shane Mage)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 16:11:11 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] How Rome's endless "war on terror" ended up -- an
	ahistorical thought for today
In-Reply-To: <b16d8daf0902071125y1bedbc0m1697f36e6a735220@mail.gmail.com>
References: <9C9A0CD935804062AAB13556D01867A6@office1pc>
	<b16d8daf0902071125y1bedbc0m1697f36e6a735220@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8F936DE0-0907-4AFC-A268-C7FC5F1D427A@pipeline.com>


On Feb 7, 2009, at 2:25 PM, Mark Lause wrote:
>
> The references to Roman history and the dangers of Ceasarism, etc.
> were widely understood and accepted at one point in our history.
> Regrettably, nowadays, this has all become Greek....or Latin.


Not so "regrettably," perhaps, since that political "classicism" was  
explicitly antidemocratic, taking as its ideal hero Marcus Tullius  
Cicero the mouthpiece for the reactionary Roman magnates self- 
identified as the "Boni" (good men) or "Optimates" (best men).  It  
loathed the Popularist tradition in Republican Rome, symbolized by the  
Gracchi (a "lex agraria" was the worst nightmare of the Founding  
Fathers) and with particular hatred for Caesar, the revolutionary  
Popularis leader whose reformist program would have preserved a  
modernised Republic if his dictatorship had not been cut short at the  
Ides of March.



Shane Mage

> This cosmos did none of gods or men make, but it
> always was and is and shall be: an everlasting fire,
> kindling in measures and going out in measures."
>
> Herakleitos of Ephesos


From markalause at gmail.com  Sat Feb  7 15:56:45 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 17:56:45 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] How Rome's endless "war on terror" ended up -- an
	ahistorical thought for today
In-Reply-To: <8F936DE0-0907-4AFC-A268-C7FC5F1D427A@pipeline.com>
References: <9C9A0CD935804062AAB13556D01867A6@office1pc>
	<b16d8daf0902071125y1bedbc0m1697f36e6a735220@mail.gmail.com>
	<8F936DE0-0907-4AFC-A268-C7FC5F1D427A@pipeline.com>
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0902071456r1dda945ao87a50745f14f611b@mail.gmail.com>

Actually, like "social Darwinism," what you call "political
'classicism'" had many variations.  Some adulated the Gracchi and the
Agrarian tradition, specifically radical land reformers, Fourieriests,
etc.--our current...which was then also the current that became so
important to the early Republicans.

ML


From Paula_cerni at msn.com  Sat Feb  7 16:04:47 2009
From: Paula_cerni at msn.com (Paula)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 15:04:47 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Debunking Third World myths
In-Reply-To: <mailman.7163.1233758666.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
References: <mailman.7163.1233758666.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <BAY122-DS30C1CC5D5496CA1BE3AEA80BE0@phx.gbl>

Louis wrote:
"I am stunned to hear this at this point since BRIC is kaput."

Not kaput; look at Russia's latest move:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090203/wl_mcclatchy/3159738

S. Artesian wrote:
"Your good doctor needs to come to grips with the massive decline in per
capita GDP in Africa over the last 40 years-- the reversal of the increments
of medical progress made recently."

The presenter was making a point about the 'Third World' as a whole - as you 
know this includes a lot more than just Africa.

Paula 



From lnp3 at panix.com  Sat Feb  7 16:12:07 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 18:12:07 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Debunking Third World myths
In-Reply-To: <BAY122-DS30C1CC5D5496CA1BE3AEA80BE0@phx.gbl>
References: <mailman.7163.1233758666.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
	<BAY122-DS30C1CC5D5496CA1BE3AEA80BE0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <498E1547.7080505@panix.com>

Paula wrote:
> Not kaput; look at Russia's latest move:
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090203/wl_mcclatchy/3159738

Actually I posted it. My definition of imperialism is conquering 
territory and exploiting resources and labor. If you think that Russia 
giving 2 billion dollars to Kyrgyzstan to close the air base US 
imperialism plans to use against Afghanistan, then my next door neighbor 
must be imperialist as well since I suspect him of stealing the Sunday 
Times.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Sat Feb  7 16:58:36 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 18:58:36 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Obama's team of zombies
Message-ID: <498E202C.5060809@panix.com>

(A breach is definitely opening to the left among liberal supporters of 
Obama. This could have been written by Ralph Nader.)

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/02/07/sirota/print.html

Obama's team of zombies
Even under the new president, Washington is the same one-party town it 
always has been -- controlled not by Democrats or Republicans, but by 
thieves.

By David Sirota
Feb. 07, 2009

Only weeks ago, the political world was buzzing about a "team of 
rivals." America was told that finally, after years of yes men running 
the government, we were getting a president who would follow Abraham 
Lincoln?s lead, fill his administration with varying viewpoints, and 
glean empirically sound policy from the clash of ideas. Little did we 
know that "team of rivals" was what George Orwell calls "newspeak": an 
empty slogan "claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the 
plain facts."

Obama's national security team, for instance, includes not a single Iraq 
war opponent. The president has not only retained George W. Bush's 
defense secretary, Robert Gates, but also 150 other Bush Pentagon 
appointees. The only "rivalry" is between those who back increasing the 
already bloated defense budget by an absurd amount and those who aim to 
boost it by a ludicrous amount.

Of course, that lockstep uniformity pales in comparison to the White 
House's economic team -- a squad of corporate lackeys disguised as 
public servants.

At the top is Lawrence Summers, the director of Obama's National 
Economic Council. As Bill Clinton's treasury secretary in the late 
1990s, Summers worked with his deputy, Tim Geithner (now Obama's 
treasury secretary), and Clinton aide Rahm Emanuel (now Obama's chief of 
staff) to champion job-killing trade deals and deregulation that Obama 
Commerce Secretary Judd Gregg helped shepherd through Congress as a 
Republican senator. Now, this pinstriped band of brothers is proposing a 
"cash for trash" scheme that would force the public to guarantee the 
financial industry's bad loans. It's another ploy "to hand taxpayer 
dollars to the banks through a variety of complex mechanisms," says 
economist Dean Baker -- and noticeably absent is anything even 
resembling a "rival" voice inside the White House.

That's not an oversight. From former federal officials like Robert Reich 
and Brooksley Born, to Nobel Prize-winning economists like Joseph 
Stiglitz and Paul Krugman, to business leaders like Leo Hindery, there's 
no shortage of qualified experts who have challenged market 
fundamentalism. But they have been barred from an administration focused 
on ideological purity.

In Hindery's case, the blacklisting was explicit. Despite this venture 
capitalist establishing a well-respected think tank and serving as a top 
economic advisor to Obama's campaign, the Politico reports that "Obama's 
aides appear never to have taken his bid (for an administration post) 
seriously." Why? Because he "set himself up in opposition" to Wall 
Street's agenda.

The anecdote highlights how, regardless of election hoopla, Washington 
is the same one-party town it always has been -- controlled not by 
Democrats or Republicans, but by Kleptocrats (i.e., thieves). Their ties 
to money make them the undead zombies in the slash-and-burn horror flick 
that is American politics: No matter how many times their discredited 
theologies are stabbed, torched and shot down by verifiable failure, 
their careers cannot be killed. Somehow, these political immortals are 
allowed to mindlessly lunge forward, never answering to rivals -- even 
if that rival is the president himself.

Remember, while Obama said he wants to slash "billions of dollars in 
wasteful spending" at the Pentagon, his national security team is 
demanding a $40 billion increase in defense spending (evidently, the 
"ludicrous" faction got its way). Obama also said he wants to crack down 
on the financial industry, strengthen laws encouraging the government to 
purchase American goods, and transform trade policy. Yet, his economic 
team is not just promising to support more bank bailouts, but also to 
weaken "Buy America" statutes and make sure new legislation "doesn't 
signal a change in our overall stance on trade," according to the 
president?s spokesman.

Indeed, if an authentic ?rivalry? was going to erupt, it would have been 
between Obama's promises and his team of zombies. Unfortunately, the 
latter seems to have won before the competition even started.


From jonflanders at jflan.net  Sat Feb  7 17:17:10 2009
From: jonflanders at jflan.net (Jon Flanders)
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 19:17:10 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Obama's team of zombies
In-Reply-To: <498E202C.5060809@panix.com>
References: <498E202C.5060809@panix.com>
Message-ID: <1234052230.5800.8.camel@localhost>


On Sat, 2009-02-07 at 18:58 -0500, Louis Proyect wrote:
> (A breach is definitely opening to the left among liberal supporters of 
> Obama. This could have been written by Ralph Nader.)
> 
> http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/02/07/sirota/print.html

Yet more evidence of this trend.

Jon Flanders


All the Comforts of Home: Republicans Destroy, Democrats Serve Cookies

by David Michael Green

I got a bad feeling that if we liked the Clinton years, we're gonna love
the Obama ones.

Remember those fun 1990s? Actually, they really weren't, of course. If
they look good at all in retrospect, it is purely because the
intervening monster mash gave us a point of reference so that we might
know what ugly really looks like.

Apart from that, however, the political story of that decade had a
depressingly simple narrative arc to it. Republican bottom-feeders
demonstrated at every opportunity how scummy politics can be, and
Democrats responded over and over again with the political equivalent of
"Thank you, sir, may I have another?" And wasn't that fun to watch?

What the last months seem to be screaming out for all to hear is the
lesson that some people just can't change. Or won't.

Could the little project launched a few centuries back, and
affectionately referred to as ?America', possibly be in a more
precipitous free-fall than it is right now?

No. And yet...

...And yet, while Wall Street firms are desperately trying to out-30s
the 1930s themselves with their 2008 exercise in earnings annihilation,
management gladly rewarded itself with nearly $20 billion dollars in
bonuses, many funded by the United States taxpayers. This caused the
people's president to nearly raise his voice in remonstration, he was so
upset.

...And yet, with the Republican Party tanking so badly that its best
likely outcome in the years ahead (and you should see the second best)
is to wind up as the undisputed vote-getting champ of Mississippi and
large parts of Georgia, still they reiterate their most aggressive and
abysmal of behavior.

...And yet, with the Democratic Party holding more or less all the
political cards imaginable, still they go desperately looking for any
and all possible ways to share their political power with the GOP. And
when the latter folks reward such generosity with an immediate slap to
the face, still the Dems come back begging for more.

We're two weeks into the Obama decade, and already I'd be bored if I
wasn't so pissed. Even with every imaginable self-made predator circling
the camp, still we go on with the same set of juvenile antics that
substitute for a meaningful politics in America. Even with every
conceivable disaster hungrily lapping at our shores, some of us would
rather get rich than live to retirement age, some of us would rather win
elections than save the country, and some of us would rather hold hands
than be the guy who walks away from the knife fight alive.

Yep, it's the Clinton years again. Minus the booming economy and
probably the sexual shenanigans. But the politics sure look the same.

Wall Street greed that exists absolutely without bound, to start with.
And a government that finds increasingly creative ways to liquidate the
commonwealth of its common wealth and turn it instead into private
playgrounds, corporate jets, MBA bacchanals, and really big rings on the
fingers of really big trophy wives. What, you've got a problem with a
$35,000 toilet for a company accepting taxpayer bailout money?

Don't worry. Barrack Obama called it shameful. Since that appears to be
just about all he plans to do about it, and since I had already made
that particular analytical leap on my own horsepower, I must confess to
being seriously unimpressed. Yeah, limiting salaries of the execs
running companies receiving bailout funds is not a bad idea, but mostly
another terribly trembling tactic from timid town. Since I am now an
owner of these firms, would it be too much to ask for new management?
Call me strange if you must, but I don't want corporate chiefs who have
proven their ability to wreck companies running mine. It's just this odd
quirk I've always had.

But the finger-wagger-in-chief's little dressing down was actually the
high point of the week. Somewhat less amusing was the GOP's reaction to
the president's fiscal stimulus plan. Even though Obama went out of his
way to include within it tax cuts that seem to be the only two words the
lips of Republicans are able to form in discussions of economics or
public policy - tax cuts that are widely understood not to have serious
stimulus capacity at this point - still not a single member of the House
- not one - voted for the bill. Instead, they went parading around the
media complaining about how the legislation would favor illegal
immigrants, or would spend a few bucks on family planning services.
Can't have that. Brown women in America? Not barefoot and not pregnant?
Not okay.

Did I mention that this looks a lot like the 1990s? Zero was precisely
the number of Republicans who voted for Bill Clinton's economic rescue
package in 1993. Taxes, sex, war, taxes. Taxes, sex, war, taxes. This
guys are like a jazz singer who can only hit four notes, two of which
are the same. And about as useful.

Of course, people gotta have principles. Texas Senator John Cornyn - who
is absolutely everything you'd expect a Texas senator to be - said this
week "I read the bill in vain for any real stimulus in the economy. What
I do see mainly is an opportunity being exploited to spend a lot of
money without much scrutiny." Now see, dang it, that's not okay. For
example, let's just say you had this Treasury secretary - we'll just
call him John Doe Paulson, to pick a name at random - and he spent $350
billion by giving banks rescue money that they used instead for bonuses
and really cool toilets, literal and figurative. Now that there, my
friends, is an example of money being spent without scrutiny. Or certain
contractors (oh, you know, like Haliburton maybe) and their no-bid
contracts in certain wars (let's say Iraq, for instance). Or a
prescription drug bill that actually forbids the government from using
its buying power to obtain volume discounts. Now those are some nasty
cases of unscrutinized federal spending, and we can all be thankful that
Cornyn and other Republicans have been on the job this last decade,
making sure none of that transpired.

The party, meanwhile, was busy last week choosing for themselves a new
chairman. And guess what? He's a real conservative fellow. Now there's a
shocker. And he's a black man. And he argues that Republicans have
gotten a totally bum rap when it comes to perceptions of their racist
politics these last decades. You know, that whole Reagan states' rights
campaign kick-off speech in Philadelphia, Mississippi - a town famous
for only one thing, murdering civil rights workers - for example. Or
that whole Nixonian Southern Strategy to appeal to racist white voters
in the South. Or the Willie Horton ad. Or the small matter of mass black
voter disenfranchisement campaign in Florida in 2000. Or Ohio in 2004.
Yeah, man. You gotta feel bad for the GOP and this unfair reputation.
They really need to hire some new marketing people!

Oh, and did I mention the guy who didn't get the chairmenship? He sent
around a CD to party leaders that included the snappy little tune,
"Barack, the Magic Negro"! Some people in the party thought that was
pretty tacky. But others didn't, and so a serious and major debate
ensued within the party leadership as to whether this was an appropriate
thing to do, and whether it was a good idea to put such a person at the
top of the party. Hmmm, tough question. No wonder they had such a
struggle over it.

Of course, the good news for the GOP is that with a black man as their
chairman now, they'll no doubt be drawing tons of black votes from this
point forward. And the even better news is that the GOP thinks that with
a black man as their chairman now, they'll no doubt be drawing tons of
black votes from this point forward. You know, just like Sarah Palin
knocked down those barriers preventing women from gaining equality (the
same ones that Republicans had spent lifetimes erecting) and thus
energized the female vote for the GOP ticket. Oh yeah.

Let's be honest. The chances that the GOP would change its ugly ways
only rose to the high-water mark of about three out of a thousand
because of the trouncing they took in two elections back-to-back. Anyone
who thought these folks were about to give up either their abysmal
politics or their disgusting tactics hasn't been paying attention since
the 1950s. And, besides, what would be the point? We already have a
party that stands for just about nothing, and does so with unsurpassed
strategic blunder, and a passionate devotion to the avoidance of both
passion and devotion. Who needs another?

Speaking of which, I'm starting to feel kinda dumb for having said
lately that a certain fellow by the name of Obama is a real smart guy.
The more I see him in operation, the more I get the sense that the prime
directive of his operating system is to always seek the making of
happy-happy with his adversaries. He actually had some nice Republican
members of Congress over to his new house the other day and personally
walked around the room carrying a plate of oatmeal raisin cookies to
serve them. You think I'm making this up, don't you? You wish. I wish.
If this keeps up, pretty soon he's gonna make Chamberlain at Munich look
as tough as the siege of Stalingrad by comparison.

He gave the Republicans a couple of hundred million bucks worth of
worthless tax cuts as a means of compromise, even though that
substantially diminishes his chances for succeeding in bringing
recovery, and therefore also in succeeding at playing president. He says
nice things about Ronald Reagan and throws a big shindig for the guy who
just got through spending half a year calling him a socialist terrorist.
He's now put three Republicans in his cabinet, which by my count totals
to a contingent therein approximately three hundred percent bigger than
the liberal cohort (of, maybe, one person). Not only that, instead of
trading the last Republican added for the 60th Democratic senator and
thus a filibuster-proof majority that would guarantee getting his
legislation through Congress, Obama agrees to a deal wherein the
Democratic governor of New Hampshire backfills Judd Gregg's seat with a
Republican appointee.

And what do they do, in return? Trash his bill in public, say that they
hope he fails, and vote - with nary a single exception - against the
signature legislative initiative of his presidency. During an economic
crisis, no less, with a public already massively angry at them.

If anyone knows this guy's Blackberry address, pass it along, wouldya?
I'd like to remind him that Republicans don't get that whole
?post-partisan' thing. Precambrian, yes. Post-partisan, no. They will
thrash the country (again) if they think it will wreck this presidency
and bring them back to power. I'm not sure how Rush Limbaugh could
possibly have been quite any more explicit about that. Yo, Barry. They
are going to resist you any and every way they can. If you succeed,
they'll take credit for it, maybe saying that the Bush tax cuts finally
kicked in. If you fail, I'm pretty sure they won't be acknowledging the
role of their political sabotage during a national economic crisis.

Lose the hand-holding impulse, dude. You've got cred, you've got crises,
you've got control of the government. If you throw them a bone and they
slap your face in return, the thing not to do here is increase the size
of the bone. No more oatmeal cookies, man. Pull their useless stuff out
of the bill, redraft it exactly the way you want it, and ram it down
their throats. If they use their 41-seat minority in the Senate to block
a relief bill that the people desperately want, the House has passed,
and the president is waiting to sign, make them pay for it politically
by endlessly reminding the public just who's standing in the way of the
Red Cross trucks, and just who's driving them.

I mean, is it really too much to ask for a Democratic Party actually
does something? Without asking the GOP for permission first?

Once before, American had a crumbling economy, a bumbling foreign
policy, an angry electorate, and a decisive election. Ronald Reagan won
in 1980, and Democrats cowered for the next three decades. They're still
cowering.

This time the conditions are almost identical, except for three things.
First, people are hurting a lot worse now than in 1980. Second, it's the
Democrats who have won this time. And, third, it wasn't an election. It
was two.

But, of course, one thing hasn't changed.

It's still the Democrats doing the cowering.

David Michael Green is a professor of political science at Hofstra
University in New York. He is delighted to receive readers' reactions to
his articles (mailto:dmg at regressiveantidote.net), but regrets that time
constraints do not always allow him to respond. More of his work can be
found at his website, www.regressiveantidote.net.

 




From lnp3 at panix.com  Sat Feb  7 17:35:43 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 19:35:43 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Merrill Lynch economist: real unemployment rate is 13.9%
Message-ID: <498E28DF.1080601@panix.com>

http://www.financialweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090206/REG/902069980/-1/FWDailyAlert01

Actual unemployment rate 13.9%: Merrill Lynch
Counting the ranks of ?underemployed? as a result of cutbacks on hours, 
the unofficial rate hit the highest level in at least 15 years, 
according to economist David Rosenberg

By Ronald Fink
February 6, 2009 ET

A Merrill Lynch analysis of the non-farm payroll numbers released on 
Friday makes for disquieting reading, to say the least.

The analysis by North American economist David Rosenberg indicates that 
the actual unemployment rate, while normally higher than the official 
one by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, hit a level not seen since at 
least 1994. The good news: Inflation is not much of a threat as a result.

As Mr. Rosenberg explained, what the official unemployment rate misses 
is the vast degree of ?underemployment? as companies cut back on the 
hours that people who are still employed are working. Those hours have 
declined 1.2% in the past twelve months.

The BLS still counts people as employed if they are working part-time, 
but the number who have been forced into that status because of slack 
economic conditions has ballooned nearly 70% in the past year, according 
to the study. Mr. Rosenberg said was that was a record growth rate for 
the 15-year period he has studied.

When that amount of slack in employment is taken into account, Mr. 
Rosenberg found that the ?real? unemployment rate has actually climbed 
to 13.9%, an all-time high for the period he studied, and up from 13.5% 
in December and 11.2% a year ago.

As a result, the economist said worries that the federal deficit will 
lead to inflation anytime soon are misplaced.

?With this amount of excess capacity in the jobs market, and keeping in 
mind that the inflation process is dominated by the direction of labor 
costs, it is tough to believe that inflation at this point is anything 
but a far-in-the-distance prospect,? Mr. Rosenberg wrote. ?A present-day 
reality it is not.?




From farmelantj at juno.com  Sat Feb  7 18:42:25 2009
From: farmelantj at juno.com (Jim Farmelant)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 20:42:25 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] How Rome's endless "war on terror" ended up -- an
	ahistorical thought for today
Message-ID: <20090207.204225.3836.1.farmelantj@juno.com>

 
On Sat, 7 Feb 2009 17:56:45 -0500 Mark Lause <markalause at gmail.com>
writes:
> Actually, like "social Darwinism," what you call "political
> 'classicism'" had many variations.  Some adulated the Gracchi and 
> the
> Agrarian tradition, specifically radical land reformers, 
> Fourieriests,
> etc.--our current...which was then also the current that became so
> important to the early Republicans.
> 
> ML
> 

The sort of 'political classicism' described by Mark was
also characteristic of the period of the French Revolution,
as examplified for instance in the paintings of Jacques-Louis
David, starting with his 1784 painting, "Oath of the Horatti"
or his 1789 painting, "The Lictors Bring to Brutus the Bodies 
of His Sons."


Jim Farmelant 
____________________________________________________________
Reduce your business expense.  Click here to find products for your small business.
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw2USj4L3P2wCPiprJVcjyu1lkEPjvHCWIVxVKapEZTtvwSlB/

From pt_costello at yahoo.com  Sat Feb  7 19:28:33 2009
From: pt_costello at yahoo.com (Pat Costello)
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 18:28:33 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] The American Dream in High Reverse
Message-ID: <154703.84034.qm@web63108.mail.re1.yahoo.com>

Florida is the new Dustbowl

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2009/02/08/us/20090208-LEHIGH_index.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/08/us/08lehigh.html





      


From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Sat Feb  7 19:49:03 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 21:49:03 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] What GOP and Dem "moderate" scum slashed from "stimulus"
Message-ID: <91BEB1FE87404F93BF507A057D9B8DEA@office1pc>

Yep, school lunches are out.  Head Start is out.  Constructing schools is
out. Getting the internet more deeply into rural and poor areas is out.
Stabilizing state budgets (i.e., maintaining social programs, preventing
layoffs) is out. 
Of course, many items can be found that we would not favor, expecially
funding for cops of various types. But frankly, one thing in a period like
this that can be guaranteed is that the police will not be underfunded.
Anything that they lose here will be popped into some other legislation and
approved by voice vote.
What's left is the unemployment compensation support (at least, I assume
from my reading of the New York Times, which noted that the extension and
$25 weekly increase in unemployment compensation had made the cut, no doubt
because of the serendipity of the announcement of the massive increase in
jobless last month with the hatchet work of the "moderates."
All indications are that the work of the "moderates" of both parties to gut
programs that protected us against the crisis, to some extent, had Obama's
okay.. 
Obama has not said a word about the massacre of the social wage-"safety net"
aspect of the stimulus., but simply advocates the gutted program as it is
left. His talk about unifying "all of us" in this case means unity of the
political probusiness elite against us. This is not even a criticism, but
simply a statement of fact.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/President44/story?id=6828160&page=1
<http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/President44/story?id=6828160&page=1&> 
CNN obtained, from a Democratic leadership aide, a list of some programs
that have been cut, either entirely or partially:
	Partially cut:
	* $3.5 billion for energy-efficient federal buildings (original bill
$7 billion)
	* $75 million from Smithsonian (original bill $150 million)
	* $200 million from Environmental Protection Agency Superfund
(original bill $800 million)
	* $100 million from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(original bill $427 million)
	* $100 million from law enforcement wireless (original bill $200
million)
	* $300 million from federal fleet of hybrid vehicles (original bill
$600 million)
	* $100 million from FBI construction (original bill $400 million)
	Fully eliminated:
	* $55 million for historic preservation
	* $122 million for Coast Guard polar icebreaker/cutters
	* $100 million for Farm Service Agency modernization
	* $50 million for Cooperative State Research, Education and
Extension Service 
	* $65 million for watershed rehabilitation
	* $100 million for distance learning
	* $98 million for school nutrition
	* $50 million for aquaculture
	* $2 billion for broadband
	* $100 million for National Institute of Standards and Technology
	* $50 million for detention trustee
	* $25 million for Marshalls Construction
	* $300 million for federal prisons
	* $300 million for BYRNE Formula grant program
	* $140 million for BYRNE Competitive grant program
	* $10 million state and local law enforcement
	* $50 million for NASA
	* $50 million for aeronautics
	* $50 million for exploration
	* $50 million for Cross Agency Support
	* $200 million for National Science Foundation
	* $100 million for science
	* $1 billion for Energy Loan Guarantees
	* $4.5 billion for General Services Administration 
	* $89 million General Services Administration operations
	* $50 million from Department of Homeland Security
	* $200 million Transportation Security Administration
	* $122 million for Coast Guard Cutters, modifies use
	* $25 million for Fish and Wildlife
	* $55 million for historic preservation
	* $20 million for working capital fund
	* $165 million for Forest Service capital improvement
	* $90 million for State and Private Wildlife Fire Management
	* $1 billion for Head Start/Early Start
	* $5.8 billion for Health Prevention Activity
	* $2 billion for Health Information Technology Grants
	* $600 million for Title I (No Child Left Behind)
	* $16 billion for school construction
	* $3.5 billion for higher education construction
	* $1.25 billion for project based rental
	* $2.25 billion for Neighborhood Stabilization
	* $1.2 billion for retrofitting Project 8 housing
	* $40 billion for state fiscal stabilization (includes $7.5 billion
of state incentive grants) 
	
WHAT ARE YOUR COMMENTS?*
Greg Dempsey
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SECULARHUMANIST
Obama - A New Beginning

From suklasenp at yahoo.co.uk  Sun Feb  8 02:34:00 2009
From: suklasenp at yahoo.co.uk (Sukla Sen)
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 09:34:00 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban Assessment of Obama: Two Comments (Juxtaposed and
	Compared)
Message-ID: <658552.59962.qm@web23004.mail.ird.yahoo.com>


The first one is an interview of a very senior and active politicain given
in the period intervening between Obama election and inauguratiion. The
second one is a blog by Fidel Castro - a semi-retired political figure who
nevertheless remains by far the most towering symbol, even if significantly
frayed, of Cuban revolution and whatever remains of it -  twelve days after
Obama inauguration. This is neither his first comment on the issue on hand
and also not his last. But a fairly detailed one.



Except to the "faithful", the significant difference in tone would be
clearly discernible.



The first one is visibly relaxed ("It's not going to be easy, chico"),
reasonably self-assured, and remarkably balanced - arguably fairly profound.
No overflow of emotions. No abuses. No entreaties. No inflated expectations.
Nor heartbreaks. No rancour. No extra frills.

*The election of Obama is undoubtedly a welcome and significant "change".
But does in no way go far enough to impact the US-Cuba relationship, at
least in the immediate future.*



The second one is a sort of sad testament of a quasi-defeat of an aging and
ailing once-legend. An admission, even if rather oblique, of quiet, but
striking, scaling down of the high ideals which once had informed the grand
and adventurous journey undertaken some half a century back.

Many of the words, in the midst of rather customary and valid critique of
predatory American imperialism, are laden with (perhaps rat
times unintended) deeper meanings. Deserves a close and careful look.



A more straightforward, even if rather surprising and highly welcome, is the
exposition:

*(Obama) includes the nuclear power plants among the sources of energy he
promises to hastily develop. These are already opposed by a high number of
people due to the high risks of accidents with disastrous
consequences for life, the atmosphere and human food. It is absolutely
impossible to prevent the occurrence of some of these accidents.*

*Modern industry has already contaminated all the seas on the planet with
the release of toxins, even without such accidental disasters.*

A clear and categorical rejection of nuke power!



Another striking observation:

*It is not my intention to blame the current President of the United States,
Barack Obama, for actions conducted by former presidents when he had not
been born or when he was just a 6-years-old boy born in Hawaii to a black
Moslem Kenyan fathers and a white Christian American mother. On the
contrary, this is an exceptional merit of the U.S. society and I am the
first to admit it.*



But far more intriguing, and almost heartbreaking, when coming from Fidel's
mouth:

*When Mr. Obama promises to make large investments to be self-reliant in
oil, despite the fact that his country is today the largest market in the
world, what could the future be of those countries whose main revenues come
from exporting that energy as many of them lack any other significant source
of income?*



*After the crisis, once the competition and the fight over the markets and
sources of employment is unleashed again, as it is usually the case among
those who are better off and more efficient in the monopoly of that
technology with sophisticated means of production, what possibilities will
be left to the not developed countries dreaming of industrialization?*

If the first portion is almost entreating in tone, the second part, *(a)fter
the crisis*, sees nothing but *the competition and the fight over the
markets and sources of employment is unleashed again.* Let alone any
explicit reference to any new dawn emerging at the end of the long and dark
tunnel, there is not even the slightest hint of that ever elusive dawn. Not
even any lament over it. The outcome is so much of a given.



And this is to be read together with:

*The U.S. House of Representatives with a Democratic majority launched the
extremely protectionist slogan of "buy US goods", to please the unions that
supported his campaign. This tramples on a basic principle
of the World Trade Organization, since every nation in the world, be they
big or small, dream of their development based on trading goods and
services; however, only the big and rich among them have the
privilege to survive to realize such dream.*

The world is defined in terms of "nations" - big and small, powerful and
weak, predator and victim - not even a mention of "class". But that apart:
the *dream* of the *small nations* *of their development based on trading
goods and services *is captured in the *basic principle of the World Trade
Organization.* And this has got to be defended as *the big and rich *are
brutally *trampling on *at* *evident cost to* *the* small *ones*.*



And the despondent mood of the piece is no doubt best captured in the line,
almost at the tailend: *As an old politician and fighter I commit no sin by
modestly exposing* (read: presenting and explaining)* these *(foreging)*
ideas.*



I/II.
http://72.14.235.132/search?q=cache:G2g6dTzmk98J:www.cubaresearch.info/node/11

II.
http://links.org.au/node/890

Sukla


      


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sun Feb  8 02:54:47 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 10:54:47 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Debunking Third World myths
References: <mailman.7163.1233758666.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
	<BAY122-DS30C1CC5D5496CA1BE3AEA80BE0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <084C958FE34246E7B9168088383AD42A@dmsthinkpad>

Perhaps Paula more important than the 2 billion spent to get the US out of 
Kyrgyzstan, is the 150-200 billion lost [latest report in the WSJ says 200 
billion] defending the ruble, bailing out banks and oligarchs, and in 
capital flight.  Since the subject was/is human development indicatiors and 
progress of lack thereoff, the economics of this loss seem a trifle bit more 
representative of the ongoing dynamics than a foreign policy coup.

As for the other item-- oh, I see, we use So Korea, Chile, Kuwait, Taiwan, 
Hong Kong, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, to help define what we mean by 3rd 
world, thus "balancing" off Africa, and voila! everybody's catching up, and 
everything's getting better.

That's some doctor, you got there.  Wasn't it Mark Twain who wrote: "There 
are lies, damned lines... and then there are statistics."?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paula" <Paula_cerni at msn.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 12:04 AM
Subject: [Marxism] Debunking Third World myths 



From dddrrr84 at gmail.com  Sun Feb  8 04:18:02 2009
From: dddrrr84 at gmail.com (Daniel Rosenberg)
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 13:18:02 +0200
Subject: [Marxism] Who Profits from the Occupation
Message-ID: <ddaae0bb0902080318m17a70376ladf2cc77afcb5348@mail.gmail.com>

February saw the launch of the website "Who Profits?"
(http://whoprofits.org/), a website maintained by the Israeli movement
Coalition of Women for Peace
(http://coalitionofwomen.org/home/english). The website presents
clearly and extensively the list of Israeli and multinational
corporations who are financially involved with with the Israeli
occupation of Palestinian territories, whether by the funding of
businesses in illegal settlements or by the supply of services, as
well as military and construction equipment to the system of
occupation in the West Bank and Gaza. The site interface includes a
search engine which allows the search by the company name, its origin
country and even by its annual income and the stock index in which it
is traded. Among the dozens of of companies which are listed on the
site, it is hard not to notice the names of the leading companies in
the Israeli economy, such as the Alon Group, Africa-Israel
Investments, Elbit Systems Ltd, the major banks as well as some
prominent weaponry and technology manufacturers. Not all companies in
the list are known actors in the military-industrial complex: some of
the occupation profiteers include Caterpillar, which provides the
equipment for house demolitions as well as construction of
checkpoints, Hewlett Packard (HP) which provides the Israeli military
with IT, and even Pizza Hut and General Mills, the producer of
Pillsbury, which are dealing heavily with illegal settlements.

The site could be highly valuable for activists who aim towards the
boycott of businesses investing in the system of Israeli occupation,
and for public campaigns against the illegal settlements in
Palestinian lands.

Above all, the data presented in the website exposes the level of
corruption  reached by the regime of monopoly capital,  which is based
not merely on trade and production but on the organized violence
applied by the capitalist state in order to preserve the profit level.
It is essential that activists on the left work in order to uncover
the violence which is inherent in the monpoly capitalist regime, and
to combine the struggle against the economic system with the struggle
against military occupation, violence and racism.


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sun Feb  8 04:31:52 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 12:31:52 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Brazil
Message-ID: <91915C7E7C5243B8869A530DE4695AB5@dmsthinkpad>


WSJ online BUSINESS
FEBRUARY 6, 2009, 10:04 P.M. ET
Economy Fuels Brazil's Ambitions Beyond South America
By JOHN LYONS
S?O PAULO, Brazil -- In the years since terrorist attacks refocused U.S. 
foreign policy on the Middle East, Brazil and Venezuela vied to replace the 
U.S. as chief broker of Latin American affairs. Today's plunging oil prices 
may determine a winner: Brazil.

Venezuela relies on its oil wealth to push an anti-U.S. agenda in the region 
through foreign-aid programs that include selling cut-rate oil to several 
nations and lending to Argentina and others at below-market rates. The 
programs are being cut back this year as oil revenue plummets and economic 
growth grinds to a near halt.

While Brazil's commodity-rich economy -- the world's 10th largest -- will be 
hit by the downturn, it is expected to fare better than most, growing 
slightly even as the U.S., Europe and Japan contract, economists forecast.

Unlike the checkbook diplomacy practiced by Venezuelan President Hugo 
Ch?vez, the sources of Brazil's influence are more diversified and less 
vulnerable to economic woes.

Brazil's diplomatic edge is a welcome development for U.S. policymakers. 
During the Bush years, Washington viewed Brazil as an important 
counterweight to Venezuelan influence, and encouraged the South American 
giant's increased assertiveness.

Under President Barack Obama, that bilateral relationship may develop as the 
U.S. seeks diplomatic alliances to tackle hemispheric issues such as energy 
and drug trafficking. Latin America provides the U.S. with a third of its 
oil -- and is the source of most of its illegal immigrants.

"Cooperation with Brazil is going to be crucial for any progress on the 
Hemispheric agenda," says Michael Shifter, vice president of the 
Inter-American Dialogue, a think tank in Washington.
Brazil, the world's biggest exporter of iron ore, beef, chicken, sugar and 
coffee, wants better access to the U.S. market for its goods. In return, 
Brazil and its charismatic President Luiz In?cio Lula da Silva could help 
the U.S. repair its image in the region, which declined sharply under the 
Bush administration.

Brazil, which recently discovered major offshore oil fields, could also 
become an energy ally as oil output drops in Mexico and Venezuela. Brazilian 
output has jumped 46% to 1.9 million barrels per day this year -- and could 
surge again as new discoveries are brought online.

Mismanagement and declining investment have cut Venezuelan output by 700,000 
barrels a day to an estimated 2.35 million over the past decade.

President Obama has asked a proponent of U.S.-Brazil ties during the Bush 
years, Assistant Secretary of State for the Western Hemisphere Thomas 
Shannon, to remain in his post. In January, Mr. Obama telephoned Mr. da 
Silva, and pledged to advance trade talks. The two leaders plan to meet in 
Washington in March.

To be sure, Brazil is no unconditional ally. Mr. da Silva regularly visits 
Caracas and Brazilian firms, such as construction giant Odebrecht, do 
business in Venezuela. The two leaders share the belief that the U.S. 
shouldn't set the tone for regional affairs.

As Brazil's economic interests expand beyond its borders, the country looks 
to be shifting toward U.S.-friendly positions, such as promoting access to 
markets and regional stability. At a recent regional summit, Brazil 
succeeded in getting harsh anti-U.S. rhetoric stripped from the final 
resolution -- a clear win over Venezuela.

As recently as the 1990s, Brazil's foreign policy amounted to begging for 
financial assistance as it wobbled from one crisis to another. Hard-won 
economic stability and an export-driven expansion changed that.

Brazil's prominence in Latin America grew as the U.S. waged its war on 
terror. Brazilians long have held that their country's sprawling size and 
180 million population warrant it international prominence.

Brazil wants a United Nations Security Council seat, for example, and 
building regional preeminence is one way to lobby for it.

-Peter Millard in Mexico City contributed to this article.
Write to John Lyons at john.lyons at wsj.com 



From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sun Feb  8 05:03:49 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 13:03:49 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie, or....
Message-ID: <1B25EF0995F743779D970EB30A98E46C@dmsthinkpad>

....
...One man's bankruptcy is another man's terrine of smoked puffin breast 



WSJ online  February7

... there has been nothing frothy about Iceland since the currency, the once high-flying krona, crashed to roughly half its value last fall. Banks were nationalized. Unemployment zoomed. And while I was in Reykjavik, the government fell, after weeks of noisy demonstrations in front of the world's oldest parliament, the Althing. In my hotel around the corner from this small squarish building of black volcanic stone, I had to put on noise-limiting earphones to block out the clash of cymbals, the blare of foghorns and other insistent cacophony from the square below at night. [THE HORROR! THE HORROR! THANK GOD THE HOTEL PROVIDES THE EARPHONES AT NO EXTRA CHARGE]

The money crisis explains why Panorama and Reykjavik's other bubble-spawned luxury restaurants are so sparsely patronized now. Icelanders aren't throwing cash around, and tourists don't flock here to luxuriate in the five hours of faint winter light each day. But for anyone interested in sampling some intelligently cosmopolitan treatments of exotic ingredients, the time is now. [ YES! SEIZE THE TIME. IF YOU WAIT, YOU'RE LATE.  IF YOU'RE SLOW YOU BLOW] Restaurants like Panorama or the very chic Vox in the Hotel Nordica or the marvelous bistro 3 Frakkar are, in effect, on sale for those of us lucky [AND BEING LUCKY IS SO MUCH BETTER THAN BEING GOOD] enough to arrive with dollars. Iceland just a few months ago was arguably the most expensive city in the Western world, with airport cabs costing $140. Now prices have come down, if not to earth, at least to a level competitive with other capitals of developed countries. Just about every boutique on the elegant shopping street Laugavegur had a sale sign in the window. (Utsala, the word for sale and a rare Icelandic-English cognate, was the first Icelandic word I learned.) And Paris and Barcelona don't offer diners cutting-edge preparations of moose, puffin, reindeer and whale. [NO THEY DON'T.  SOMEONE THEY DO SEEM TO DO OK WITH CANARD CONFIT, CREME CATALAN, THOSE FISH SOUPS FROM YOUR EVERYDAY FISH.  BUT SOMETIMES YOU JUST NEED A CHANGE, YOU NEED TO TUCK INTO SOME PUFFIN AND WHALE TO FEEL GOOD ABOUT YOURSELF AGAIN].

At the top of the food chain, you can now tie into some paper-thin petals of roseate, pounded moose carpaccio at Sjafarkallarin (Seafood Cellar) or a plateful of langoustine tails lightly tossed in butter. I never thought I would be served too many langoustines, but what seemed like a dozen of the dainty things turned a treat into a trial. The waitress relentlessly pushed overpriced wine on me (all wine in Iceland is overpriced, because of import duties), and I reluctantly concluded that Sjafarkallarin was a kind of pretentious trap.[UNLIKE THE WSJ WEEKEND SECTION DINING REVIEWS...]

Vox might strike some people as even more pretentious, but for me it was a beautiful adaptation of modern culinary principles by executive chef Gunnar Karl G?slason to local foods. [SEE WHAT I MEAN?]

I started with an elaborate and well-thought-out saut? of puffin cubes with sunchokes and hazelnuts in a cream sauce tinctured with truffle and leek oil. Puffins thrive in such abundance in Iceland that, it is said, you can easily find yourself alone with a million of them on an isolated beach. So guilt would have been irrational as I enjoyed the chef's artful crossruff of textures -- the chewy puffin playing against the more brittle sunchoke and hazelnuts, with an overall sea-saltiness prevailing amid the Gallic refinement of the sauce. The puffin hunter's name, Siggi Hennings, was on the menu.... [BUT HOW CAN YOU BE SURE THAT SIGGI KILLED THEM HIMSELF, AND BY HAND.  MAYBE HE HAS A SLEW OF FORMER BANKERS, CURRENCY TRADERS, WORKING FOR HIM]

.

...Icelandic law permits hunters to take only 300 reindeer a year (there are no farmed reindeer in Iceland). So those dark-red cylinders of faintly gamy meat (really more in the line of grass-fed filet mignon) taken at J?kuldals og Fellaheidum says the menu (and who would doubt it?) are the Kobe beef of the North. Vox serves them standing on end, apparently the local style for the same cut of beef.

Vox is the obvious candidate for Iceland's first Michelin star,[AND PERHAPS A HARD-ON-THE-HEELS BANKRUPTCY] according to a proud Vox waiter who recognized me on a flight to London. Iceland is a small place. Before you know it, you start noticing faces you've seen before.[THAT'S BECAUSE THEY ARE THE SAME FACES, WITH A GENETIC HOMOGENY THAT IS ALMOST FRIGHTENING-- AS IF YOU HAD BEEN DROPPED INTO THE FILMING OF CHILDREN OF THE DAMNED]. 

Thrir Frakkar is where you want to go for Icelandic traditional food with a modest nontraditional spin. Chef ?lfar Eysteinsson's puffin is cured and pungent, comes in purple strands, arrayed in a nouvelle starburst. If I could go back tomorrow, I think I would order the horse steak again. Here was meat with personality, plated modestly with potatoes, carrots and turnips. Lean and unforgettable. [UNLIKE THE WRITER WHO IS UNLEAN AND MOST FORGETTABLE]

As was the cunningly Icelandicized dessert, a cr?me br?l?e based on skyr, the mildly sour, ubiquitous soft cheese that will remind first-timers of a thick yogurt. In the cr?me br?l?e, its sourness countered the sweetness of the sugary sheet on top. And that's not all. On the same plate was a big mound of whipped cream and a smear of light custard sauce rippling with red fruit jam -- a dairy symphony. And for a touch of the sunbaked south, Chef Eysteinsson drops an orange Colombian physalis berry (Cape gooseberry) complete with papery ecru leaves, on top of the whipped cream. [BE  STILL MY HEART.  ACTUALLY, IT WILL BE AFTER EATING THAT DAIRY SYMPHONY/DIRGE].

Does this sound too cute for you? Then head down to the harbor in a gale and wander among the docks until you stumble on Saegreifinn (The Sea Count), a shack specializing in putrefied Greenland shark and hardfiskur, fish chips that will permanently perfume your luggage. [PUTRIFIED GREENLAND SHARK? HOW WONDERFUL,  HOW APPROPRIATE FOR THIS CAPITALISM].

They reminded W.H. Auden of toenails. But if you don't get around to buying some from Saegreifinn, and forget to pick up a sheep's head, complete with eye and tongue, at the central-bus-station canteen, the Icelandic deli at the hypermodern airport sells them both along with puffin p?t?. [ON MY WAY!]

From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Feb  8 07:22:22 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 09:22:22 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Krugman: This is really, really bad
Message-ID: <498EEA9E.9010804@panix.com>

Paul Krugman - New York Times Blog
February 7, 2009, 5:36 pm
What the centrists have wrought

I?m still working on the numbers, but I?ve gotten a fair number of 
requests for comment on the Senate version of the stimulus.

The short answer: to appease the centrists, a plan that was already too 
small and too focused on ineffective tax cuts has been made 
significantly smaller, and even more focused on tax cuts.

According to the CBO?s estimates, we?re facing an output shortfall of 
almost 14% of GDP over the next two years, or around $2 trillion. 
Others, such as Goldman Sachs, are even more pessimistic. So the 
original $800 billion plan was too small, especially because a 
substantial share consisted of tax cuts that probably would have added 
little to demand. The plan should have been at least 50% larger.

Now the centrists have shaved off $86 billion in spending ? much of it 
among the most effective and most needed parts of the plan. In 
particular, aid to state governments, which are in desperate straits, is 
both fast ? because it prevents spending cuts rather than having to 
start up new projects ? and effective, because it would in fact be 
spent; plus state and local governments are cutting back on essentials, 
so the social value of this spending would be high. But in the name of 
mighty centrism, $40 billion of that aid has been cut out.

My first cut says that the changes to the Senate bill will ensure that 
we have at least 600,000 fewer Americans employed over the next two years.

The real question now is whether Obama will be able to come back for 
more once it?s clear that the plan is way inadequate. My guess is no. 
This is really, really bad.


From anthony.boynton at gmail.com  Sun Feb  8 08:21:03 2009
From: anthony.boynton at gmail.com (Anthony Boynton)
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 10:21:03 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] You Try to Live on 500K in This Town
Message-ID: <7b8a676d0902080721j6d3c49e4jab02d25eae48ec0@mail.gmail.com>

You Try to Live on 500K in This Town

The New York Times,

By ALLEN SALKIN

Published: February 6, 2009



PRIVATE school: $32,000 a year per student. Mortgage: $96,000 a year. Co-op
maintenance fee: $96,000 a year. Nanny: $45,000 a year.



We are already at $269,000, and we haven't even gotten to taxes yet.



Five hundred thousand dollars ? the amount President Obama wants to set as
the top pay for banking executives whose firms accept government bailout
money ? seems like a lot, and it is a lot. To many people in many places, it
is a princely sum to live on. But in the neighborhoods of New York City and
its suburban enclaves where successful bankers live, half a million a year
can go very fast.



"As hard as it is to believe, bankers who are living on the Upper East Side
making $2 or $3 million a year have set up a life for themselves in which
they are also at zero at the end of the year with credit cards and mortgage
bills that are inescapable," said Holly Peterson, the author of an Upper
East Side novel of manners, "The Manny," and the daughter of Peter G.
Peterson, a founder of the equity firm the Blackstone Group. "Five hundred
thousand dollars means taking their kids out of private school and selling
their home in a fire sale."



Sure, the solution may seem simple: move to Brooklyn or Hoboken, put the
children in public schools and buy a MetroCard. But more than a few of the
New York-based financial executives who would have their pay limited are men
(and they are almost invariably men) whose identities are entwined with
living a certain way in a certain neighborhood west of Third Avenue: a life
of private schools, summer houses and charity galas that only a seven-figure
income can stretch to cover.



Few are playing sad cellos over the fate of such folk, especially since the
collapse of the institutions they run has yielded untold financial pain. But
in New York, where a new study from the Center for an Urban Future, a
nonprofit research group in Manhattan, estimates it takes $123,322 to enjoy
the same middle-class life as someone earning $50,000 in Houston,
extricating oneself from steep bills can be difficult.



Therefore, even if it is not for sympathy but for sport, consider the
numbers.



The cold hard math can be cruel.



Like those taxes. If a person is married with two children, the weekly
deductions on a $500,000 salary are: federal taxes, $2,645; Social Security,
$596; Medicare, $139; state taxes, $682; and city, $372, bringing the weekly
take-home to $5,180, or about $269,000 a year, said Martin Cohen, a
Manhattan accountant.



Now move to living expenses.



Barbara Corcoran, a real estate executive, said that most well-to-do
families take at least two vacations a year, a winter trip to the sun and a
spring trip to the ski slopes.



Total minimum cost: $16,000.



A modest three-bedroom apartment, she said, which was purchased for $1.5
million, not the top of the market at all, carries a monthly mortgage of
about $8,000 and a co-op maintenance fee of $8,000 a month. Total cost:
$192,000. A summer house in Southampton that cost $4 million, again not the
top of the market, carries annual mortgage payments of $240,000.



Many top executives have cars and drivers. A chauffeur's pay is between
$75,000 and $125,000 a year, the higher end for former police officers who
can double as bodyguards, said a limousine driver who spoke anonymously
because he does not want to alienate his society customers.



"Some of them want their drivers to have guns," the driver said. "You get a
cop and you have a driver." To garage that car is about $700 a month.



A personal trainer at $80 an hour three times a week comes to about $12,000
a year.



The work in the gym pays off when one must don a formal gown for a charity
gala. "Going to those parties," said David Patrick Columbia, who is the
editor of the New York Social Diary (newyorksocialdiary.com), "a woman can
spend $10,000 or $15,000 on a dress. If she goes to three or four of those a
year, she's not going to wear the same dress."



Total cost for three gowns: about $35,000



Not every bank executive has school-age children, but for those who do,
offspring can be expensive. In addition to paying tuition, "You're not going
to get through private school without tutoring a kid," said Sandy Bass, the
editor of Private School Insider, a newsletter that covers private schools
in the New York City area. One hour of tutoring once a week is $125. "That's
the low end," she said. "The higher end is 150, 175." SAT tutors are about
$250 an hour. Total cost for 30 weeks of regular tutoring: $3,750.



Two children in private school: $64,000.



Nanny: $45,000.



Ms. Bass, whose husband is an accountant with many high-end clients, said
she spends about $425 every 10 days on groceries for her family. Annual
cost: about $15,000.



More? Restaurants. Dry cleaning. Each Brooks Brothers suit costs about
$1,000. If you run a bank, you can't look like a slob.



The total costs here, which do not include a lot of things, like kennels for
the dog when the family is away, summer camp, spas and other grooming for
the human members of the family, donations to charity, and frozen hot
chocolates at Serendipity, are $790,750, which would require about a
$1.6-million salary to compensate for taxes. Give or take a few score
thousand of dollars.



Does this money buy a chief executive stockholders might prize, a well-to-do
man with a certain sureness of stride, something that might be lost if the
executive were crowding onto the PATH train every morning at Journal Square,
his newspaper splayed against the back of a stranger's head?



The man would certainly not feel like himself on that train, said Candace
Bushnell, the author of "Sex and the City" and other books chronicling New
York social mores.



"People inherently understand that if they are going to get ahead in
whatever corporate culture they are involved in, they need to take on the
appurtenances of what defines that culture," she said. "So if you are in a
culture where spending a lot of money is a sign of success, it's like the
same thing that goes back to high school peer pressure. It's about fitting
in."



By the way, the frozen hot chocolate costs $8.50.

From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Feb  8 08:29:30 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 10:29:30 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] You Try to Live on 500K in This Town
In-Reply-To: <7b8a676d0902080721j6d3c49e4jab02d25eae48ec0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <7b8a676d0902080721j6d3c49e4jab02d25eae48ec0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <498EFA5A.2080608@panix.com>

Anthony Boynton wrote:
> You Try to Live on 500K in This Town
> 
> The New York Times,
> 
> By ALLEN SALKIN
> 

Yeah, there was an article along these lines about 7 years ago in the 
Times trying to explain that having a million dollars a year in NY only 
qualifies you as "middle class". I remain committed to the campaign 
demand of Fred Halstead in 1968 that there be a hundred percent taxation 
on all incomes over one million dollars.


From schaffer at optonline.net  Sun Feb  8 08:31:20 2009
From: schaffer at optonline.net (Les Schaffer)
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 10:31:20 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] the biology of sleep
Message-ID: <498EFAC8.1010700@optonline.net>

there is an interesting perspective article in a back issue of Nature 
Reviews Neuroscience, from May 2005, entitled "The rhythm of rest and 
excess" by Russell G. Foster and Katharina Wulff on sleep (and the lack 
thereof) in the modern industrial age. below is the introduction, the 
full paper is available here:
http://www.chronobiology.ch/chronobiology.data/Dokumente/PDF/PDF_Informations/Nature%20Neurosci%20Foster%20Wulff.pdf

Les



Introduction:


Abstract | There is a stark contrast between our attitudes to sleep and 
those of the pre-industrial age. In Shakespeare?s Julius C?sar we are 
told to ?Enjoy the honey-heavy dew of slumber?. There seems little 
chance of this today, as we crave more, work more and expect more, and, 
in the process, abandon sleep. Our occupation of the night is having 
unanticipated costs for both our physical and mental health, which, if 
continued, might condemn whole sectors of our society to a dismal future.

For centuries, sleep has been regarded as a simple suspension of 
activity; today we appreciate that it is a complex and highly organized 
series of physiological and behavioural states. On average, we spend 30% 
of our lives asleep, and we have little idea why. This ignorance is 
probably the main reason why our society has such little regard for 
sleep. At best we tolerate the fact that we need to sleep, and at worst 
we think of sleep as an illness that needs a cure. This attitude is not 
only dangerous but unsustainable. Our immune defence, cognitive 
performance and mental health are all affected by sleep and our 
circadian rhythms. Disruption of the sleep?wake axis results in a broad 
range of interconnected pathologies, including poor vigilance and 
memory, reduced mental and physical reaction times, reduced motivation, 
depression, insomnia, metabolic abnormalities, obesity, immune 
impairment and even a greater risk of cancer. There is an intimate 
connection between these pathologies and the way in which we have 
organized our society in recent years[1].

The introduction of artificial lighting and the re-structuring of 
working hours has progressively detached our species from the 24-hour 
cycle of light and dark. Our working culture of long hours and shift 
work, and the 24-hour availability of almost everything have conspired 
to demote sleep in our priorities. In our 24/7 society, we have 
established a new
benchmark for wakefulness, in which many employers expect their staff to 
work to the beat of an artificial rhythm and to perform with equal 
efficiency throughout the 24 hours of a day. This imposed structure 
conflicts with our basic biology and is suboptimal for our health. In an 
attempt to cope with tiredness, we have fallen into a stimulant?sedation 
loop, in which stimulants, such as caffeine and nicotine, are used for 
wakefulness during the day and sedatives, such as hypnotics and alcohol, 
are used at night to induce sleep. The following morning, stimulants are 
needed once again to override the sedatives and impaired sleep. In 
addition, many drugs have been developed to modify sleep and alertness,
to beat jet lag and to create ?metabolically dominant soldiers? ? 
warriors who can fight 24 hours a day for 7 days without rest.

In this perspective, we consider some of the causes and consequences of 
sleep and circadian rhythm disruption. In the space available, this 
article cannot be all encompassing, but our aim is to highlight the 
importance of this topic, illustrate how many agents of sleep disruption 
are interconnected, and promote discussion about how we might use this 
information to adjust the way we organize our lives. ...





From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Feb  8 08:34:25 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 10:34:25 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Unemployed Japanese lack safety net
Message-ID: <498EFB81.2080707@panix.com>

NY Times, February 8, 2009
In Japan, New Jobless May Lack Safety Net
By MARTIN FACKLER

OITA, Japan ? Koji Hirano said his ?mind went blank? with disbelief when 
he and other workers at a Canon digital camera factory in this southern 
city were suddenly called into a cafeteria in late October and told they 
were being laid off.

The shock turned to fear when they were also ordered to vacate their 
employer-provided apartments, a common job benefit here. With no savings 
from his monthly take-home pay of as little as $700, he said, he faced 
certain homelessness.

?They were going to kick us out into the winter cold to die,? said Mr. 
Hirano, 47.

The current economic crisis has spread joblessness and distress across 
the world, and Japan has been no exception ? with output plunging at 
historic rates, the unemployment rate leapt to 4.4 percent in December 
from 3.9 percent the month before. But what has proved more shocking has 
been the fact that so many of those laid off have been so vulnerable, 
with hundreds and perhaps thousands finding themselves cast into the 
streets.

Mr. Hirano and the others laid off by Canon are part of a new subclass 
of Japanese workers created during a decade of American-style 
deregulation. As short-term employees they have none of the rights of 
so-called salarymen or even the factory workers for Japan?s legions of 
small manufacturers.

To make matters worse, they can expect little in the way of unemployment 
or welfare benefits. In Japan, a country with little experience of 
widespread unemployment until recently, there is an inadequate safety 
net for laid-off workers.

According to the Labor Ministry, about 131,000 layoffs have been 
announced since October. Of those, only about 6,000 were culled from the 
majority of Japanese workers who hold traditional full-time jobs, which 
are still often held for life. The overwhelming majority ? some 125,000, 
the ministry says ? are so-called nonregular workers, who are sent by 
staffing agencies or hired on short-term contracts with lower pay, fewer 
benefits and none of the legal protections against layoffs of regular 
full-time employees.

Mr. Hirano and other former temporary workers at Canon were allowed to 
stay in their apartments for a few extra months after a public outcry 
reached all the way to the prime minister. But others have not been so 
lucky. Over the New Year holiday some 500 disgruntled former temporary 
workers made homeless by layoffs built an impromptu tent city in a Tokyo 
park adjacent to the Labor Ministry.

As never before, the global downturn has driven home how a decade of 
economic transformation has eroded Japan?s gentler version of 
capitalism, in which companies once laid off employees only as a last 
resort.

?This recession has opened the nation?s eyes to its growing social 
inequalities,? said Masahiro Abe, a professor at Dokkyo University who 
specializes in labor relations. ?There is a whole population of workers 
who are outside the traditional support net.?

Until a decade ago, nonregular workers accounted for less than a quarter 
of Japan?s total work force, and included subcontractors and others 
outside the lifetime employment system as well as students or homemakers 
working part-time jobs at restaurants or convenience stores.

But the number of nonregular workers took off after an easing of labor 
laws in 1999 and again in 2004 allowed temporary workers to work on 
factory lines and in other jobs once largely restricted to full-time 
workers. During Japan?s economic recovery in this decade, companies 
added millions of less expensive temporary employees while continuing to 
reduce overall numbers of full-time staff.

Today, 34.5 percent of Japan?s 55.3 million workers are nonregular 
employees, including many primary breadwinners for households, according 
to the Internal Affairs Ministry.

Under the nation?s traditional company-centered social welfare system, 
created after World War II, companies were expected to look after 
employees until retirement and beyond, serving as the main conduit for 
pensions and other benefits, and keeping jobless rosters empty by not 
laying off workers.

Even the limited government job-loss benefits were devised with lifetime 
employees in mind. To receive unemployment insurance, for instance, 
workers must have held the same job for at least a year, effectively 
excluding most temporary workers, whose contracts can be as short as two 
months. This has left at least half of Japan?s 17.8 million nonregular 
workers ineligible for unemployment aid, say labor experts and Labor 
Ministry officials.

According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 
Japan spends about 0.3 percent of its gross domestic product on 
unemployment benefits, far below Western European countries and about 
the same as the United States, which tolerates far more social 
dislocation and poverty than Japan.

According to labor experts and Labor Ministry officials, Japan needs to 
revamp the system to fit a more dynamic labor market in which not all 
jobs are held for life, and to prevent layoffs from being so financially 
devastating.

?Japan?s social safety net has failed to keep up with changes in the 
labor market,? said Yusuke Inoue, a section chief in the Labor 
Ministry?s bureau of stable employment. ?We must build a safety net that 
suits this more deregulated working environment.?

After a public outcry, Tokyo has promised to expand unemployment 
benefits to those who have worked six months or more. The government has 
also tried to shore up the traditional system by pressuring companies to 
elevate more nonregular workers to full-time status, with Prime Minister 
Taro Aso telling companies in December that ?regular employment is best.?

Some of the first layoffs to gain national attention were at two Canon 
factories in Oita, where some 1,100 temporary workers were let go, 
including Mr. Hirano.

As a temporary worker, Mr. Hirano was technically the employee of a 
staffing agency, and not of the factory where he worked. As a result, 
Canon executives even refused at first to accept a letter written by him 
and other laid-off temporary workers asking for their jobs back, Mr. 
Hirano said. After 30 minutes of discussion in front of the factory?s 
gate, the executives finally took the letter, he said. He said he never 
got a response.

In a written response to questions from The New York Times, Canon said 
it had underestimated the difficulties faced by the laid-off temporary 
workers in the current economic downturn and would offer them more aid, 
including help in staying longer in their apartments.

Mr. Hirano and other laid-off temporary workers said their annual pay 
was about $22,000 a year, below what many labor experts call Japan?s 
poverty line of $25,000 a year.

To make ends meet, even when employed, Mr. Hirano said he usually cooked 
a small stew of cabbages and carrots every night in the tiny kitchen in 
the corner of his one-room apartment. He added chicken to the stew only 
on days it was on sale at the supermarket, he said.

Mr. Hirano and others said they had applied for a dozen jobs each, with 
no luck in the current market. With their meager savings running out, 
they said, they had applied for welfare a half dozen times in two 
months, only to be rejected by officials who said they were not trying 
hard enough to find new employment. The officials said the former 
workers were ineligible for unemployment support because they had worked 
at Canon less than a year.

Just in case he gets kicked out of the apartment suddenly, Mr. Hirano 
has packed most of his belongings in a half dozen cardboard boxes that 
sit in a corner of his room, next to an unmade futon and a table covered 
in r?sum?s.

Mr. Hirano and his co-workers said they felt betrayed. They said that 
they had believed that if they worked hard, Canon would reward them with 
an offer of direct employment, at higher pay.

?We did our best, so Canon should have taken care of us,? said one 
32-year-old laid-off worker who was so ashamed of his situation that he 
asked that only his family name, Murakami, be used. ?That is the 
Japanese way. But this isn?t Japan anymore.?


From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Feb  8 08:48:44 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 10:48:44 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Looks like Frank Rich has joined the disillusioned
Message-ID: <498EFEDC.5040601@panix.com>

NY Times, February 8, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist
Slumdogs Unite!
By FRANK RICH

SOMEDAY historians may look back at Tom Daschle?s flameout as a minor 
one-car (and chauffeur) accident. But that will depend on whether or not 
it?s followed by a multi-vehicle pileup that still could come. Even as 
President Obama refreshingly took responsibility for having ?screwed 
up,? it?s not clear that he fully understands the huge forces that hit 
his young administration last week.

The tsunami of populist rage coursing through America is bigger than 
Daschle?s overdue tax bill, bigger than John Thain?s trash can, bigger 
than any bailed-out C.E.O.?s bonus. It?s even bigger than the Obama 
phenomenon itself. It could maim the president?s best-laid plans and 
what remains of our economy if he doesn?t get in front of the mounting 
public anger.

Like nearly everyone else in Washington, Obama was blindsided by the 
savagery and speed of Daschle?s demise. Conventional wisdom had him 
surviving the storm. Such is the city?s culture that not a single 
Republican or Democratic senator called for his withdrawal until the 
morning of his exit. Membership in the exclusive Senate club, after all, 
has its privileges. Among Daschle?s more vocal defenders was Bob Dole, 
who had recruited him to Alston & Bird, the law and lobbying firm where 
Dole has served as ?special counsel? when not otherwise cashing in on 
his own Senate years by serving as a pitchman for Pepsi and Viagra.

In New York, editorial pages on both ends of the political spectrum, The 
Wall Street Journal and The Times, called for Daschle to step down. But 
not The Washington Post. In a frank expression of the capital?s 
isolation from the country, it thought Daschle could still soldier on 
even though ?ordinary Americans who pay their taxes may well wonder why 
Mr. Obama can?t find cabinet secretaries who do the same.?

As Jon Stewart might say, oh those pesky ordinary Americans!

In reality, Daschle?s tax shortfall, an apparently honest mistake, was 
only a red flag for the larger syndrome that much of Washington still 
doesn?t get. It was the source, not the amount, of his unreported income 
that did him in. The car and driver advertised his post-Senate immersion 
in the greedy bipartisan culture of entitlement and crony capitalism 
that both helped create our economic meltdown (on Wall Street) and 
failed to police it (in Washington). Daschle might well have been the 
best choice to lead health-care reform. But his honorable public record 
was instantly vaporized by tales of his cozy, lucrative relationships 
with the very companies he?d have to adjudicate as health czar.

Few articulate this ethical morass better than Obama, who has repeatedly 
vowed to ?close the revolving door? between business and government and 
end our ?two sets of standards, one for powerful people and one for 
ordinary folks.? But his tough new restrictions on lobbyists (already 
compromised by inexplicable exceptions) and porous plan for salary caps 
on bailed-out bankers are only a down payment on this promise, even if 
they are strictly enforced.

The new president who vowed to change Washington?s culture will have to 
fight much harder to keep from being co-opted by it instead. There are 
simply too many major players in the Obama team who are either alumni of 
the financial bubble?s insiders? club or of the somnambulant 
governmental establishment that presided over the catastrophe.

This includes Timothy Geithner, the Treasury secretary. Washington hands 
repeatedly observe how ?lucky? Geithner was to be the first cabinet 
nominee with an I.R.S. problem, not the second, and therefore get 
confirmed by Congress while the getting was good. Whether or not this is 
?lucky? for him, it is hardly lucky for Obama. Geithner should have left 
ahead of Daschle.

Now more than ever, the president must inspire confidence and stave off 
panic. As Friday?s new unemployment figures showed, the economy kept 
plummeting while Congress postured. Though Obama is a genius at building 
public support, he is not Jesus and he can?t do it all alone. On Monday, 
it?s Geithner who will unveil the thorniest piece of the economic 
recovery plan to date ? phase two of a bank rescue. The public face of 
this inevitably controversial package is now best known as the guy who 
escaped the tax reckoning that brought Daschle down.

Even before the revelation of his tax delinquency, the new Treasury 
secretary was a dubious choice to make this pitch. Geithner was present 
at the creation of the first, ineffectual and opaque bank bailout ? 
TARP, today the most radioactive acronym in American politics. Now the 
double standard that allowed him to wriggle out of his tax mess is a 
metaphor for the double standard of the policy he must sell: Most 
?ordinary Americans? still don?t understand why banks got billions while 
nothing was done (and still isn?t being done) to bail out those who lost 
their homes, jobs and retirement savings.

As with Daschle, the political problems caused by Geithner?s tax 
infraction are secondary to the larger questions raised by his past 
interaction with the corporations now under his purview. To his credit, 
Geithner, like Obama, has devoted his career to public service, not 
buckraking. But he still has not satisfactorily explained why, as 
president of the New York Fed, he failed in his oversight of the 
teetering Wall Street institutions. Nor has he told us why, in his first 
major move in his new job, he secured a waiver from Obama to hire a 
Goldman Sachs lobbyist as his chief of staff. Nor, in his confirmation 
hearings, did he prove any more credible than the Bush Treasury 
secretary, the Goldman Sachs alumnus Hank Paulson, in explaining why 
Lehman Brothers was allowed to fail while A.I.G. and Citigroup were spared.

Citigroup had one highly visible asset that Lehman did not: Robert 
Rubin, the former Clinton Treasury secretary who sat passively (though 
lucratively) in its executive suite as Citi gorged on reckless risk. 
Geithner, as a Rubin prot?g? from the Clinton years, might have recused 
himself from rescuing Citi, which so far has devoured $45 billion in 
bailout money.

Key players in the Obama economic team beyond Geithner are also tied to 
Rubin or Citigroup or both, from Larry Summers, the administration?s top 
economic adviser, to Gary Gensler, the newly named nominee to run the 
Commodity Futures Trading Commission and a Treasury undersecretary in 
the Clinton administration. Back then, Summers and Gensler joined hands 
with Phil Gramm to ward off regulation of the derivative markets that 
have since brought the banking system to ruin. We must take it on faith 
that they have subsequently had judgment transplants.

Obama?s brilliant appointees, we keep being told, are irreplaceable. But 
as de Gaulle said, ?The cemeteries of the world are full of 
indispensable men.? You have to wonder if this team is really a 
meritocracy or merely a stacked deck. Not only did Rubin himself serve 
on the Obama economic transition team, but two of the transition?s 
headhunters were Michael Froman, Rubin?s chief of staff at Treasury and 
later a Citigroup executive, and James S. Rubin, an investor who is 
Robert Rubin?s son.

A welcome outlier to this club is Paul Volcker, the former Federal 
Reserve chairman chosen to direct Obama?s Economic Recovery Advisory 
Board. But Bloomberg reported last week that Summers is already freezing 
Volcker out of many of his deliberations on economic policy. This sounds 
like the arrogant Summers who was fired as president of Harvard, not the 
chastened new Summers advertised at the time of his appointment. A team 
of rivals is not his thing.

Americans have had enough of such arrogance, whether in the public or 
private sectors, whether Democrat or Republican. Voters turned on Sarah 
Palin not just because of her manifest unfitness for office but because 
her claims of being a regular hockey mom were contradicted by her Evita 
shopping sprees. John McCain?s sanctification of Joe the Plumber 
(himself a tax delinquent) never could be squared with his inability to 
remember how many houses he owned. A graphic act of entitlement also 
stripped naked that faux populist John Edwards.

The public?s revulsion isn?t mindless class hatred. As Obama said on 
Wednesday of his fellow citizens: ?We don?t disparage wealth. We don?t 
begrudge anybody for achieving success.? But we do know that the system 
has been fixed for too long. The gaping income inequality of the past 
decade ? the top 1 percent of America?s earners received more than 20 
percent of the total national income ? has not been seen since the 
run-up to the Great Depression.

This is why ?Slumdog Millionaire,? which pits a hard-working young man 
in Mumbai against a corrupt nexus of money and privilege, has become 
America?s movie of the year. As Robert Reich, the former Clinton labor 
secretary, wrote after Daschle?s fall, Americans ?resent people who 
appear to be living high off a system dominated by insiders with the 
right connections.?

The neo-Hoover Republicans in Congress, who think government can put 
Americans back to work with corporate tax cuts but without any 
?spending,? are tone deaf to this rage. Obama is not. It?s a good thing 
he?s getting out of Washington this week to barnstorm the country about 
the crisis at hand. Once back home, he?s got to make certain that the 
insiders in his own White House know who?s the boss.


From Jscotlive at aol.com  Sun Feb  8 09:35:14 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 11:35:14 EST
Subject: [Marxism] You Try to Live on 500K in This Town
Message-ID: <c66.48bc5981.36c063c2@aol.com>

Five hundred thousand dollars ? the amount President Obama wants to set  as
the top pay for banking executives whose firms accept government  bailout
money ? seems like a lot, and it is a lot. To many people in many  places, it
is a princely sum to live on. But in the neighborhoods of New York  City and
its suburban enclaves where successful bankers live, half a million  a year
can go very fast.

Reply:
 
Fuck em! 

From jayroth6 at cox.net  Sun Feb  8 10:53:49 2009
From: jayroth6 at cox.net (J Rothermel)
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 12:53:49 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Karl Marx on Front Cover of European ed. of Time mag
Message-ID: <498F1C2D.4010501@cox.net>

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1873191_1873190_1873188,00.html
 
excerpt:

Thursday, Jan. 22, 2009


  Rethinking Marx

By Peter Gumbel

The book has been on the best-seller lists in Germany for nine weeks, 
and in the provincial town of Trier it has special resonance, especially 
in tough economic times. It's Marx's /low>Das Kapital/, and dozens of 
copies of it are laid out in the bookshop in Trier's pedestrian-only 
town center. But no, this is not the seminal 19th century work on 
political economy by Karl Marx, who was born in Trier in 1818. It's a 
book by Reinhard Marx, the former Roman Catholic Bishop of Trier who is 
now Archbishop of Munich and Freising. He cheekily borrowed the title 
for his own thesis, namely that today's troubled economy needs to 
reconnect with fundamental Christian values if it is to be restored to 
health.

The book's introduction is a letter to Reinhard's celebrated namesake in 
which he rejects revolutionary Marxist solutions. Nonetheless, as he 
surveys the wreckage of the global financial system and the growing 
insecurity of ordinary people, the Archbishop wonders: Was Marx's 
critique of capitalism right after all? "It lasted longer than you 
expected back in the 19th century," he writes, "but could it be that 
capitalism is just an episode of history that will end at some point 
because the system will collapse as a result of its internal 
contradictions?"

(See pictures of the Bolshevik October Revolution 
<http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1681193_1481200,00.html>.)
-- 
________________________________________
*j a y   r o t h e r m e l
*
               jayroth6 at cox.net








From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Feb  8 12:30:21 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 14:30:21 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] A Flock of Dodos
Message-ID: <498F32CD.7030903@panix.com>

The other night I stumbled across ?A Flock of Dodos? on the Showtime 
cable network, a somewhat overly whimsical documentary on ?intelligent 
design? that I still recommend heartily. It is directed by Randy Olson 
who received a PhD in evolutionary biology from Harvard while studying 
under Stephen Jay Gould. Olson changed careers in the mid 1990s and 
became a documentary film-maker with Michael Moore as his most obvious 
influence. Using himself as a central figure, Olson interviews both 
sides of the debate seeking to make it entertaining to a mass audience. 
He largely succeeds although nobody is better at this than Michael Moore 
obviously.

full: http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2009/02/08/a-flock-of-dodos/


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sun Feb  8 12:37:26 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 20:37:26 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] You Try to Live on 500K in This Town
References: <c66.48bc5981.36c063c2@aol.com>
Message-ID: <AAA55E9F06BB4989A3BA013ACD2B9A80@dmsthinkpad>

Exactly.  The only rational response.  Let 'em eat credit-default swaps.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Jscotlive at aol.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 5:35 PM
Subject: [Marxism] You Try to Live on 500K in This Town
> Reply:
> 
> Fuck em! 



From wsredden at gmail.com  Sun Feb  8 12:45:36 2009
From: wsredden at gmail.com (Shawn Redden)
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 14:45:36 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] You Try to Live on 500K in This Town
In-Reply-To: <AAA55E9F06BB4989A3BA013ACD2B9A80@dmsthinkpad>
References: <c66.48bc5981.36c063c2@aol.com>
	<AAA55E9F06BB4989A3BA013ACD2B9A80@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <a06240802c5b4e691353c@[72.225.169.30]>

At 8:37 PM +0100 2/8/09, S. Artesian wrote:
>Exactly.  The only rational response.  Let 'em eat credit-default swaps.


Amen.

And Citibank stock options.  For every two of 'em, they can get a 
McDonalds value meal.

Super sized.

Shawn



From adambrichmond at yahoo.com  Sun Feb  8 13:23:28 2009
From: adambrichmond at yahoo.com (Adam Richmond)
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 12:23:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] New video on gay marriage
Message-ID: <833732.100.qm@web54605.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

Here is a link to a new video from the Courage Campaign called
Fidelity.? It is going "viral" (meaning: rapid, massive, person to
person dissemination) in the LGBT community and allies.? It is aimed to
raise awareness about chief schmuck Ken Starr's lawsuit to void all the
same sex marriages performed in 2008 in California. (Yep, it is that
Ken Starr.... from the Clinton impeachment days).? It is geared to
show that this lawsuit will directly affect average folks.?? 
http://www.couragecampaign.org/page/s/divorce


      

From eindeoc at googlemail.com  Sun Feb  8 13:38:12 2009
From: eindeoc at googlemail.com (Einde O'Callaghan)
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 21:38:12 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] RCP/LM Watch
Message-ID: <498F42B4.8020301@googlemail.com>

This seems to have come on-line recently and may interest some people in 
this forum:

A new blog "RCP/LM Watch" has been set up at
<http://rcpwatch.wordpress.com> to discuss the doings past and present
of the late not-so-lamented (British) RCP and it's various offspring.

Einde O'Callaghan



From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Feb  8 13:40:40 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 15:40:40 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] One of 573 mostly favorable comments on Frank Rich's
	latest
Message-ID: <498F4348.4080701@panix.com>

If Obama doesn't stop his futile appeasement of the Republicans, and 
instead begin leading and perhaps governing with an ample portion of 
"executive-privilege," he's going to set the stage for a third party in 
2012. And I will work for and vote for that party, because it appears 
that it is the only way our "business as usual" system can be stopped. 
And if it comes to that, let's hope that by then, the USA hasn't already 
gone totally out of business.

? W.D. Benoit, Maine, usa


From csoc21 at btinternet.com  Sun Feb  8 13:44:48 2009
From: csoc21 at btinternet.com (noah tucker)
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 20:44:48 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Marxism] New articles in 21st Century Socialism
Message-ID: <753991.71600.qm@web87106.mail.ird.yahoo.com>

Dear friend  ?  New articles in 21st Century Socialism web magazine- http://www.21stcenturysocialism.com/  ?    That the Science of Cartography is Limited: 

"The famine roads belonged to the second year of the Irish famine,"? says the Irish poet Eavan Boland, discussing her haunting poem 'That the Science of Cartography Is Limited' which abominates the British policy of putting starving Irish peasants to work building roads. "In 1847, the Relief Committees, coming to Ireland from the economic councils of Lord Trevelyan and the British government, decided the Irish should work for their food..."

   Did China cause the crisis?

A consideration of the underlying causes of the economic fiasco and the prospects for a US trade war against China.

Progress report from South America:
  ?  As we approach Venezuela's latest constitutional referendum, Dan Morgan assesses recent developments in the continent.  ?  Who calls the shots?

In
light of the massacre in Gaza, which is predominant in the USA-Israel relationship- the 'Jewish Lobby' or United States imperial interests? 

Check: http://www.21stcenturysocialism.com/  ?  ***************************************************************************************************  ?  I hope you enjoy reading 21st Century Socialism, but if for any reason you would like to be removed from this mailing list, please contact me.  ?  Very best regards  ? 
 Noah Tucker
Co-editor, 21st Century Socialism

From shamresearch at yahoo.co.nz  Sun Feb  8 14:09:22 2009
From: shamresearch at yahoo.co.nz (Scott Hamilton)
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 13:09:22 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Maori artist declares war on the New Zealand state
Message-ID: <434344.73310.qm@web50611.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

http://readingthemaps.blogspot.com/2009/02/war-in-head.html


      Easy recipes for Christmas entertaining on Yahoo!Xtra Lifestyle- http://nz.lifestyle.yahoo.com/food-recipes

From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Feb  8 15:38:14 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 17:38:14 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Swans Release: February 9, 2009
Message-ID: <498F5ED6.4080201@panix.com>

> Swans Commentary
> http://www.swans.com/
> February 9, 2009
> 
> Note from the Editors:  As the US economy shed another 600,000 jobs last 
> month for a total of 3.6 million in the past 13, Congress remains mired in 
> paralysis, engulfed in partisan bickering, and wealthy executives bitterly 
> whine that they cannot possibly live on $500K in Manhattan -- they'd need a 
> bare $1.6 million minimum to keep frequenting les salons dor?s in good 
> company. Art Shay has a message for ces gens l? that they should heed in a 
> hurry, as the ship is nonchalantly careening in stormy pre-Depression waters: 
> These people stink. Shay, with his renowned photographic memory, provides an 
> apercu of our pre-Depression dysfunctional age as well as reminiscences of 
> long forgotten yesteryears. Reading Jan Baughman, one has to wonder whether 
> we are well past the stage of dysfunction and have entered the territory of 
> irremediable dystopia, in spite of the anguished and angry calls by Charles 
> Marowitz for Obama to shake the darn tree so forcefully that all the dead, 
> rotten branches will finally complete their rotting process on the ground and 
> let the tree grow again, sound and alive. Though if you follow the continuing 
> saga of our Ponzters, Fraudsters, and Banksters that Gilles d'Aymery has been 
> faithfully portraying in his persistent Blips you should not hold your breath 
> for a favorable outcome. The system is not just corroded. It is putrefied. 
> And it's not limited to the financial world. Michael Barker, equally 
> persistent, underscores how much wealth controls and sets the agenda of human 
> rights organizations, this time in the Israel-Palestine conflict -- in the 
> same fashion the MSM controls the news and how countries are depicted; e.g., 
> Nigeria as Femi Akomolafe reports. Not surprisingly, the same corrupt 
> processes extend to the environment as Martin Murie shows, taking the example 
> of the jaguar. Not a happy spectacle, to say the least.
> 
> Fortunately, to avoid falling into a deep depressive mood, Isidor Saslav 
> brings us a world of music thanks to his latest visit to the New York 
> Philharmonic; Peter Byrne reviews two books by Scott Turow; Guido Monte and 
> Marie Rennard add a touch of poetry; Raju Peddada explores the world of 
> luxury with some conclusions you will appreciate; and Scott Porter mulls over 
> the benefits of being attentive to others -- the art of listening. We end 
> this edition with your letters. Enjoy.
> 
>                                               # # # # #
> 
> http://www.swans.com/library/art15/ashay08.html
> The Real World of Deerfield And The Coming Depression - Art Shay
> 
> http://www.swans.com/library/art15/jeb205.html
> National Priorities In The Economic And Digital Divide - Jan Baughman
> 
> http://www.swans.com/library/art15/cmarow129.html
> Obama's Gordian Knot - Charles Marowitz
> 
> http://www.swans.com/library/art15/desk079.html
> Blips #79 - From the Martian Desk - Gilles d'Aymery
> 
> http://www.swans.com/library/art15/barker13.html
> Engineering Human Rights In The Israel-Palestine Conflict - Michael Barker
> 
> http://www.swans.com/library/art15/femia04.html
> Understanding Nigeria - Femi Akomolafe
> 
> http://www.swans.com/library/art15/murie64.html
> The Jaguar Scandal - Martin Murie
> 
> http://www.swans.com/library/art15/saslav11.html
> Conductors' Guild Convention In New York 2009 - Isidor Saslav
> 
> http://www.swans.com/library/art15/pbyrne92.html
> To Kill Or Not - Book Review by Peter Byrne
> 
> http://www.swans.com/library/art15/gmonte61.html
> War n.2 - Multilingual Poem by Guido Monte
> 
> http://www.swans.com/library/art15/marier26.html
> The Day I Die... - Poem by Marie Rennard
> 
> http://www.swans.com/library/art15/rajup07.html
> What Is Luxury? - Raju Peddada
> 
> http://www.swans.com/library/art15/porter13.html
> Learning From Everyone - R. Scott Porter
> 
> http://www.swans.com/library/art15/letter158.html
> Letters to the Editor
> 
>                                            # # # # #
> 
> Please, consider supporting our co-operative work financially. See 
> http://www.swans.com/about/donate.html
> 
> Swans (aka Swans Commentary), ISSN: 1554-4915, is a bi-weekly non-
> commercial ad-free Web-only magazine which provides original content to
> its readers. We encourage pulp publications to republish Swans' Work in
> print format. Please contact the publisher at <aymery AT ix.netcom.com>.
> Please, do not repost Swans' Work on the Web and other mailing lists:
> "Hypertext" links to any pages of Swans.com are authorized; however,
> republication of any part of this site, inlining, mirroring, and framing
> are expressly prohibited. We welcome your comments and suggestions. When
> writing to Swans, please indicate your first and last name as well as your
> city and state (country) of residence.
> 
> You are receiving this E-mail notification for you have expressed your
> interest in Swans and the work of its team. If you wish not to receive
> these short notifications, simply reply to this E-mail (delete the
> content) and enter the word REMOVE in the subject line. We do NOT share
> your E-mail address with anyone.
> 
> Cordially,
> Gilles d'Aymery
> --
> Swans
> 
> "Hungry man, reach for the book: It is a weapon."  B. Brecht
> 


From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Sun Feb  8 17:23:08 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 19:23:08 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] President  said to be questioning Afghanistan "surge"
Message-ID: <51154D915F4F46778209536704328CC8@office1pc>


Following, in lieu of an introduction, are the introductory comments of
Professor Mark Jensen of the Snow-News list and United for Peace of Pierce
County, who does an excellent job of educating this little circle and quite
a few beyond about aspects of world events and crises. (One difference: I
thought the Times article today on Karzai was in many ways a cover-up for
the Afghan "leader." -- Fred

[The *Times* of London reported Sunday that "The Pentagon was set to
announce the deployment of 17,000 extra soldiers and marines last week but
Robert Gates, the defense secretary, postponed the decision after questions
from Obama."[1]  --  

Sarah Baxter and Michael Smith said that "Obama has demanded that American
defense chiefs review their strategy in Afghanistan before going ahead with
a troop surge."  --  They said that he was "concerned by a lack of strategy
at his first meeting with Gates and the U.S. joint chiefs of staff last
month in 'the tank,' the secure conference room in the Pentagon," and
British leaders are said to share the concern.  --  

In suggesting that Obama is raising questions about "the endgame," Baxter
and Smith went much further than an account published two days earlier by
Reuters that cited "officials who spoke on condition of anonymity" and said
that there was "a debate within the Obama administration about the timing of
the deployment" but that the Pentagon "was still on track to send three
additional combat units to Afghanistan by midsummer."[2]  --  

On Sunday, the *New York Times* published a front-page profile of Afghan
President Hamid Karzi that portrayed him as unreliable, ineffective,
unpopular both at home and in Washington, D.C., and corrupt.[3]  --Mark]

http://www.ufppc.org/content/view/8374/

1.

World news

OBAMA PUTS BRAKES ON AFGHAN SURGE
By Sarah Baxter and Michael Smith

Times of London
February 8, 2009

www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article5683681.ece


President Barack Obama has demanded that American defense chiefs review
their strategy in Afghanistan before going ahead with a troop surge.

There is concern among senior Democrats that the military is preparing to
send up to 30,000 extra troops without a coherent plan or exit strategy.

The Pentagon was set to announce the deployment of 17,000 extra soldiers and
marines last week but Robert Gates, the defense secretary, postponed the
decision after questions from Obama.

The president was concerned by a lack of strategy at his first meeting with
Gates and the U.S. joint chiefs of staff last month in "the tank,"
the secure conference room in the Pentagon.  He asked:  "What's the
endgame?" and did not receive a convincing answer.

Larry Korb, a defense expert at the Center for American Progress, a
Washington think tank, said:  "Obama is exactly right.  Before he agrees to
send 30,000 troops, he wants to know what the mission and the endgame is."

Obama promised an extra 7,000-10,000 troops during the election campaign,
but the military has inflated its demands.  Leading Democrats fear
Afghanistan could become Obama's "Vietnam quagmire."

If the surge goes ahead, the military intend to limit the mission to
fighting the Taliban and Al-Qaeda and leave democracy building and
reconstruction to NATO allies and civilians from the State Department and
other agencies.

The United States has been pushing Britain to send several thousand more
troops but there is just as much disagreement and confusion among British
defense chiefs over the long-term aim.  Gordon Brown is set to receive a
full briefing this week.

General Sir Richard Dannatt, the army chief who will step down this summer,
has insisted that troops need a rest and believes he can send only one
battlegroup, senior defense sources said.

General Sir David Richards, his successor, believes that the two extra
battlegroups the Americans have asked for is the minimum the U.K. should
send, the sources said.

2.

U.S. ON TRACK FOR AFGHAN TROOP DEPLOYMENTS -- PENTAGON

Reuters
February 6, 2008

http://wire.antiwar.com/2009/02/06/us-on-track-for-afghan-troop-deployments-
pentagon/

WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon said Friday it was still on track to send three
additional combat units to Afghanistan by midsummer, despite a debate within
the Obama administration about the timing of the deployment.

President Barack Obama had been widely expected to approve as early as this
week a plan to deploy up to 17,000 combat troops as part of an anticipated
buildup that could nearly double the U.S. force in Afghanistan to about
60,000 troops over the next 12 to 18 months.

The additional forces are needed to combat an intensifying insurgency by the
Taliban and other militant groups.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has spoken publicly about sending two
additional combat units by the end of spring and a third by midsummer.

"That is still the goal," Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman told reporters.

There are currently 36,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, including 17,000 who
operate as part of a 50,000-strong NATO force.

But officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the plan for
Afghanistan was still being debated in the White House National Security
Council, where it has come under scrutiny at a time when the Obama
administration is also considering options for withdrawing forces from Iraq
where there are 144,000 U.S. troops.

The Obama administration is separately conducting a wide-ranging review of
U.S. strategy in Afghanistan.

Pentagon officials say the expected buildup in Afghanistan would have to be
coordinated with the drawdown of forces from Iraq because of the strains
both conflicts have placed on the structure of the U.S. military.

"We need to get troops to Afghanistan soon because the spring fighting
season begins in April.  But there has been concern that a large initial
deployment could force their hand in Iraq," said one official familiar with
the debate.

Pentagon officials have provided Obama with a set of options for withdrawing
U.S. forces from Iraq, including one that keeps to the 16-month timetable
for the drawdown of combat troops that was his campaign centerpiece.

But no decisions on Iraq have been made and the ongoing debate has led to
speculation the initial Afghan deployment had been delayed, an assertion the
Pentagon was quick to reject.

"You're looking for something that's not there yet," Whitman told reporters.
"I don't see this as a postponing of anything.  This is not on a particular
timeline."

"We're certainly not in a window that endangers that desired goal at this
point," he said.

Whitman said U.S. military planners could deploy forces to Afghanistan
without drawing down in Iraq but added that could require the unwelcome
option of reducing the time at home between combat missions, which the
Pentagon wants to avoid.

"There's any number of force management tools that you can use to maintain
the level of effort, if you decided to hold in one (theater) and increase in
the other.  Some of those options aren't particularly attractive,"
Whitman said.

(Reporting by David Morgan; Editing by Peter Cooney)

Source: Reuters North American News Service

3.

World

Asia Pacific

AFGHAN LEADER FINDS HIMSELF HERO NO MORE By Dexter Filkins

New York Times
February 8, 2009

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/08/world/asia/08karzai.html

KABUL, Afghanistan -- A foretaste of what would be in store for President
Hamid Karzai after the election of a new American administration came last
February, when Joseph R. Biden Jr., then a senator, sat down to a formal
dinner at the palace during a visit here.

Between platters of lamb and rice, Mr. Biden and two other American senators
questioned Mr. Karzai about corruption in his government, which, by many
estimates, is among the worst in the world.  Mr. Karzai assured Mr. Biden
and the other senators that there was no corruption at all and that, in any
case, it was not his fault.

The senators gaped in astonishment.  After 45 minutes, Mr. Biden threw down
his napkin and stood up.

"This dinner is over," Mr. Biden announced, according to one of the people
in the room at the time.  And the three senators walked out, long before the
appointed time.

Today, of course, Mr. Biden is the vice president.

The world has changed for Mr. Karzai, and for Afghanistan, too.  A White
House favorite -- a celebrity in flowing cape and dark gray fez -- in each
of the seven years that he has led this country since the fall of the
Taliban, Mr. Karzai now finds himself not so favored at all.  Not by
Washington, and not by his own.

In the White House, President Obama said he regarded Mr. Karzai as
unreliable and ineffective.  Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said
he presided over a "narco-state."  The Americans making Afghan policy,
worried that the war is being lost, are vowing to bypass Mr.
Karzai and deal directly with the governors in the countryside.

At home, Mr. Karzai faces a widening insurgency and a population that blames
him for the manifest lack of economic progress and the corrupt officials
that seem to stand at every doorway of his government.  His face, which once
adorned the walls of tea shops across the country, is today much less
visible.

Now, perhaps crucially, an election looms.  Mr. Karzai says he will ask the
voters to return him to the palace for another five-year term.  The election
is set for Aug. 20, after what promises to be a violent and eventful summer.
In a poll commissioned by a group of private Afghans, 85 percent of those
surveyed said they intended to vote for someone other than Mr. Karzai.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration will have to decide what it wants from
Mr. Karzai as it tries to make good on its promise to reverse the course of
the war.  Or whether it wants him at all.

With the insurgency rising, corruption soaring and opium blooming across the
land, it perhaps is not surprising that so many Afghans, and so many in
Washington, see President Karzai's removal as a precondition for reversing
the country's downward surge.

"Under President Karzai, we have gone from a better situation to a good
situation to a not-so-bad situation to a bad situation -- and now are going
to worse," said Abdullah, a former foreign minister in Mr. Karzai's
government who may now challenge him for the presidency (and who, like many
Afghans, has only one name).  "That is the trend.

"So let us say Karzai stays in power through the summer and that nothing
serious happens and then he wins re-election," Dr. Abdullah said.  "Then
there will be two scenarios, and only two scenarios -- a rapid collapse or a
slow unraveling."

People close to Mr. Karzai say the man is exhausted, wary of his enemies and
worried for his physical safety.  He feels embattled and underappreciated,
they say, but is utterly determined, in spite of it all, to run again and
win.  In recent weeks, the growing American dissatisfaction with Mr. Karzai,
coupled with a simmering frustration among Afghans over what they regard as
the reckless killing of civilians by American forces, has prompted
extraordinary reactions from Mr. Karzai.

At a news conference on Tuesday at his marble-floored palace, Mr. Karzai
appeared side-by-side with Ban Ki-moon, the United Nations secretary
general.  Mr. Karzai wore his signature outfit of fez and cape, but his
visage was wan and slack.  Asked by an Afghan reporter about his relations
with American leaders, Mr. Karzai sprang to life, accusing unnamed people in
the American government of trying to "pressure" him to stay silent over the
deaths of Afghan civilians in attacks by Americans.

"Our demands are clear -- to stop the civilian casualties, the searching of
Afghan homes, and the arresting Afghans," Mr. Karzai said of the Americans.
"And of course, the Americans pressured us to be quiet and to make us
retreat from our demands.  But that is impossible.  Afghanistan and its
president are not going to retreat from their demands."

Mr. Karzai did not touch on larger frustrations, which Afghan and Western
officials here say he harbors, about the overall American effort, namely,
the relegation of Afghanistan to second-tier status after the invasion of
Iraq.  Many Afghans and Western officials here believe that it was the Iraq
war, more than any other factor, that deprived Mr. Karzai of the resources
he needed to help the Afghan state stand on its own, and to prevent the
resurgence of the Taliban that Mr. Obama is now vowing to contain.


Yet for all the doubts about Mr. Karzai -- and for all the strains he labors
under -- he remains by far the strongest politician in the country.
 He commands the resources of the Afghan state, including the army and the
police, and billions of dollars in American and other aid that flows into
the treasury.
[snip] Full: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/08/world/asia/08karzai.html






From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Sun Feb  8 17:46:39 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 19:46:39 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Supply-line problems critical for imperialists in
	Afghanistan
Message-ID: <4E873EDA04FB40DBB4B78206607DCD72@office1pc>

http://www.juancole.com/

Sunday, February 08, 2009
Obama May Postpone Afghan Surge; 
Severe Problems in Supply Routes Afflict Aghanistan War Effort 

While the attention of the US public and the news media here has been
consumed (understandably enough) by the congressional debate over the
economic stimulus plan, America's war in Afghanistan has nearly collapsed
because of logistical problems.

First, the Taliban destroyed a crucial bridge west of Peshawar over which
NATO trucks traveled to the Khyber Pass and into Afghanistan. 75% of US and
NATO supplies for the war effort in Afghanistan are offloaded at the
Pakistani port of Karachi and sent by truck through the Khyber Pass into
Afghanistan. Then the Taliban burned 10 trucks carrying such materiel, to
demonstrate their control over the supply route of their enemy. The Taliban
can accomplish these breathtaking operations against NATO in Pakistan in
large part because Pakistani police and military forces are unwilling to
risk much to help distant foreign America beat up their cousins. That
reluctance is unlikely to change with any rapidity.

Well, you might say, there are other ways to get supplies to Afghanistan.
But remember it is a landlocked country. Its neighbors with borders on the
state are Pakistan, China, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan;
Kyrgyzstan is close enough to offer an air route. Pakistan is the most
convenient route, and it may be at an end. China's short border is up in the
Himalayas and not useful for transport. Tajikistan is more remote than
Afghanistan. The US does not have the kind of good relations with Iran that
would allow use of that route for military purposes. A Turkmenistan route
would depend on an Iran route, so that is out, too.

 

So what is left? Uzbekistan and (by air) Kyrgyzstan, that's what. 

More bad news. Kyrgyzstan has made a final decision to deny the US further
use of the Manas military base, from which the US brought 500 tons of
materiel into Afghanistan every month. It is charged that Russia used its
new oil and gas wealth to bribe Kyrgyzstan to exclude the US, returning the
area to its former status as a Russian sphere of influence. (Presumably this
would also be payback for US and NATO expansion on Russia's European and
Caucasian borders).

Then there was one. The US has opened negotiations with Uzbekistan, which
had given Washington use of a base 2002-2005 but ended that deal after it
massacred protesters at Andizhon in 2005. Some Uzbeks charged that the US
had promoted an "Orange Revolution" style uprising similar to the one in the
Ukraine against Uzbek stongman Islam Karimov. But even if the US could get a
stable relationship with Karimov, the Uzbeks are not offering to be the
transit route for military materiel, only for nonlethal food, medicine and
other items.

In the light of these logistical problems (which are absolutely central to
the prospects for success of the Afghanistan War), and given that no clear,
attainable, finite mission in Afghanistan has ever been enunciated by US
civil or military leaders, it is no wonder that President Barack Obama is
reported to be putting the "Afghan surge" or the sending of 30,000 new
troops to Afghanistan on hold until a clearer mission can be formulated.
TheTimes of London writes:


' The president was concerned by a lack of strategy at his first meeting
with Gates and the US joint chiefs of staff last month in "the tank", the
secure conference room in the Pentagon. He asked: "What's the endgame?" and
did not receive a convincing answer. ' 


and adds, 'Leading Democrats fear Afghanistan could become Obama's "Vietnam
quagmire".'

This is a warning that I have voiced, in Salon.

And make sure to read Tom Engelhardt's essential essay on Afghanistan as the
graveyard of empires.

Aljazeera English reports on the blocking of the supply routes in Pakistan
used by NATO to send materiel to Afghanistan, by Taliban in Pakistan. Just a
note on the high quality both of the report and the discussion, which
includes former State Department South Asia analyst Marvin Weinbaum, former
head of the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence Lt Gen (Ret.) Asad
Durrani, and former Afghan/Taliban ambassador to Pakistan Mulla Abdul Salam
Zaeef. You would almost never get this range of opinion in expert comment on
such an issue on American corporate news. Aljazeera's philosophy, of
allowing all sides of an issue to be heard, seems to me far superior to the
American approach of having a US centrist debate a US far-right conservative
about foreign policy (typically even an American left voice is absent over
here).





From markalause at gmail.com  Sun Feb  8 17:57:35 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 19:57:35 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] President said to be questioning Afghanistan "surge"
In-Reply-To: <51154D915F4F46778209536704328CC8@office1pc>
References: <51154D915F4F46778209536704328CC8@office1pc>
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0902081657m6dca2ff8rdff1947ed5cd81b1@mail.gmail.com>

This could be a decisive development, couldn't it?

I've expected very little impact on US foreign policy of an Obama
presidency, though perhaps an FDR-like unwillingness to pay the cost
of the sweeping interventionism of his predecessors.  If he backs off
on Afghanistan, it will have very serious implications on just about
every level imaginable.

ML


From anthony.boynton at gmail.com  Sun Feb  8 19:27:10 2009
From: anthony.boynton at gmail.com (Anthony Boynton)
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 21:27:10 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] How much is enough?
Message-ID: <7b8a676d0902081827s3a73ebf8od659602223a58509@mail.gmail.com>

How much is enough?



By Alan Freeman, University of Manitoba



7th February, 2009



How much is needed to get us out of the crisis? From the historical
evidence, a lot more than we've seen so far.



Obama's stimulus, at five per cent of GDP, outstrips all others in the
Western world ? which on its own sheds doubt on them. Yet even this may not
be enough.



All but the willfully stupid now know this is no 'ordinary' recession.
Downturns like 1974 pale into insignificance beside it.  Only two crises in
modern history  ? 1929 and 1893 ? compare with it. With few exceptions,
economists in Bush's inimitable words 'misunderestimated' this from day one.



It is driven, like those of '29 and '93, by a failure of investment, in turn
caused by a system-wide crisis of profitability. When the return on capital
sinks to present levels, investors simply retreat from productive investment
into ever more irrational speculation.



This occurs rarely, but when it does, the conventional belief that 'the
market always works' is worse than useless. One must be guided not by
doctrine but the facts. It is an open secret that Obama has expressed more
interest in the 1933 US 'New Deal' than in the views of his closest economic
advisors. So let's take a look at it.



Who blessed America?



By 1933, US unemployment reached the unprecedented level of 25%. It's not
hard to see why: capital stopped investing. By 1932, private investment of
all types had fallen to the all-time low of 2.2 per cent of GDP, from 15.9
per cent only three years earlier.



An investment failure goes beyond lack of demand. You can cut taxes and
interest rates as far as you like, but unless investors put their money
where their large mouths are, the economy goes nowhere fast. The state has
to step in directly. In words used by Keynes but conveniently ignored by his
recent converts, it must 'socialise investment'. But on what scale? Like
Obama ? but two years too late ? the New Deal hiked state spending by five
per cent of GDP, cutting unemployment to 16 per cent until the
mini-recession of 1937-38.



Cool ? but not a recovery. The 'golden age' boom of 1942-1968 finally saw
the back of the depression. It dates not from the New Deal, but the War.
Between 1938 and 1944, government spending trebled, approaching half of GDP
? compared with a miserable three per cent from private investors. And when
the war was over, state investment stayed at double its prewar level despite
repeated foolish attempts to cut it back. This was what it took,
economically, to 'solve' the crisis.



It's common to speak as if the war was 'economically abnormal'. Well, so is
the present situation. So here's an 'uncomfortable truth': before the US
economy saw a meaningful recovery, the state took over half its economy,
supplanting private investment for three years, and following that, retained
both investments and spending which were double their prewar levels.



And it happened in wartime, when private investors accepted measures they
would not tolerate in peacetime. That's food for thought. It means the way
out of the crisis involves something never seen before ? wartime state
involvement on a peacetime basis.



In simultaneous polls in the USA and Canada, two-thirds of those interviewed
said that they wanted direct state spending instead of tax cuts ? a historic
shift of opinion. North American economists haven't caught up and, according
to the Wall Street Journal, are still arguing for tax cuts ? which just
means they want the poor to pay. This is so last Millenium. As France and
Iceland show, it won't play in Peoria.



Maybe it's time the politicians stopped listening to their economic
ill-advisors, and started listening to their own people ? and the lessons of
history. Capital, move over. Public, move in.

From dan.dimaggio at gmail.com  Sun Feb  8 20:39:09 2009
From: dan.dimaggio at gmail.com (Dan DiMaggio)
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 21:39:09 -0600
Subject: [Marxism] Karl Marx on Front Cover of European ed. of Time mag
Message-ID: <b71770d0902081939j6dd69c94te8533eb60b9d7f98@mail.gmail.com>

Here's an article I wrote on Marx's appearance on the cover of Time Magazine
that I thought some people on this list might want to check out:

http://www.socialistalternative.org/news/article11.php?id=1025

And another article on how the interest in socialism is surging across the
globe: http://www.socialistalternative.org/news/article22.php?id=990

Thanks to all the posts on this list, they have been helpful in writing
these articles.

Dan

From stuartmunckton at gmail.com  Sun Feb  8 23:20:36 2009
From: stuartmunckton at gmail.com (Stuart Munckton)
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 17:20:36 +1100
Subject: [Marxism] Venezuela: Democracy, revolution and term limits
Message-ID: <2c6145850902082220g45fb8191x41f6f2bf7068b979@mail.gmail.com>

Venezuela: Democracy, revolution and term limits

Chris Kerr, Caracas
6 February 2009

http://www.greenleft.org.au/2009/782/40274

"The
reform is aimed as a personal project. This is neither revolution nor
socialism, but personal ambition", argued Federico Black of the student
organisation Furthering the Country to the virulently anti-Chavez
Venezuelan daily El Universal.

Black was referring to an amendment to Venezuela's constitution that
will be voted on in a referendum on February 15 to remove limits on the
number of times an elected official can stand for election to a public
office. If passed, it would allow President Hugo Chavez to stand in the
presidential elections in 2012.

According to Black, "We have been educating the public about why
you should vote 'no'. The point at issue is to explain to ordinary
people and the whole country that indefinite reelection is
anti-democratic and a mere personal desire ?"

Thus goes the constant and repetitive theme of the corporate
media's coverage of the referendum campaign, hammering the same line as
the US-funded right-wing opposition.

President for life?

It misleadingly characterises the proposed reform as "indefinite
re-election", implying that the vote is about
whether or not to make "Chavez president for life".

All the amendment would do is remove existing restrictions on
standing for election, Chavez, or any other incumbent, would still be
required to actually win the popular vote.

As well, Venezuela's constitution includes the profoundly
democratic right to hold a referendum on whether or not to recall any
elected official from halfway through their term if 20% of their
electors sign a petition calling for one.

The opposition called a recall referendum on Chavez in 2004, which he won.

In response, the Bolivarian government has pointed out that many states
throughout the world do not have term limits for
their heads of state, without this being considered anti-democratic.

Chavez has repeatedly stressed that he does "not have any plan to
be president for life. That would be a violation of the constitution
[and also] the political system. That would be the end of alternative
governments."

The referendum has become the latest battle in Venezuela's intense
class struggle. The Bolivarian revolution led by Chavez, which has
sought to implement policies to empower the poor that have resulted in
poverty rates halving, has been met by powerful resistance from the old
elite, backed by the US government, and much of the middle class.

The campaign around the referendum has involved large rallies by
supporters of the revolution among the poor, with 100,000 grassroots
committees established to campaign for a "yes" vote. The "no" campaign
has been marked by the violent protests and riots by middle-class
students that have become a hallmark of the opposition.

According to polling companies linked to the opposition
(Datanalysis) and to the government (IVAD, GIS), despite differing
statistics and conclusions, two distinct trends are evident in all
polls. The first is that the majority of Venezuelans support the
amendment (varying from 51%-55%) and the second is that the support for
the amendment has grown significantly since the debate over it
commenced late last year.

The actual result will most likely depend on the voter turnout.

However, the question still remains, not only among conservative
commentators, but progressive as well: Is the referendum about
entrenching Chavez in power permanently?

To answer this question, we need to place the question of term
limits in Venezuela's current situation. Venezuela is currently
experiencing a revolutionary upheaval, as the poor majority and working
people seek to overcome crippling poverty and underdevelopment imposed
by a corrupt elite that allowed multinationals to drain the oil-rich
nation of its wealth.

Popular power

Central to this struggle from its beginning has been, in the words
of Chavez, the need for "the sovereign people [to] transform itself
into the object and the subject of power. This option is not negotiable
for revolutionaries."

The desperate actions of the Venezuelan oligarchy in response to
the initial reforms implemented by the Chavez government, including a
failed military coup and bosses lock-out in 2002 and 2003, made it
clear that a profound and far-reaching transformation of the entire
society from the bottom up was required in order for the process of
change to advance.

The actions of the poor and workers in mobilising on a massive
scale to defeat the attempts of the elite to overthrow the Chavez
government revealed that the motor-force of the process was the people
themselves.

In this sense, the revolution has achieved much in the ten years
since Chavez was first sworn in as president. Millions of people have
become involved in politics for the
first time and are involved in running the social missions
(community run social programs) and other organisations from the ground
up.

In particular, thousands of communal councils, grassroots bodies
run democratically by groups of up to 400 families, are emerging as the
base of popular power. These are promoted as potential building blocks
for a new democratic and decentralised state ? through which people
learn to govern ? as part of constructing a socialist system.

Also, the mass-based United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV),
with 5.8 million aspiring members, has emerged as the political
instrument that can unite the previously fragmented revolutionary
movement.

But, inevitably, the Bolivarian revolution was born with defects
inherited from the very society it is attempting to transform.
Populism, bureaucracy and corruption still pervade Venezuelan politics.

And while those fighting for justice in Venezuela are united in
various organisational structures, these structures are still new and
the unity is fragile.

It has been the personal leadership role of Chavez ? with his
unique connection to the impoverished majority and approval ratings far
higher than any other Chavista figure and even the PSUV ? that has been
crucial to inspiring and mobilising millions.

Chavez's role has been essential to maintaining unity between the
often fragmented forces for progressive change, while at the same time
pushing for "revolution within the revolution" ? that is, the
overcoming of the revolution's internal problems such as corruption and
bureaucracy.

Chavez has used his connection with the masses to constantly seek to educate
and radicalise, turning his weekly Alo Presidente TV show into a "socialist
school".

International role

Chavez's role transcends Venezuela's borders, as he has sought both
to promote pro-people integration in the region and used international
forum's to give voice to the world's oppressed.

This has brought Chavez into confrontation with US imperialism, however such
actions have given Chavez massive moral authority.

It is true that it can not be considered a strength of the
revolutionary process that so much importance is attached to an
individual leader, no matter what their personal qualities. There is
the need to develop a broad-based collective leadership.

However, this requires time to develop and is one of the key aims of the
PSUV, which only formed properly last year.

The role of Chavez must be considered in the context of the urgent
need to deepen the revolutionary process in Venezuela and Latin
America, especially in the context of the global economic crisis.

At this point in time, Chavez's role in using his immense authority
to promote radical solutions to the crisis and consciously mobilise
millions to that end is indispensable.

US imperialism and its local agents in Venezuela are fully aware of
this, as they are of the danger of allowing the process to develop in
order to create a collective leadership with the authority currently
invested in Chavez.

This explains the vehemence of the "no" campaign, not supposed
concerns about democracy. Such claims are laughable from an opposition
that in 2002 overthrew the elected government and installed one of
Venezuela's richest men as president ? before a mass uprising restored
Chavez.

The Venezuelan people have the right to determine their political
system and decide for themselves who can or cannot stand for election ?
this right to self-determination is the most relevant democratic
principle at stake in the referendum.

From: International News, Green Left Weekly issue #782 11 February 2009.
"It is not possible to re-found the capitalist system; it would be like
trying to sail on the Titanic when it's laying on the ocean floor." ? Hugo
Chavez

-- 
"The free market is perfectly natural... do you think I am some kind of
dummy?" - Jarvis Cocker

"Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious" - Oscar Wilde

From glparramatta at greenleft.org.au  Mon Feb  9 00:23:04 2009
From: glparramatta at greenleft.org.au (glparramatta)
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 18:23:04 +1100
Subject: [Marxism] What's new at Links: Climate & bushfires; boycott Israel;
 Philippines new left party; WSF; Canada; Castro on Obama;
 British strike debate; Venezuela & Israel
Message-ID: <498FD9D8.1010402@greenleft.org.au>

What's new at Links: Climate and bushfires; boycott Israel; Philippines 
new left party; WSF; Canada; Castro on Obama; British strike debate; 
Venezuela & Israel

* * *
Subscribe free to Links - International Journal of Socialist Renewal - 
at http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373

Visit and bookmark http://links.org.au and add it to your RSS feed 
(http://links.org.au/rss.xml). If you would like us to
consider an article, please send it to links at dsp.org.au

*Please pass on to anybody you think will be interested in /Links/.

* * *


    Meltdown, fires as climate emergency hits Australia: Urgent action
    required <http://links.org.au/node/898>

By *Katherine Bradstreet*
Melbourne, February 7, 2009 -- The heatwave across south-eastern 
Australia in recent weeks has given a hint of what we can expect as 
global temperatures continue to rise: black-outs, fatalities and 
transport chaos as privatised infrastructure fails.
Many are in mourning as bushfires have devastated rural Victoria, with 
the death toll passing triple figures and more than 750 homes destroyed. 
The country town of Marysville has been erased from the map. Several 
other towns have all but been destroyed.
Even before the bushfire catastrophe, South Australia and Victoria had 
seen a sharp increase in deaths as a result of the heatwave, with 
Adelaide's central morgue quite literally overflowing --- the "excess" 
cadavers were stored temporarily in a refrigerated freight container.

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/898>


    South Africa: Victory for workers' solidarity as Israeli ship sneaks
    out of Durban still loaded <http://links.org.au/node/896>

*Congress of South African Trade Unions* and *Palestine Solidarity 
Committee* (South Africa)
[See http://links.org.au/node/888 for more background information.]
February 6, 2009 -- The Congress of South African Trade Union (COSATU) 
is pleased to announce that its members, dock workers belonging to the 
South African Transport and Allied Workers Union (SATAWU), achieved a 
victory last night when they stood firm by their decision not to offload 
the /Johanna Russ/, a ship that was carrying Israeli goods to South 
Africa. This, despite threats to COSATU members from sections of the 
pro-Israel lobby, and despite severe provocation.

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/896>


    New left party -- Power of the Masses Party -- formed in Philippines
    <http://links.org.au/node/893>

/Interview with *Sonny Melencio*, chairperson of Partido Lakas ng Masa 
of the Philippines. Conducted by *Peter Boyle* for /Green Left Weekly/ 
and /Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal/in Manila on 
February 1, 2009.
/

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/893>


    Sydney, April 10-12 (Easter), 2009: World at a Crossroads - Fighting
    for Socialism in the 21st Century <http://links.org.au/node/756>

World At a Crossroads:

Fighting for Socialism in the 21st Century

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/756>


    World Social Forum: `We won't pay for the crisis. The rich must
    pay!' <http://links.org.au/node/897>

Declaration of the *Assembly of Social Movements* at the World Social 
Forum, January 27-February 1, 2009, Belem, Brazil.

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/897>


    Spain: Video -- Anti-apartheid protesters disrupt Israeli basketball
    team's game <http://links.org.au/node/895>

Barcelona, February 5, 2009 -- Protesters opposed to Israel's apartheid 
policies and its atrocities in Gaza chanted slogans and waved 
Palestinian flags during a basketball match between Maccabi Tel Aviv and 
Barcelona on Thursday, February 5, 2009. Despite tight police security, 
protesters managed to disrupt the game by running onto the court before 
being dragged away by aggressive cops and security guards. Tel Aviv was 
thrashed 85-65 by Barcelona.
Boicot del partit de b?squet Bar?a -- Maccabi de Tel Aviv. Palau 
Blaugrana. 5 de febrer de 2009. Boicot a Israel. Solidaritat amb Palestina!!

Watch at http://links.org.au/node/895


    The capitalist crash and the challenges facing socialists in Canada
    <http://links.org.au/node/894>

By *Roger Annis and John Riddell*
/[Roger Annis will be a featured guest at the /World at a Crossroads 
/conference, to be held in Sydney, Australia, on April 10-12, 2009, 
organised by the Democratic Socialist Perspective, Resistance and /Green 
Left Weekly/. Visit http://www.worldATACrossroads.org 
<http://www.worldatacrossroads.org/> for full agenda and to book your 
tickets.]/
The first casualty of the financial collapse has been the claim that 
"there is no alternative" to unrestricted free market capitalism. The 
imperialist governments are bankrolling imperilled banks and industrial 
conglomerates with immense bailouts --- an estimated $5.1 trillion in 
the US alone by November 2008 --- while preparing "stimulus" packages 
aimed at restoring financial markets.

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/894>


    San Francisco trade unionists support boycott of apartheid Israel
    <http://links.org.au/node/892>

San Francisco trade unionists support boycott of apartheid Israel, 
protest in soldarity with the Palestinian people, January 10, 2009.


Watch at http://links.org.au/node/892


    Australia: Climate Summit unites new environment movement
    <http://links.org.au/node/891>

By *Simon Butler*, Canberra

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/891>


    Fidel Castro: Contradictions between Obama's politics and ethics
    <http://links.org.au/node/890>

By *Fidel Castro Ruz*
February 4, 2009 -- A few days ago I referred to some of Obama's ideas 
which point to his role in a system that denies every principle of 
justice. I'd rather address some questions of many that could be raised 
and that the new President of the United States should answer.

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/890>


    Chavismo: Christian, pro-Muslim, pro-Jewish and anti-Nazi
    <http://links.org.au/node/889>

By *Roy Chaderton Matos*, Venezuela's ambassador to the Organization of 
American States.
January 30, 2009 -- Watching television footage of one of the necessary 
and legitimate protests against the Israeli Embassy in Caracas, I 
spotted a lone sign with a slogan that left me thunderstruck.  The 
slogan was something like: "We condemn Hitler for not having completed 
his work of extermination..."
The frightening message, totally alien to the Bolivarian process and the 
Chavista commitment to liberty, democracy, equality and social justice, 
shows that, every now and then in our struggles and protests, "loose 
cannons" come dog us and that we have to detect them and neutralise them 
and expel them like any foreign body.

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/889>


    South African dockworkers announce ban on Israeli ship; Palestinians
    salute decision <http://links.org.au/node/888>

FREE PALESTINE! ISOLATE APARTHEID ISRAEL!
February 3, 2009 -- In a historic development for South Africa, South 
African dock workers have announced their determination not to offload a 
ship from Israel that is scheduled to dock in Durban on Sunday, February 
8, 2009. This follows the decision by COSATU to strengthen the campaign 
in South Africa for boycotts, divestment and sanctions against apartheid 
Israel.

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/888>


    `For international solidarity between workers' -- British left
    debates Lindsey oil refinery strike wave (updated Feb. 7)
    <http://links.org.au/node/887>

/A range of views from the British and Scottish left on the strike wave 
that erupted at the Lindsey oil refinery and rapidly spread across the 
country. Statements from Socialist Resistance, Scottish Socialist Party, 
Socialist Workers Party, Respect MP George Galloway, the Socialist 
Party, the /Morning Star/, /Lenin's Tomb/ blog and the /Socialist Unity/ 
blog./

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/887>

* * *

Links seeks to promote the international exchange of information, 
experience of struggle, theoretical analysis and views of political 
strategy and tactics within the international left. It is a forum for 
open and constructive dialogue between active socialists coming from 
different political traditions. It seeks to bring together those in the 
international left who are opposed to neoliberal economic and social 
policies. It aims to promote the renewal of the socialist movement in 
the wake of the collapse of the bureaucratic model of "actually existing 
socialism" in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe.

ATTENTION: Sign up for regular ``what's new'' announcement emails at 
http://www.feedblitz.com/f/?Sub=343373


From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Mon Feb  9 02:25:30 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 04:25:30 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Krugman: The destructive center
Message-ID: <F735E53584E14442A60E5DF32A896BC2@office1pc>

Apparently food stamps took the chop, and medical assistance for the poor. 

I still the rather large assistance to unemployment compensation was the
real target of the "moderates." That's the meaning of the "moderate"
philosophy that money for working people is money wasted, and since it is
the rich who "create jobs," all money for "job creation" should go directly
to the rich, without any of it passing first through the hands of
economically irrelevant children or unemployed workers.

The idea that the producers of the commodity labor power, including
children, simply have nothing to do with "job creation" is partly a product
of the long reign of fictitious capital, in which money mysteriously
produces more money, with no apparent material intermediaries like workers
and machines and products of labor. This thinking is still very dominant in
bourgeois minds (including and perhaps especially the political class)
although it has taken a big hit in the "real economy."

Krugman's hopes for the Senate-House conference are misplaced, I suspect.
More likely as time passes from the latest panic-inducing job loss
announcement, the "moderates" will take the ax to unemployment insurance,
too. (Where my personal ox will be very much gored.)

Clearly there is substantial backing for this ax job on the "stimulus",
reflected in the strong support from the Washington Post, and the bipartisan
character of the "moderate" scum. It seems to me that sectors of the
bourgeoisie have become complacent, because no new giant breakdowns of
finance and trade have taken place for a couple months.

Their tendency may be to say: Why shouldn't we take full advantage of the
cyclical recession? Why should we worry about how deep it is? Wages,
including the social wage (services provided by the state to working people)
are not supposed to be increased but brutally slashed during such a
downturn. Let's get on with it!
Fred Feldman 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/09/opinion/09krugman.html

February 9, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist
The Destructive Center 
By PAUL KRUGMAN
What do you call someone who eliminates hundreds of thousands of American
jobs, deprives millions of adequate health care and nutrition, undermines
schools, but offers a $15,000 bonus to affluent people who flip their
houses?

A proud centrist. For that is what the senators who ended up calling the
tune on the stimulus bill just accomplished. 

Even if the original Obama plan - around $800 billion in stimulus, with a
substantial fraction of that total given over to ineffective tax cuts - had
been enacted, it wouldn't have been enough to fill the looming hole in the
U.S. economy, which the Congressional Budget Office estimates will amount to
$2.9 trillion over the next three years.

Yet the centrists did their best to make the plan weaker and worse.

One of the best features of the original plan was aid to cash-strapped state
governments, which would have provided a quick boost to the economy while
preserving essential services. But the centrists insisted on a $40 billion
cut in that spending.

The original plan also included badly needed spending on school
construction; $16 billion of that spending was cut. It included aid to the
unemployed, especially help in maintaining health care - cut. Food stamps -
cut. All in all, more than $80 billion was cut from the plan, with the great
bulk of those cuts falling on precisely the measures that would do the most
to reduce the depth and pain of this slump.

On the other hand, the centrists were apparently just fine with one of the
worst provisions in the Senate bill, a tax credit for home buyers. Dean
Baker of the Center for Economic Policy Research calls this the "flip your
house to your brother" provision: it will cost a lot of money while doing
nothing to help the economy.

All in all, the centrists' insistence on comforting the comfortable while
afflicting the afflicted will, if reflected in the final bill, lead to
substantially lower employment and substantially more suffering.

But how did this happen? I blame President Obama's belief that he can
transcend the partisan divide - a belief that warped his economic strategy.

After all, many people expected Mr. Obama to come out with a really strong
stimulus plan, reflecting both the economy's dire straits and his own
electoral mandate. 

Instead, however, he offered a plan that was clearly both too small and too
heavily reliant on tax cuts. Why? Because he wanted the plan to have broad
bipartisan support, and believed that it would. Not long ago administration
strategists were talking about getting 80 or more votes in the Senate. 

Mr. Obama's postpartisan yearnings may also explain why he didn't do
something crucially important: speak forcefully about how government
spending can help support the economy. Instead, he let conservatives define
the debate, waiting until late last week before finally saying what needed
to be said - that increasing spending is the whole point of the plan.

And Mr. Obama got nothing in return for his bipartisan outreach. Not one
Republican voted for the House version of the stimulus plan, which was, by
the way, better focused than the original administration proposal. 

In the Senate, Republicans inveighed against "pork" - although the wasteful
spending they claimed to have identified (much of it was fully justified)
was a trivial share of the bill's total. And they decried the bill's cost -
even as 36 out of 41 Republican senators voted to replace the Obama plan
with $3 trillion, that's right, $3 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years.

So Mr. Obama was reduced to bargaining for the votes of those centrists. And
the centrists, predictably, extracted a pound of flesh - not, as far as
anyone can tell, based on any coherent economic argument, but simply to
demonstrate their centrist mojo. They probably would have demanded that $100
billion or so be cut from anything Mr. Obama proposed; by coming in with
such a low initial bid, the president guaranteed that the final deal would
be much too small. 

Such are the perils of negotiating with yourself.

Now, House and Senate negotiators have to reconcile their versions of the
stimulus, and it's possible that the final bill will undo the centrists'
worst. And Mr. Obama may be able to come back for a second round. But this
was his best chance to get decisive action, and it fell short.

So has Mr. Obama learned from this experience? Early indications aren't
good. 

For rather than acknowledge the failure of his political strategy and the
damage to his economic strategy, the president tried to put a postpartisan
happy face on the whole thing. "Democrats and Republicans came together in
the Senate and responded appropriately to the urgency this moment demands,"
he declared on Saturday, and "the scale and scope of this plan is right." 

No, they didn't, and no, it isn't. 





From lueko.willms at t-online.de  Mon Feb  9 02:29:35 2009
From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (=?iso-8859-1?q?L=FCko_Willms?=)
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 10:29:35 +0100 (MEZ)
Subject: [Marxism] Muammar Ghaddafi, new AU president,
	defends Somalian "pirates"
Message-ID: <000.00e204007ff78f49.021@lws-media.de>


  Some lines out of an article in the Kenian newspaper "Daily Nation": 

> 
<http://www.nation.co.ke/News/africa/-/1066/525348/-/13rtrgiz/-/index.html
>
February 5, 2009:
-- quote ----------------------
The Libyan leader further said he believed that piracy was a way of counter 
defence against the greedy Western nations.

Col Gaddafi expressed the sentiments Thursday morning when he paid his 
first day official visit to African Union head quarter in Addis Ababa. He 
addressed AU officials and staff.

Col Gaddafi wore a colourful shirt decorated with Africa Union founding 
fathers portraits including Tanzanian Julius Nyerere, Ethiopian Haile Selassie, 
Kenyan Jomo Kenyatta, and Ghanaian Kwame Nkrumah.

During the inaugural tour, Col Gaddafi revealed his plan for the next seasons, 
saying he doesn't believe that Somalia piracy was a crime.

"It is a response to greedy Western nations, who invade and exploit Somalia's 
water resources illegally,'' he said.

"It is not a piracy, it is self defence. It is defending the Somalia children's 
food," Col Gaddafi argued.

He pointed out that some countries, particularly Western nations, were 
penetrating into a Somalia's sovereign water territory, against the 
international law .

European, the US and China fleets are entering in the sovereign Somalia 
territory, because Africa doesn't have strong and modern defence to push 
them back, Col Gaddafi said.

Nowadays, Somalis are reacting for justice and trying to defend their country 
against the unfair exploitation of resources, but Western countries have 
labelled it as piracy, Gaddafi explained.

The long-serving Libyan leader said he planned to convince other African 
leaders to claim compensation from colonial masters for their crimes and 
exploitation during the colonial era. 
----------- unquote -----------------

 See also "Under Gaddafi, Africa could explode" from the same newspaper at
 > 
<http://www.nation.co.ke/News/africa/-/1066/526676/-/13rt0pdz/-/index.ht
ml>
 
 

Comradely yours, 
L?ko Willms
Frankfurt, Germany
--------------------------------
visit http://www.mlwerke.de Marx, Engels, Luxemburg, Lenin, Trotzki in Ge

From lueko.willms at t-online.de  Mon Feb  9 02:22:04 2009
From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (=?iso-8859-1?q?L=FCko_Willms?=)
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 10:22:04 +0100 (MEZ)
Subject: [Marxism] Supply-line problems critical for imperialists
	inAfghanistan
In-Reply-To: <4E873EDA04FB40DBB4B78206607DCD72@office1pc>
References: <4E873EDA04FB40DBB4B78206607DCD72@office1pc>
Message-ID: <000.b8f90200bcf58f49.018@lws-media.de>

On Sun, 08 Feb 2009 19:46:39 -0500, Fred Feldman wrote:

  quoting Juan Cole: 

> While the attention of the US public and the news media here has been
> consumed (understandably enough) by the congressional debate over the
> economic stimulus plan, America's war in Afghanistan has nearly collapsed
> because of logistical problems.

   A recent article of the Stratfor (Strategic Forecast) geopolitician George 
Friedman may add some food for thought on this issue. Geopolitics, 
especially in the Stratfor version, thinks of the world as a collection of 
nations which try to dominate each other, but without any thought of the 
existence of several distinct and even opposed social classes whose struggle 
determines history. 

  According to what I know, the German occupation troops in Afghanistan 
move supplies also by rail via the Russian Federation, and there has been 
speculation that they would want to extend up to their Masar-i-Sharif camp 
the broad gauge rail line which crosses the border river Amu Darja at 
Heyratan
> 
<http://maps.google.de/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=de&geocode=&q=heyratan+
Friendship+bridge&sll=37.232515,67.40181&sspn=0.082278,0.164452&ie=UTF8
&ll=37.218847,67.404556&spn=0.082293,0.10746&t=h&z=13&lci=lmc:panorami
o>
which is said to extend 12 km into Afghanistan. The Russian Federation has 
also recently allowed the transport of military goods; in how far this is also 
done by Uzbekistan is unknown to me. 


published January 19, 2009:
------- cut ---------------------------
OBAMA ENTERS THE GREAT GAME

By George Friedman


U.S. President-elect Barack Obama will be sworn in on Tuesday as president 
of the United States. Candidate Obama said much about what he would do as 
president; now we will see what President Obama actually does. The most 
important issue Obama will face will be the economy, something he did not 
anticipate through most of his campaign. The first hundred days of his 
presidency thus will revolve around getting a stimulus package passed. But 
Obama also is now in the great game of global competition -- and in that 
game, presidents rarely get to set the agenda.

The major challenge he faces is not Gaza; the Israeli-Palestinian dispute is 
not one any U.S. president intervenes in unless he wants to experience pain. 
As we have explained, that is an intractable conflict to which there is no real 
solution. Certainly, Obama will fight being drawn into mediating the 
Israeli-Palestinian conflict during his first hundred days in office. He 
undoubtedly will send the obligatory Middle East envoy, who will spend time 
with all the parties, make suitable speeches and extract meaningless 
concessions from all sides. This envoy will establish some sort of process to 
which everyone will cynically commit, knowing it will go nowhere. Such a 
mission is not involvement -- it is the alternative to involvement, and the 
reason presidents appoint Middle East envoys. Obama can avoid the Gaza 
crisis, and he will do so. 


Obama's Two Unavoidable Crises

The two crises that cannot be avoided are Afghanistan and Russia. First, the 
situation in Afghanistan is tenuous for a number of reasons, and it is not a 
crisis that Obama can avoid decisions on. Obama has said publicly that he 
will decrease his commitments in Iraq and increase them in Afghanistan. He 
thus will have more troops fighting in Afghanistan. The second crisis emerged 
from a decision by Russia to cut off natural gas to Ukraine, and the resulting 
decline in natural gas deliveries to Europe. This one obviously does not 
affect the United States directly, but even after flows are restored, it affects 
the Europeans greatly. Obama therefore comes into office with three 
interlocking issues: Afghanistan, Russia and Europe. In one sense, this is a 
single issue -- and it is not one that will wait. 

Obama clearly intends to follow Gen. David Petraeus' lead in Afghanistan. The 
intention is to increase the number of troops in Afghanistan, thereby 
intensifying pressure on the Taliban and opening the door for negotiations 
with the militant group or one of its factions. Ultimately, this would see the 
inclusion of the Taliban or Taliban elements in a coalition government. 
Petraeus pursued this strategy in Iraq with Sunni insurgents, and it is the 
likely strategy in Afghanistan. 

But the situation in Afghanistan has been complicated by the situation in 
Pakistan. Roughly three-quarters of U.S. and NATO supplies bound for 
Afghanistan are delivered to the Pakistani port of Karachi and trucked over 
the border to Afghanistan. Most fuel used by Western forces in Afghanistan is 
refined in Pakistan and delivered via the same route. There are two crossing 
points, one near Afghanistan's Kandahar province at Chaman, Pakistan, and 
the other through the Khyber Pass. The Taliban have attacked Western 
supply depots and convoys, and Pakistan itself closed the routes for several 
days, citing government operations against radical Islamist forces. 

Meanwhile, the situation in Pakistan has been complicated by tensions with 
India. The Indians have said that the individuals who carried out the Nov. 26 
Mumbai attack were Pakistanis supported by elements in the Pakistani 
government. After Mumbai, India made demands of the Pakistanis. While the 
situation appears to have calmed, the future of Indo-Pakistani relations 
remains far from clear; anything from a change of policy in New Delhi to new 
terrorist attacks could see the situation escalate. The Pakistanis have made it 
clear that a heightened threat from India requires them to shift troops away 
from the Afghan border and toward the east; a small number of troops 
already has been shifted. 

Apart from the direct impact this kind of Pakistani troop withdrawal would 
have on cross-border operations by the Taliban, such a move also would 
dramatically increase the vulnerability of NATO supply lines through Pakistan. 
Some supplies could be shipped in by aircraft, but the vast bulk of supplies 
-- petroleum, ammunition, etc. -- must come in via surface transit, either by 
truck, rail or ship. Western operations in Afghanistan simply cannot be 
supplied from the air alone. A cutoff of the supply lines across Pakistan 
would thus leave U.S. troops in Afghanistan in crisis. Because Washington 
can't predict or control the future actions of Pakistan, of India or of terrorists, 
the United States must find an alternative to the routes through Pakistan.

When we look at a map, the two routes through Pakistan from Karachi are 
clearly the most logical to use. If those were closed -- or even meaningfully 
degraded -- the only other viable routes would be through the former Soviet 
Union.

One route, along which a light load of fuel is currently transported, crosses 
the Caspian Sea. Fuel refined in Armenia is ferried across the Caspian to 
Turkmenistan (where a small amount of fuel is also refined), then shipped 
across Turkmenistan directly to Afghanistan and through a small spit of land 
in Uzbekistan. This route could be expanded to reach either the Black Sea 
through Georgia or the Mediterranean through Georgia and Turkey (though the 
additional use of Turkey would require a rail gauge switch). It is also not 
clear that transports native to the Caspian have sufficient capacity for this.

Another route sidesteps the issues of both transport across the Caspian and 
the sensitivity of Georgia by crossing Russian territory above the Caspian. 
Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan (and likely at least a small corner of Turkmenistan) 
would connect the route to Afghanistan. There are options of connecting to 
the Black Sea or transiting to Europe through either Ukraine or Belarus.

Iran could provide a potential alternative, but relations between Tehran and 
Washington would have to improve dramatically before such discussions 
could even begin -- and time is short.

Many of the details still need to be worked out. But they are largely 
variations on the two main themes of either crossing the Caspian or transiting 
Russian territory above it. 

Though the first route is already partially established for fuel, it is not clear 
how much additional capacity exists. To complicate matters further, Turkmen 
acquiescence is unlikely without Russian authorization, and Armenia remains 
strongly loyal to Moscow as well. While the current Georgian government 
might leap at the chance, the issue is obviously an extremely sensitive one 
for Moscow. (And with Russian forces positioned in Azerbaijan and the 
Georgian breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Moscow has 
troops looming over both sides of the vulnerable route across Georgia.) The 
second option would require crossing Russian territory itself, with a number of 
options -- from connecting to the Black Sea to transiting either Ukraine or 
Belarus to Europe, or connecting to the Baltic states.

(click image to enlarge)

Both routes involve countries of importance to Russia where Moscow has 
influence, regardless of whether those countries are friendly to it. This would 
give Russia ample opportunity to scuttle any such supply line at multiple 
points for reasons wholly unrelated to Afghanistan.

If the West were to opt for the first route, the Russians almost certainly 
would pressure Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan not to cooperate, and Turkey 
would find itself in a position it doesn't want to be in -- namely, caught 
between the United States and Russia. The diplomatic complexities of 
developing these routes not only involve the individual countries included, 
they also inevitably lead to the question of U.S.-Russian relations. 

Even without crossing Russia, both of these two main options require Russian 
cooperation. The United States must develop the option of an alternative 
supply route to Pakistan, and in doing so, it must define its relationship with 
Russia. Seeking to work without Russian approval of a route crossing its 
"near abroad" will represent a challenge to Russia. But getting Russian 
approval will require a U.S. accommodation with the country.


The Russian Natural Gas Connection 

One of Obama's core arguments against the Bush administration was that it 
acted unilaterally rather than with allies. Specifically, Obama meant that the 
Bush administration alienated the Europeans, therefore failing to build a 
sustainable coalition for the war. By this logic, it follows that one of Obama's 
first steps should be to reach out to Europe to help influence or pressure the 
Russians, given that NATO has troops in Afghanistan and Obama has said he 
intends to ask the Europeans for more help there. 

The problem with this is that the Europeans are passing through a serious 
crisis wi