From Jscotlive at aol.com  Sun Mar  1 00:40:37 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 02:40:37 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight
Message-ID: <d55.47367d95.36db95f5@aol.com>

Ruthless:
 
JScotlive's and some others' tendency to defend against criticism
anyone  and everyone who claims to be anti-imperialist and is under
attack from  imperialism, is revealing.

Reply:
 
Yes, I agree - it reveals an orientation towards anti-imperialism.
 
Ruthless:
 
Similar arguments, equally weak, were used recently to forestall  the
criticism of Hamas on the ground that they were "under attack".

Reply:
 
Yes, weak arguments such as supporting resistance to ethnic cleansing, war  
crimes, and settler colonialism. 
 
Ruthless:
 
Marxists *must* get out of this habit of defending some entities
merely  because imperialism attacks these entities. They *must* be
criticized for  their failings, whether they are under attack by
imperialism or not. That is  the only principled position for Marxists
to take.

Reply:
 
Yes, we must get out of the habit of defending people being murdered,  
colonised, starved, immiserated, and ethnically cleansed. Why? Well, of course,  
such people have the awful habit of worshipping a different god, wearing funny  
clothes, and appearing on the TV news waving guns in the air. Must they persist 
 in fighting back?. I mean, if only they would lay down their weapons, their  
homemade rockets and small arms, and go on hunger strike instead. That  way, 
when they're slaughtered I'll be able to impress my friends and work  
colleagues with my moral outrage.
 
I'm the Ruthless Critic Of All That Exists and I like my chitlens to know  
their place.
 
  

From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 01:12:22 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 03:12:22 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight
In-Reply-To: <d55.47367d95.36db95f5@aol.com>
References: <d55.47367d95.36db95f5@aol.com>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903010012j3e824127y7da6a4f306c9a7d3@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 2:40 AM,  <Jscotlive at aol.com> wrote:

> Ruthless:
>
> Marxists *must* get out of this habit of defending some entities
> merely ?because imperialism attacks these entities. They *must* be
> criticized for ?their failings, whether they are under attack by
> imperialism or not. That is ?the only principled position for Marxists
> to take.
>
> Reply:
>
> Yes, we must get out of the habit of defending people being murdered,
> colonised, starved, immiserated, and ethnically cleansed.

Notice how JScotlive distorts. (S)he equates <refraining from
criticizing Hamas> with <defending Palestinians being oppressed>.

But the two are not the same. One can be vocal in critique of Hamas,
AND criticize Israeli oppression of Palestinians. In fact, that is the
principled position to take here.

While accommodating to imperialism is a clear and present danger for
Marxists, JScotlive vividly illustrates the opposite danger:
accommodating to religious zealots *merely* because the same religious
zealots are under attack from imperialists.

By the same arguments, Marxists would be reduced to supporting Obama
because, after all, Obama is attacked by the right. Surely one sees
the absurdity of this line of mislogical reasoning.


From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 01:15:01 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 03:15:01 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Rich man's justice
In-Reply-To: <550813287-1235833573-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-2045486597-@bxe1113.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
References: <550813287-1235833573-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-2045486597-@bxe1113.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903010015v79e55af9r2a2611fd944e0cd7@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 10:04 AM,  <sabocat59 at mac.com> wrote:

> Rich man's justice: 15 days in jail for exec who killed bride-to-be in
> hit-run <http://web03.echomail.com/nydaily/l.asp?t=H320090228&amp;c=6dcrimee460f067dry2009m02d28&amp;e=jbooyr2~crbcyrcp.pbz>

Link expired...?


From lueko.willms at t-online.de  Sun Mar  1 01:16:53 2009
From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (=?iso-8859-1?q?L=FCko_Willms?=)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:16:53 +0100 (MEZ)
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight
Message-ID: <000.085200007544aa49.039@lws-media.de>

On Sun, 1 Mar 2009 01:18:38 EST, Jscotlive at aol.com wrote:

> Joaquin's distaste for the FARC at a time when they have come 
> under most pressure from the Colombian military, a US proxy, 
>> is revealing. His  distaste for what he describes as kidnappings, 
> but which the FARC and their  supporters, struggling against 
> the most reactionary regime in the region, would  describe 
> as arrests (perhaps in the same way the Colombian state 
> would  describe the imprisonment of FARC members, 
> sympathisers, trade unionists  and leftists) is obvious.

  But the fact is that the FARC takes prisoners in order to exchange them for 
money or the release of some of their people in the government's goals. 

  I don't think this helps to advance politically and to undermine the political 
base of the Bogot? regime. 

  The Cuban "Rebel Army" of Fidel Castro, Camilo and Che released the 
prisoners they took after taking their arms, boots, and uniforms and giving 
them some political explanations. Fidel said that this lead to the Batista 
soldiers giving up themselves to be taken prisoner instead of fighting tooth 
and nail not to be captured, because they knew how they would be treated. 

  This is not to say that taking hostages is absolutely ruled out in 
revolutionary politics, but it depends on the concrete situation. See Leo 
Trotsky's "Their moral and ours" for an extended discussion of morals and 
politics. 

  BTW, British TV journalist and author Phil Rees (<http://philrees.tv/>) 
visitied also the FARC for his six part series "Dining with terrorists" on Al 
Jazeera International. See 
> 
<http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/general/2009/02/200925650129291
22.html>
for the part "America's Backyard". 

  Please note the link of "Watch part two" on the bottom of the side text to 
the Youtube link for the second installment ("after the break") of each part of 
the series. 

  Very interesting. 

  Although -- I just watched the Colombia part to look for FARC statements 
on their hostage taking -- it is not easy to get the original Spanish words of 
the two FARC guerillas speaking behind the english translation dubbed over. 

  The second part of the "America's Backyard" looks into the history of the 
Nicaraguan Contras, which were armed and financed by the USA. 


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



From Jscotlive at aol.com  Sun Mar  1 01:36:25 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 03:36:25 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight
Message-ID: <c27.573a60ac.36dba309@aol.com>

Ruthless:
 
But the two are not the same. One can be vocal in critique of Hamas,
AND  criticize Israeli oppression of Palestinians. In fact, that is the
principled  position to take here.

Reply:
 
Oh yes it is! Hamas are the elected govt of the Palestinian people. By  
joining in the ongoing attempt of the Israeli government and their allies in the  
US, EU, and Egyptian govts in trying to use the election of Hamas as an excuse  
to punish the Palestinians for daring to exercise their democratic right, you 
 give succour to the Zionist project to demonise and dehumanise any  
Palestinian who would dare resist the occupation of their land.
 
This bullshit of the middle ground is an excuse for hand wringing as the  
bombs and the missiles fall. There can be no middle ground between the  oppressed 
and oppressor. In such a context the middle ground is where  paternalism 
lies.   
 
Ruthless:
 
By the same arguments, Marxists would be reduced to supporting  Obama
because, after all, Obama is attacked by the right. Surely one  sees
the absurdity of this line of mislogical reasoning.

Reply:
 
The only absurdity here is your continued attempts to equate moralism with  
Marxism.

From Jscotlive at aol.com  Sun Mar  1 01:43:28 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 03:43:28 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight
Message-ID: <d40.38355251.36dba4b0@aol.com>

Luko:
 
But the fact is that the FARC takes prisoners in order to exchange them for  
money or the release of some of their people in the government's goals.  

I don't think this helps to advance politically and to undermine the  
political 
base of the Bogot? regime. 

Reply:
 
I don't see how we can disapprove of a revolutionary movement carrying out  
actions in solidarity with its members and comrades incarcerated by the  enemy.
 
Attempting to explain the lack of advance or success of the FARC as a  
consequence of tactics is to miss the point that they are acting in a position  of 
weakness not strength. Material conditions of struggle determine actions, not  
the other way around. The huge infusion of US military support and aid in the  
region, going back to Plan Colombia and maintained in response to the 
leftward  shift that has taken place with the emergence of Chavez, has resulted in 
huge  pressure being exerted against the FARC. This pressure has culminated in 
the  series of setbacks to have befallen them over the past year or so. As 
such, they  are currently in no position to advance anything other than their own  
survival.

From suarsos at alphalink.com.au  Sun Mar  1 01:46:56 2009
From: suarsos at alphalink.com.au (Tom O'Lincoln)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 19:46:56 +1100
Subject: [Marxism] Marxist Interventions: Louis Proyect debates Mick
	Armstrong
Message-ID: <EA4AD38F2C344A268949F0197C6997F0@gx270>

Marxist Interventions 2009 edition has just gone live at 
www.anu.edu.au/polsci/mi/.
This includes a debate on revolutionary organisation arising from Lou's 
critical review of Mick's book

Full contents:

Saving the planet or selling off the atmosphere? Emissions trading, capital 
accumulation and the carbon rent.

Neither free trade nor protection but international socialism: contesting 
the conservative antinomies of trade theory.

Xenophobic racism and class during the Howard years.

Whose liberty? Australian imperialism and the Pacific war

Debate on revolutionary organisation - Louis Proyect and Mick Armstrong

Jeff Goldhar's socialist legacy.

Here's the link again:

www.anu.edu.au/polsci/mi/.



From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 01:52:34 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 03:52:34 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight
In-Reply-To: <d40.38355251.36dba4b0@aol.com>
References: <d40.38355251.36dba4b0@aol.com>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903010052k15e5b4b2i905e1eb0087fcc39@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 3:43 AM,  <Jscotlive at aol.com> wrote:

> Attempting to explain the lack of advance or success of the FARC as a
> consequence of tactics is to miss the point that they are acting in a position ?of
> weakness not strength. Material conditions of struggle determine actions, not
> the other way around.

This is vulgar, reductive materialism. Material conditions do
constrain the field of choices, but they are never "deterministic" in
the sense you think they are, as if humans were zombies without any
agency, dancing to the puppet strings pulled by "material forces".

Using your logic, every poor strategic choice that leftists make,
could be retrospectively explained away as somehow inevitable and
materially "determined". This is verily the "materialism of fools".


From suarsos at alphalink.com.au  Sun Mar  1 01:53:06 2009
From: suarsos at alphalink.com.au (Tom O'Lincoln)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 19:53:06 +1100
Subject: [Marxism] Marxist Interventions: Louis Proyect debates Mick
	Armstrong
Message-ID: <2F111DDCE28B42D5A4455E3B2060F349@gx270>

Woops, I"ve put a period next to the link so it might not work. Try this:

www.anu.edu.au/polsci/mi/

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tom O'Lincoln" <suarsos at alphalink.com.au>
To: <marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu>
Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 7:46 PM
Subject: Marxist Interventions: Louis Proyect debates Mick Armstrong


> Marxist Interventions 2009 edition has just gone live at 
> www.anu.edu.au/polsci/mi/.
> This includes a debate on revolutionary organisation arising from Lou's 
> critical review of Mick's book
>
> Full contents:
>
> Saving the planet or selling off the atmosphere? Emissions trading, 
> capital accumulation and the carbon rent.
>
> Neither free trade nor protection but international socialism: contesting 
> the conservative antinomies of trade theory.
>
> Xenophobic racism and class during the Howard years.
>
> Whose liberty? Australian imperialism and the Pacific war
>
> Debate on revolutionary organisation - Louis Proyect and Mick Armstrong
>
> Jeff Goldhar's socialist legacy.
>
> Here's the link again:
>
> www.anu.edu.au/polsci/mi/.
> 



From Jscotlive at aol.com  Sun Mar  1 02:08:02 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 04:08:02 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight
Message-ID: <d5c.34270770.36dbaa72@aol.com>

Ruthless:
 
This is vulgar, reductive materialism. Material conditions do
constrain  the field of choices, but they are never "deterministic" in
the sense you  think they are, as if humans were zombies without any
agency, dancing to the  puppet strings pulled by "material forces".

Reply:
 
I don't recognise the thing you describe as 'reductive materialism'. It  
sounds to me about as relevant as describing the missionary position as  reductive 
sex.  
 
Perhaps my offering of a materialist analysis can be explained by the fact  
that I am a materialist. Agency is largely  - not solely - but largely  
determined by material conditions. If this makes me vulgar, sue me.
 
Ruthless:
 
Using your logic, every poor strategic choice that leftists make,
could  be retrospectively explained away as somehow inevitable and
materially  "determined". This is verily the "materialism of fools".

Reply:
 
This crap presupposes that I think the FARC are making mistakes. On the  
contrary, I think their resistance to the Colombian oligarchs and their death  
squads over the past 30 years has been nothing short of heroic.
 
What I do think IS determined is that oppression breeds resistance. You  
obviously do not. In fact, in every nuance of your posts on both this and Hamas,  
is your chauvinistic distaste for the victims of oppression.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Using your logic, every poor strategic choice that leftists make,
could  be retrospectively explained away as somehow inevitable and
materially  "determined". This is verily the "materialism of  fools".



From sabocat59 at mac.com  Sun Mar  1 02:13:18 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 09:13:18 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops?
Message-ID: <967270091-1235898905-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1234201991-@bxe1088.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

This is somewhat old news but the answer is yes.  

Greg McDonald

https://prod.biotech.indymedia.org/es/2004/06/2995.shtml


Dr Carlos Borretto of Cuba?s agricultural biotechnology centre went to great lengths to explain the nature of Cuba?s genetic engineering project. Obviously acutely aware of the controversy that surrounds GM crops in the UK, he was emphatic: ?Public confidence is high in our biotechnology and we not wan to lose that support from our people. You can be sure that before anything we do is released into the environment it will be safe.? Dr Borretto showed slides of the way in which Cuban GM crops are tested. Unlike in the UK where open fields are used, Cuban GM crops are grown in special greenhouses that completely sealed from environment so that no genetically modified material can escape to the outside. In addition, Cuba?s approach to GM is different from that which has been taken by the big multinationals. Cuba is not interested in patenting the plants so that they can control the sale of seeds. Instead, Dr Borretto?s institute is dedicated to producing strains of Cuba?s staple products that are truly resistant to diseases and whose performance in terms of yields is enhanced. The work already done has produced a GM strain of tobacco that is resistant to blue mould, but ironically this has not been accepted. ?When we told the big tobacco buyers of our product they turned it down because cigar lovers would not buy cigars made form a GM plant!,? said Dr Borretto, ?I find this position somewhat strange, given the known dangers of smoking tobacco, that people should be concerned at the risk of GM!? Cuba also has GM potatoes, rice and maize under trial. But most exciting is the development of tobacco plants that produce human monoclonal antibodies in their leaves. Currently, all the monoclonal antibodies that are manufactured in the world come from specially bred mice. It takes a hundred thousand mice to produce on kilo of antibody material. However with the new plant production the possibility will be to produce much more material much more quickly in a way that is more animal friendly. And what of Cuba?s famous transgenic fish? Dr Borretto explains: ?We produced a transgenic tilapia, a type of edible freshwater fish, that grows twice as fast and sues less food. We genetically modified its stomach to be more efficient in absorbing nutrients from food. We have had this fish for 8 years now, and the story has been around the world that we are already eating this fish and selling it to the population. But this is absolutely untrue, the fish has not escaped the laboratory and we have no intention of marketing it. That would be a public relations disaster! We don?t want to be the first to release a transgenic fish into the world!? However, the fish could yet yield a reward for Cuba. The research has discovered how the new fish absorbs nutrients more efficiently and Cuban scientists have now isolated the enzyme that triggers the effect. ?In other words, we can now manufacture an enzyme that can be given to normal fish that will make them perform like the genetically modified ones. So here we have used GM to make non GM organisms perform better. This is very exciting.? Exciting just about sums up what is a tremendous achievement for a Third World country. The overall impression received was that perhaps the US opposition to Cuba?s science is really rooted in envy. For it is clear that the only danger Cuba poses to the US is in the field of competition in the marketplace 
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 02:26:29 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 04:26:29 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops?
In-Reply-To: <967270091-1235898905-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1234201991-@bxe1088.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
References: <967270091-1235898905-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1234201991-@bxe1088.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903010126s1ce753c4y43e867a41d66df2@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 4:13 AM,  <sabocat59 at mac.com> wrote:
> This is somewhat old news but the answer is yes.
>
> Greg McDonald
>
> https://prod.biotech.indymedia.org/es/2004/06/2995.shtml
>
>
>  Unlike in the UK where open fields are used, Cuban GM crops are grown in special greenhouses that completely sealed from environment so that no genetically modified material can escape to the outside.

But that's only during testing, as the article clarifies. During
actual production, open fields will *have* to be used, if crops are to
be grown on a large scale.

Many anti-GM people fear (unfoundedly for the most part) unanticipated
side effects, which can only manifest later and will not be caught in
testing to begin with.

So this is sort of a non sequitur.

In any case,Cuba needs to be applauded for not kow-towing to the
Luddite, reflexively anti-GM greenie-green bandwagon.


From david at miradoiro.com  Sun Mar  1 02:37:20 2009
From: david at miradoiro.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?David_Pic=F3n_=C1lvarez?=)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 10:37:20 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops?
References: <967270091-1235898905-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1234201991-@bxe1088.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
	<908b689f0903010126s1ce753c4y43e867a41d66df2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C9223B9E0844476F9175F5E3D7053B09@Nautilus>

From: "Ruthless Critic of All that Exists" <ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com>
> In any case,Cuba needs to be applauded for not kow-towing to the
> Luddite, reflexively anti-GM greenie-green bandwagon.

Absolutely. A good part of this opposition seems to be rooted in 
quasi-religious views about the goodness of nature (and the consequent 
badness of artificiality) not too far from the conception some have of God's 
plan. I'm aware there are some better reasons to oppose GM (mostly, 
regulation about testing isn't stringent enough in many places, and 
regulation about informing the consumer is certainly insufficient in the US, 
as well as many patent-related issues) but in my experience most people who 
manifest an opposition to GM (and here in Europe this opposition is very 
widespread) do so from a reactionary antitechnological bias.

--David.



From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sun Mar  1 03:30:22 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 05:30:22 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] EU UnEmployment
Message-ID: <8DB606AFEE8941B3BD3239D14808968F@dmsthinkpad>

Thanks to Brad for keeping up with the BEA while I was in transition back to 
the US.  I don't care what Chuck Berry says,  I'm not so happy to be back in 
the USA.  Navigation may replace economics as the dismal science.


January 2009

Euro area unemployment up to 8.2%

EU27 up to 7.6%

The euro area1 (EA16) seasonally-adjusted unemployment rate2 was 8.2% in 
January 2009, compared with 8.1% in December 20083. It was 7.3% in January 
2008. The EU271 unemployment rate was 7.6% in January 2009, compared with 
7.5% in December 20083. It was 6.8% in January 2008.

Eurostat estimates that 18.412 million men and women in the EU27, of which 
13.036 million were in the euro area, were unemployed in January 2009. 
Compared with December 2008, the number of persons unemployed increased by 
386 000 in the EU27 and by 256 000 in the euro area. Compared with January 
2008, unemployment went up by 2.194 million in the EU27 and by 1.641 million 
in the euro area.

These figures are published by Eurostat, the Statistical Office of the 
European Communities

full at:
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/pls/portal/docs/PAGE/PGP_PRD_CAT_PREREL/PGE_CAT_PREREL_YEAR_2009/PGE_CAT_PREREL_YEAR_2009_MONTH_02/3-27022009-EN-AP.PDF 



From clintonf at optusnet.com.au  Sun Mar  1 05:11:39 2009
From: clintonf at optusnet.com.au (Clinton Fernandes)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 23:11:39 +1100
Subject: [Marxism] In memory of Paddy Kenneally
Message-ID: <E4DD110F-7C63-4621-AA97-D95F6B048D5F@optusnet.com.au>

On Sunday 1st March 2009, Paddy Kenneally (WW2 commando and long-time  
East Timor activist) died after a week's hospitalisation. His funeral  
will occur on 6th March. Details later.

http://cas.awm.gov.au/photograph/P05096.001

http://workers.labor.net.au/14/d_review_paddy.html

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/02/1051382095391.html

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/relig/enc/stories/s353423.htm

http://tsjc.asiapacificjustice.org/media_cov_18_04_abcrsl.htm

http://www.anzacday.org.au/education/activities/timor_ww2/testimony02.html

http://www.asslh.org.au/sydney/hummer/vol3no6/kenneally01.htm

Thank you Paddy.

CF

From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Mar  1 06:03:47 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:03:47 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] From $70k per year to $12 per hour
Message-ID: <49AA87B3.2000207@panix.com>

NY Times, March 1, 2009
Forced From Executive Pay to Hourly Wage
By MICHAEL LUO

TEMPE, Ariz. ? Mark Cooper started his work day on a recent morning 
cleaning the door handles of an office building with a rag, vigorously 
shaking out a rug at a back entrance and pushing a dust mop down a long 
hallway.

Nine months ago he lost his job as the security manager for the western 
United States for a Fortune 500 company, overseeing a budget of $1.2 
million and earning about $70,000 a year. Now he is grateful for the $12 
an hour he makes in what is known in unemployment circles as a ?survival 
job? at a friend?s janitorial services company. But that does not make 
the work any easier.

?You?re fighting despair, discouragement, depression every day,? Mr. 
Cooper said.

Working five days a week, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., Mr. Cooper is not counted by 
traditional measures as among the recession?s casualties at this point. 
But his tumble down the economic ladder is among the more disquieting 
and often hidden aspects of the downturn.

It is not clear how many professionals like Mr. Cooper have taken on 
these types of lower-paying jobs, which are themselves in short supply. 
Many are doing their best to hold out as long as possible on 
unemployment benefits and savings while still looking for work in their 
fields.

About 1.7 million people, however, were working part-time in January 
because they could not find full-time work, a 40 percent jump from 
December 2007, when the recession began, according to the Bureau of 
Labor Statistics.

And experts agree that as the economic downturn continues and as more 
people begin to exhaust their jobless benefits and other options, the 
situation Mr. Cooper is in will inevitably become more common.

Interviews with more than two dozen laid-off professionals across the 
country, including architects, former sales managers and executives who 
have taken on lower-paying, stop-gap jobs to help make ends meet, found 
that they were working for places like U.P.S., a Verizon Wireless call 
center and a liquor store. For many of the workers, the psychological 
adjustment was just as difficult as the financial one, with their sense 
of identity and self-worth upended.

?It has been like peeling back the layers of a bad onion,? said Ame 
Arlt, 53, who recently accepted a position as a customer-service 
representative at an online insurance-leads referral service in 
Franklin, Tenn., after 20 years of working in executive jobs. ?With 
every layer you peel back, you discover something else about yourself. 
You have to make an adjustment.?

Some people had exhausted their jobless benefits, or were ineligible; 
others said it was impossible for them to live on their unemployment 
checks alone, or said it was a matter of pride, or sanity, that drove 
them to find a job, any job.

In just one illustration of the demand for low-wage work, a spokesman 
for U.P.S. said the company saw the number of applicants this last 
holiday season for jobs sorting and delivering packages almost triple to 
1.4 million from the 500,000 it normally receives.

When Ms. Arlt applied for the job, she sent in a stripped-down r?sum? 
that hid her 20-year career at national media companies, during which 
she ascended to vice president of brand development at the On Command 
Video Corporation and was making $165,000 a year. She decided in 2001 to 
start her own business, opening an equestrian store and then founding a 
magazine devoted to the sport. But with the economy slowing, she was 
forced to shutter both businesses by June of last year.

After applying for more than 100 jobs, mostly director-level and above 
in marketing and branding, and getting just two interviews, Ms. Arlt 
said she realized last fall that she had to do something to ?close the 
monthly financial hemorrhage.?

Her new job at HometownQuotes pays $10 to $15 an hour and has mostly 
entailed data entry. But even though she has parted ways with some 
friends because she is no longer in their social stratum, Ms. Arlt said 
she was glad she was no longer sitting at home, ?thinking, ?Who have I 
not heard from today?? ?

Her new paycheck covers her mortgage but not her other living expenses. 
Recently, she cashed out what was left of her retirement portfolio, 
about $17,000.

?It has been the hardest thing in my life,? she said. ?It has been 
harder than my divorce from my husband. It has really been even worse 
than the death of my mother.?

Nearly all of those interviewed said they considered their situations 
temporary and planned to resume their careers where they left off once 
the economy improves. But there are people like John Eller, 51, of Lee?s 
Summit, Mo., who offer a glimpse of how difficult it can be to bounce back.

Mr. Eller had been a senior director at Sprint, earning as much as 
$150,000 a year and overseeing 7,000 employees at 13 call centers, 
before being laid off in 2002 amid the economic contraction after the 
Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

A year later, he found another job, at roughly half the pay, managing a 
call center in New Jersey. After he lost that job two years later in a 
downsizing, Mr. Eller found himself out of work for another year before 
landing a contract position running two call centers in Kansas and 
Illinois, earning close to six figures.

But after that ended a year later, he was unable to find work for 
several months. In July 2007, he took what he thought would be a 
temporary job for $10 an hour as a baker in a grocery store. He was laid 
off again last October.

Mr. Eller quickly landed a new survival job, working as a supervisor on 
the overnight shift for a contractor processing immigration applications 
for the federal government at a salary of about $34,000 a year. But with 
eight children and a wife to support, Mr. Eller said he was still ?below 
poverty level.? The family has not been able to make mortgage payments 
in five months and has been on the brink of foreclosure.

?I?m still scratching and clawing and trying to work my way back,? he said.

In Mr. Cooper?s case, relying on unemployment checks was never a serious 
consideration. The maximum benefit that jobless people can collect in 
Arizona is $240 a week, among the lowest in the country ? and much less 
than is required to cover the mortgage on the comfortable four-bedroom 
home in Glendale that he and his wife, Maggie Macias-Cooper, share.

Mrs. Macias-Cooper, who works as a personal trainer in a gym built in 
what used to be the couple?s three-car garage, has seen her client base 
shrink to 10 from about 50 over the last year.

In addition to giving Mr. Cooper a job as a janitor, his friend agreed 
to pay for the couple?s benefits through Cobra. Maintaining health care 
coverage was paramount for the family because Mrs. Macias-Cooper 
recently had breast cancer.

Some unemployed professionals said they decided not to seek even 
part-time work because it might interfere with their job searches. But 
Mr. Cooper rises every day at 4 a.m. and, after a time of prayer, 
devotes two hours to his job hunt on the computer. He prints out a 
detailed call list of prospective employers to take with him, squeezing 
in phone conversations during breaks throughout the day from his pickup 
truck, which he calls his ?office.?

?There were times I broke down,? Mr. Cooper said. ?I broke down 
thinking, ?This is what I?ve become.? ?

But Mrs. Macias-Cooper, who admitted that she was initially embarrassed 
about her husband?s new job, says she is now grateful.

?There is no shame,? said Mrs. Macias-Cooper, who grew teary during an 
interview at their home. ?I am very proud of my husband that he will go 
to any lengths, do whatever it takes, to keep his family afloat, if it 
means mopping floors, cleaning urinals.?


From Dbachmozart at aol.com  Sun Mar  1 06:48:51 2009
From: Dbachmozart at aol.com (Dbachmozart at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 08:48:51 EST
Subject: [Marxism] "New Patterns in Israel-Palestinian and Intra-Palestinian
	Politics"
Message-ID: <c65.4229a7d7.36dbec43@aol.com>



Iqbal Siddiqui,  - clip ---

As Crescent went to press,  talks between Palestinian leaders, dubbed 
"national reconciliation talks", were  due to open in Cairo on February 22. On the 
face of it, these are a continuation  of talks that were due to take place last 
autumn but were cancelled when Hamas  refused to take part unless Fatah 
authorities in the West Bank fulfilled the  promises it had made to release Hamas 
political prisoners before the talks  began. In hindsight, it is clear that 
progress on Palestinian reconciliation at  that time was not convenient to Fatah 
and its backers as Israel was already  committed to launching its war in 
December. Now the situation is completely  different, and the talks are likely to 
prove the first step of a new process,  approved by the US and Israel, of 
drawing Hamas back into mainstream Palestinian  political institutions while at the 
same time limiting its freedom of action  within those institutions. This 
strategy is likely to involve two separate  strands. The first is of political 
negotiations involving pressure on Hamas from  various Arab states, both 
directly, and indirectly, particular via Damascus,  host government of the Hamas 
leaders in exile. As well as Egypt, Qatar, Saudi  Arabia and the Arab League have 
all launched charm offensives towards both Hamas  and Damascus in the aftermath 
of the Gaza war. The second, not unrelated, is of  aid for the reconstruction 
of Gaza, which would be made available by the Arab  states via Hamas provided 
they were satisfied with progress being made on the  political front.
 
 
full ---
 
<_http://scepticalislamist.typepad.com/home/2009/02/new-patterns-in-israelpale
stinian-and-intrapalestinian-politics.html_ 
(http://scepticalislamist.typepad.com/home/2009/02/new-patterns-in-israelpalestinian-and-intrapalestinian-politi
cs.html) > 
**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1218822736x1201267884/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID
%3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62)

From bbauerly at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 07:10:20 2009
From: bbauerly at gmail.com (brad bauerly)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 09:10:20 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis
Message-ID: <55868ddf0903010610je8cc592g9c0fc30e80c62f49@mail.gmail.com>

>>>"Brother, if Leo and Sam don't think the root of this is in the
profitability
of production in manufacturing, mining, utilities, etc.  then they haven't
been paying attention to near-current, current, and future events."<<<

What do you mean by this?  Of course the root is in the drive for profits
through production.  That is obvious.  The question is what is behind the
decline in profitability of manufacturing, mining, utilities, etc.?  What
role did the rising financial sphere play in overcoming  declines in
profitability (through the coordination and disciplining that led to
increased profits by comparative advantage and increased labor
competition)? And what new contradictions did this successful overcoming of
declining profitability through financialization and the spreading of
production around the globe (which required finance to coordinate it, as it
always has) produce?

I don't buy the 40 year crisis analysis.  The profitability crisis of the
70's was overcome by financialization, neoliberal attacks on workers and
globalization, which then produced *new* contradictions (you know the
empirical data supports this).  We are in the middle of the resolution (or
more accurately the displacement) of those *new* contradictions (which are
related to the old ones, as capitalist history is the process of
displacement of contradictions leading to new ones).  Cheap credit was one
of the means to overcome the declining profitability, as was to displace
manufacturing from the capitalist core to the global south, but this lead to
new contradictions.  It is these new contradictions that need explication.
Not simply to say a decline in profitability of production has been with us
since the 1970's.


Comradely,

Brad

-- 
Brad A. Bauerly
PhD Candidate,
Political Science
York University
Toronto, Canada
647-345-2072
bauerly at yorku.ca

From marvgandall at videotron.ca  Sun Mar  1 07:22:14 2009
From: marvgandall at videotron.ca (Marv Gandall)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:22:14 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Dr. Doom Squared: print money or die
Message-ID: <BCAC5AFCED6D468FABC9515D0BA0EDF7@MARV>

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, the notoriously gloomy Telegraph columnist, says
we're at the tipping point, and unless the Fed urgently and massively begins
buying US long bonds, a "cataclysmic structural breakdown" will make the
30's depression look mild by comparison. Already, economies are collapsing
at a faster pace than they did then, and will result in "social mayhem
(which) comes with a 12 month lag."  He says the US can threaten to use it's
economic and military power to avert a run on the dollar.

*    *    *

We need shock and awe policies to halt depression
By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
Telegraph
28 Feb 2009

As ordinary citizens with no power over the levers of policy, we watch from
the sidelines, and weep. The whole global economy has tipped into a downward
spiral. Trade and output are contracting at rates that outstrip the
leisurely depression of the 1930s. Debt deflation has simply washed over the
drastic measures taken by governments everywhere.

Judging by the latest Merrill Lynch survey of fund managers, investors have
a touching faith that China is going to rescue us all and re-ignite the
commodity boom. How can this be? Taiwan's exports to China fell 55pc in
January, Japan's fell 45pc. These exports are links in the supply chain for
China's industry. Manufacturing output in the Shanghai region fell 12pc in
January.

My favourite China guru, Michael Pettis from Beijing University, is in
despair ? as you can see on his blog (http://mpettis.com). The property
bubble is bursting. Developers have built more offices in Beijing since 2006
than the entire stock in Manhattan. There is a 14-year supply glut. We have
seen this movie before.

Factory output is collapsing at the fastest pace everywhere. The figures for
the most recent month available are, year-on-year: Taiwan (-43pc), Ukraine
(-34pc), Japan (-30pc), Singapore (-29pc), Hungary (-23pc), Sweden (-20pc),
Korea (-19pc), Turkey (-18pc), Russia (-16pc), Spain (-15pc), Poland
(-15pc), Brazil (-15pc), Italy (-14pc), Germany (-12pc), France (-11pc), US
(-10pc) and Britain (-9pc). Norway sails blissfully on (+4pc). What do they
drink up there?

This terrifying fall has been concentrated in the last five months. The job
slaughter has barely begun. Social mayhem comes with a 12-month lag. By
comparison, industrial output in core-Europe fell 2.8pc in 1930, 5.1pc in
1931 and 3.9pc in 1932, according to RBS.

Stephen Lewis, from Monument Securities, says we have been lulled into a
false sense of security by the lack of "soup kitchens". The visual cues from
Steinbeck's America are missing. "The temptation for investors is to see
this as just another recession, over by the end of the year. But this is not
a normal cycle. It is a cataclysmic structural breakdown," he said.

Fiscal stimulus is reaching its global limits. The lowest interest rates in
history are failing to gain traction. The Fed seems paralyzed. It first
talked of buying US Treasuries three months ago, but cannot seem to bring
itself to hit the nuclear button.

As the Fed dithers, a flood of bond issues from the US Treasury is swamping
the debt market. The yield on 10-year Treasuries has climbed from 2pc to
3.04pc in eight weeks. The real cost of money is rising as deflation gathers
pace.

US house prices have fallen 27pc (Case-Shiller index). The pace of descent
is accelerating. The 2.2pc fall in December was the worst month ever.
January looks just as bad. Delinquencies on prime mortgages were 1.72pc in
September, 1.89pc in October, 2.13pc on November and 2.42pc in December.
This is the trajectory eating away at the banking system.

Graham Turner, from GFC Economics, fears the Dow could crash to 4,000 by
summer unless there is a "quantum reduction" in mortgage rates. The Fed
should swoop in to the market ? armed with Ben Bernanke's "printing press" ?
and mop up enough Treasuries to force 10-year yields down to 1pc and
mortgage rates to 2.5pc. Monetary shock and awe.

This remedy is fraught with risk, but all options are ghastly at this point.
That is the legacy we have been left by the Greenspan doctrine. We are at
the moment of extreme danger in Irving Fisher's "Debt Deflation Theory"
(1933) where the ship fails to right itself by natural buoyancy, and
capsizes instead.

From all accounts, the Fed was ready to launch its bond blitz in January.
Something happened. Perhaps the hawks awoke in cold sweats at night,
fretting about Weimar.

Perhaps they feared that China and the world will pull the plug on the US
bond market. If so, it is time for Washington to get a grip. America remains
the hegemonic global power. The Obama team should let it be known ? and
perhaps Hillary Clinton did just that on her trip to Asia ? that any country
playing games with the US bond market in this crisis will be treated as an
enemy and pay a crushing price.

Pacific allies already know that they cannot take the US security blanket
for granted. As for China ? and others pursuing a mercantilist strategy of
export-led growth ? they must know that the US can shut off its market and
wreak havoc to their economy.

To Europe, they might make it clearer that unless the European Central Bank
is brought to heel by the Continent's leaders (whatever Maastricht says) and
forced to play its full part in emergency efforts to save the global
economy, the NATO military alliance will wither and the region will be left
to fend for itself against a revanchist Russia.

Should the main threat come from an exodus of private wealth, Washington may
have to impose temporary capital controls. Never forget, America is the one
country with enough strategic depth to go it alone, if necessary. The US is
not going to let foreigners keep it trapped in a depression.

I doubt matters will ever come to this. Japan is already in dire straits.
Exports crashed 46pc in January, year-on-year. The Bank of Japan may soon
start buying US Treasuries for its own reasons ? just as it did from 2003 to
2004 ? in order to reverse the 30pc rise of the yen over the last 18 months.
If it helps preserve the Sino-US defence alliance in the face of Chinese
naval expansion, so much the better.

In any case, the storm has shifted across the Atlantic to Europe. Germany
faces 5pc contraction this year (Deutsche Bank). The bill has come from the
burst bubble in the ex-Soviet bloc. Europe's banks are on the hook for $1.6
trillion (?1.1 trillion). For the first time since the launch of monetary
union, Europe's leaders are speaking openly about the risk of EMU break-up.

A run on the US dollar looks a remote threat as the euro drama unfolds. The
Fed may soon have all the room for manoeuvre it needs. Small comfort.




From killakai at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 07:52:01 2009
From: killakai at gmail.com (killakai at gmail.com)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 14:52:01 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] From $70k per year to $12 per hour
Message-ID: <1721314180-1235919091-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1023586695-@bxe1052.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

Ohh boo hoo these people. They seem more hurt by the social implications of their jobs than the financial ones. There is no shame in work. Cleaning urinals isn't beneath anyone, it is socially useful labor, something many with their business degrees and marketing jobs have never partaken in. 
Sent from my BlackBerry? smartphone with SprintSpeed

From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Mar  1 07:57:00 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:57:00 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] From $70k per year to $12 per hour
In-Reply-To: <1721314180-1235919091-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1023586695-@bxe1052.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
References: <1721314180-1235919091-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1023586695-@bxe1052.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
Message-ID: <49AAA23C.4040609@panix.com>

killakai at gmail.com wrote:
> Ohh boo hoo these people. They seem more hurt by the social implications of their jobs than the financial ones. 

The issue is not the individuals who meet this fate, but the social 
implications of a ruined middle-class. If the American economy betrays 
this class, it will eventually bite the hand that once fed it. Speaking 
of which, it is a good test of an analysis I have heard in the past that 
posits a fascist reaction to an economic collapse in advanced 
industrialized countries. So far, the evidence is a shift to the left 
looking at Iceland et al.


From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 08:17:07 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 10:17:07 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] From $70k per year to $12 per hour
In-Reply-To: <49AAA23C.4040609@panix.com>
References: <1721314180-1235919091-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1023586695-@bxe1052.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
	<49AAA23C.4040609@panix.com>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903010717j437446acw3e0d7cf6555953c@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> wrote:

> The issue is not the individuals who meet this fate, but the social
> implications of a ruined middle-class. If the American economy betrays
> this class, it will eventually bite the hand that once fed it. Speaking
> of which, it is a good test of an analysis I have heard in the past that
> posits a fascist reaction to an economic collapse in advanced
> industrialized countries. So far, the evidence is a shift to the left
> looking at Iceland et al.

Global recession could facilitate rise of fascism, warns Brit minister

<http://www.newkerala.com/topstory-fullnews-90277.html>

London, Feb.10 : Britain's Children's and Schools Secretary Ed Balls
has warned that the global economic crisis could spark off a rise of
fascism.

Balls warning came in a speech to activists at the weekend, where he
warned that far right parties were trying to hijack the campaign for
"British jobs for British workers".

The row over foreign workers has gathered momentum in recent weeks and
according to The Telegraph, Balls seemed to suggest the recession
could trigger a return to the Far Right politics that prospered in the
Great Depression of the 1930s.


From marvgandall at videotron.ca  Sun Mar  1 08:29:04 2009
From: marvgandall at videotron.ca (Marv Gandall)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 10:29:04 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] From $70k per year to $12 per hour
References: <1721314180-1235919091-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1023586695-@bxe1052.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
	<49AAA23C.4040609@panix.com>
Message-ID: <25463F438C304AC4976C979C04AC7DBD@MARV>

Louis wrote:

> killakai at gmail.com wrote:
>> Ohh boo hoo these people. They seem more hurt by the social implications
>> of their jobs than the financial ones.
>
> The issue is not the individuals who meet this fate, but the social
> implications of a ruined middle-class. If the American economy betrays
> this class, it will eventually bite the hand that once fed it. Speaking
> of which, it is a good test of an analysis I have heard in the past that
> posits a fascist reaction to an economic collapse in advanced
> industrialized countries. So far, the evidence is a shift to the left
> looking at Iceland et al.
===========================
Right. The fascist base was racially homogenous; that was a large part of
its appeal to the white petits-bourgeois and segments of the working class.
The big bourgeoisie supported it for other reasons. It's hard to see fascism
sinking roots in modern advanced capitalist societies which are so much more
diverse, cosmopolitan, urban, and educated than they were in the 30's. The
social base of the DP and social democratic parties would move further left
under the impact of a deepening crisis. We've already seen the beginnings of
such movement in the US. The Republican social base, almost exclusively
white, will move further right. Their relative strength today suggests what
the balance of forces is and is likely to be as social tensions increase.



From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sun Mar  1 08:35:22 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 10:35:22 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Dr. Doom Squared: print money or die
References: <BCAC5AFCED6D468FABC9515D0BA0EDF7@MARV>
Message-ID: <3C42213221144DDABF8984C888241152@dmsthinkpad>

Right, shock and awe.  War policies.  Gee, that's worked so well everywhere, 
Baghdad, New Orleans, really sorted out those situations, the old shock and 
awe did, didn't it?

Who's the "we"  in "we're at the tipping point"?

Who cares, honestly, about the squealing and whining of these little pigs 
going to market and finding there is none?

Only concrete point he makes is that China is hardly the big engine that 
could; it's the little engine that couldn't, and as a little engine, 
targeting it for culpability, as this creep does,  in the collapse is just 
bullshit.  China's mercantilist policies?  How about  France's, Germany's, 
etc.?

Of course, some of us were arguing over a year ago that China's economy was 
a paper tiger, and that exports from Asia were starting to flatten and 
decline.....

One other thing, I think my credentials as a Greenspan hater are unmatched, 
perhaps worldwide, but the Fed did increase rates through 2005 and 2006--  
holding them steady when the first ripples of distress were manifesting 
themselves in the mortgage markets.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Marv Gandall" <marvgandall at videotron.ca>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 9:22 AM
Subject: [Marxism] Dr. Doom Squared: print money or die


Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, the notoriously gloomy Telegraph columnist, says
we're at the tipping point, and unless the Fed urgently and massively begins
buying US long bonds, a "cataclysmic structural breakdown" will make the
30's depression look mild by comparison. Already, economies are collapsing
at a faster pace than they did then, and will result in "social mayhem
(which) comes with a 12 month lag."  He says the US can threaten to use it's
economic and military power to avert a run on the dollar.




From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sun Mar  1 08:44:48 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 10:44:48 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis
References: <55868ddf0903010610je8cc592g9c0fc30e80c62f49@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BB4C834473054475AF71741D55B7AE34@dmsthinkpad>

First, my apologies to the list for not clipping the text-- the post was not 
supposed to be transmitted, but I hit the send button instead of the "save" 
and there we are.

Now what I mean is this:  Thesis 1:
1. *The current economic crisis has to be understood in terms of the
historical dynamics and contradictions of capitalist finance in the second
half of the 20th century*. Even though the spheres of capitalist finance and
production are obviously intertwined (in significant ways today more than
ever before), the origins of today's US-based financial crisis are not
rooted in a profitability crisis in the sphere of production, as was the
case with the crisis of the 1970s, nor in the global trade imbalances that
have emerged since.
_____________


Yes, the current economic crisis is most definitely rooted in the 
profitability of production, and the decline in the return on investment, 
and no, the crisis has nothing to do with global trade imbalances, so I 
guess I'm half in agreement.

You really cannot grasp the core of this crisis without examining the 
previous recession and the recovery.  As Charles Jannuzi remarked over on 
Julio Huato's list,  the US [and the world] is getting the collapse it 
avoided in 2001.

No, I'm not talking about a structural long term decline in profitability; 
I'm talking about a real eruption of a temporal decline, with the ROI 
peaking in the 2nd half of 2006.

And I don't believe in long wave theories.



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "brad bauerly" <bbauerly at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 9:10 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis


>>>>"Brother, if Leo and Sam don't think the root of this is in the
> profitability
> of production in manufacturing, mining, utilities, etc.  then they haven't
> been paying attention to near-current, current, and future events."<<<
>
> What do you mean by this?  Of course the root is in the drive for profits
> through production.  That is obvious.  The question is what is behind the
> decline in profitability of manufacturing, mining, utilities, etc.?  What
> role did the rising financial sphere play in overcoming  declines in
> profitability (through the coordination and disciplining that led to
> increased profits by comparative advantage and increased labor
> competition)? And what new contradictions did this successful overcoming 
> of
> declining profitability through financialization and the spreading of
> production around the globe (which required finance to coordinate it, as 
> it
> always has) produce?
> 



From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sun Mar  1 08:52:01 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 10:52:01 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] From $70k per year to $12 per hour
References: <1721314180-1235919091-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1023586695-@bxe1052.bisx.prod.on.blackberry><49AAA23C.4040609@panix.com>
	<25463F438C304AC4976C979C04AC7DBD@MARV>
Message-ID: <DD2F0B0912E24B1CA6064C8491A2769C@dmsthinkpad>

Marvin wrote:

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Marv Gandall" <marvgandall at videotron.ca>
> Right. The fascist base was racially homogenous; that was a large part of
> its appeal to the white petits-bourgeois and segments of the working 
> class.
> The big bourgeoisie supported it for other reasons. It's hard to see 
> fascism
> sinking roots in modern advanced capitalist societies which are so much 
> more
> diverse, cosmopolitan, urban, and educated than they were in the 30's. The
> social base of the DP and social democratic parties would move further 
> left
> under the impact of a deepening crisis. We've already seen the beginnings 
> of
> such movement in the US. The Republican social base, almost exclusively
> white, will move further right. Their relative strength today suggests 
> what
> the balance of forces is and is likely to be as social tensions increase.
_____________________

Marvin,  Germans considered themselves, their Weimar republic, and their 
culture the most enlightened, cosmopolitan, educated, and urban of Europe. 
They were consoling themselves, just like you are, with the delusion that 
education, liberalism, enlightenment counts for anything when it's a 
question of preserving private property.

If you don't think we should be quite so quick to discount the potential for 
a fascist popular movement in the US, UK, Germany, Russia, the countries of 
Eastern and Central Europe.  Layoffs have just started, ruination of small 
businesses has more than just started, but has hardly run its course.

The issue will be decided by the quality and quantity of working class, 
conscious, social action, not be the enlightenment, diversity, education, 
sophistication of the capitalist society.

>
>
> ________________________________________________
> 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 lueko.willms at t-online.de  Sun Mar  1 08:58:21 2009
From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (=?iso-8859-1?q?L=FCko_Willms?=)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:58:21 +0100 (MEZ)
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight
In-Reply-To: <d5c.34270770.36dbaa72@aol.com>
References: <d5c.34270770.36dbaa72@aol.com>
Message-ID: <000.b09b04009db0aa49.099@lws-media.de>

On Sun, 1 Mar 2009 04:08:02 EST, Jscotlive at aol.com wrote:

> This crap presupposes that I think the FARC are making mistakes. On the  
> contrary, I think their resistance to the Colombian oligarchs and their death  
> squads over the past 30 years has been nothing short of heroic.

  Being heroic does not prevent making mistakes both in a tactical and a 
strategical sense. 

> What I do think IS determined is that oppression breeds resistance. 

  Yeah, but defeat breeds demoralisation. There is no automatism (we 
discussed this in relation to this Irish splinter group some time ago) that 
repression results in _increased_ resistance, following the motto "let's 
provoke the ruling class to be as vicious they can get, and this will result in 
the people rising up". That has never worked. 

> You obviously do not. In fact, in every nuance of your posts 
> on both this and Hamas,  is your chauvinistic distaste for 
> the victims of oppression. 

  This was not addressed to me, but while I have a lot of compassion with 
victims of oppression, or maybe just pity, I have sympathy for people who 
fight, and who have charted a way to fight sucessfully. 


On Sun, 1 Mar 2009 03:43:28 EST, Jscotlive at aol.com wrote, replying to an 
earlier remark by me:

>> But the fact is that the FARC takes prisoners in order 
>> to exchange them for money or the release of some 
>> of their people in the government's goals.  

> I don't see how we can disapprove of a revolutionary movement 
> carrying out actions in solidarity with its members and comrades 
> incarcerated by the  enemy.

   Certainly not, but one can very well ponder the usefulness of this and that 
actual "action in solidarity". I don't think that it helps to keep prisoners for 
many years as hostages waiting for an opportunity to exchange them. That 
degrades those human beings into a commodity which is only stored away 
speculating for a higher price being paid for it. 

  As I said in the message which "jscotlive" answered above:

>> I don't think this helps to advance politically and to undermine the  
>> political base of the Bogot? regime. 

  To which "jscotlive" responded: 

> Attempting to explain the lack of advance or success 
> of the FARC as a consequence of tactics is to miss the 
> point that they are acting in a position of weakness not strength. 

  Well, I am also in a position of weakness compared to the bourgeois state, 
but I would not dare to take prisoners and keep them as hostage for years, 
not even days. The so-called "Red Army Faction" (RAF) tried it and failed 
abysmally. 

  The FARC, on the other hand, are in a position of strengh, rather, having 
their bases in the jungle, unknown or inacessible to the government armed 
forces. If they make a wise use of this their position of strength is 
questionable. 

> Material conditions of struggle determine actions, not 
> the other way around. 

  Well, rather they determine the choice of actions which a revolutionist can 
successfully undertake. The political results of the revolutionists actions then 
become part of the objective situation which shapes the choices at hand. The 
art of revolutionary politics is to chose _those_ actions which change the 
objective situation as best as possible to the advantage of the working 
masses, i.e. enhancing the workers' self-confidence and sense of "Yes, we 
can!". 


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

From pt_costello at yahoo.com  Sun Mar  1 09:19:19 2009
From: pt_costello at yahoo.com (Pat Costello)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 08:19:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Evangelical Christian Republican Activist Arrested for
	Murder of Chilean Students
Message-ID: <528286.16453.qm@web63106.mail.re1.yahoo.com>


Well, we can just imagine how this would be treated if the murder were muslim: it would be called a "terrorist attack" and on the front pages of all the major media. 

http://immigrationmexicanamerican.blogspot.com/
Hate Crime: Christian Conservative Republican Activist Arrested for Murdering Two Legal Latino Students! Proclaims Upcoming "Revolution!" 
In one of the most heinous HATE Crimes against Latinos in U.S. history, two young Latino students were brutally murdered yesterday by Republican activist and Christian Conservative Minister Donnie Ray Baker (60). When Deputies arrived at the murder-site, they found innocent, legal (from Chile), Latino students: Nicolas Pablo Corp-Torres (23) and Racine Balbontin-Aragondona (22), deceased at the scene. Deputies also discovered three victims that had been wounded. Fransisco Javier Cofre-Fernande (25) was air lifted by life flight to Sacred Heart and is in critical condition. Sebastian Mauricio Arizaga-Suarez (27) was also air lifted to Sacred Heart and is listed in stable condition at this time. The third victim, David Alonzo Bilbao-Meza (21) was taken to a local hospital and is listed in good condition. It is heartbreaking to learn that these innocent children, at the beginning of their lives, were so brutally murdered by someone who proclaimed he was a
Christian minister.

The murder rampage began a little before 2:00 am Thursday morning at the units of the Summer Lake Townhomes in Miramar Beach, Florida. Investigators said Baker left his townhouse, armed with a rifle, walked across the complex to the victims' unit's window, peaked inside, and opened fire.
After the shooting, witnesses saw Baker carrying a rifle though the pool area across the street to his home on the other side of the complex. Authorities say he locked himself inside and waited. When authorities arrived, they used a loudspeaker to talk with Baker, said Michele Nicholson with the Okaloosa County Sheriff's Office. Baker surrendered without further incident shortly after 6 a.m. His tennis shoes were discarded near the door of his home at Unit 25, where he was arrested.Afterwards, neighbor Crystal Lynn said, "he did come up to me one time and asked me if I was ready for the revolution to begin and if I had any immigrants in my house to get them out."

While many Republicans are already attempting to distance themselves from Baker proclaiming him a lone nutcase, on the Landover Baptist website, one Republican Christian Conservative, Jeb Thurmond, has already proclaimed: "Walton County Republican Headquarters volunteer Dannie R Baker is being persecuted for pre-emptively defending America against potential illegal immigrants." Some Republican, Christian Conservative and ANTI Immigration Reform websites are predicting an on-coming Revolution against the Obama Administration and their supporters. Reading the Landover Baptist website provides eerie insights into their diabolical agenda. How can anyone with these heinous agendas pretend to be Christian?
Baker was a pitiful man, looking for love. On one "looking for love" website, this 60 year old man advertised for a woman between 18 - 29. He said, "I'm looking for a woman to be my bride and to have my children and to enjoy my lifestyle on the beach in Florida, USA!!! I want a Christian who wants to be a ministers wife." It is a good thing no one answered. 
Let's hope Baker is charged, to the fullest extent of the law, for the HATE Crimes he so callously committed.

===

There is a diary up at DailyKos about this story:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/2/27/111358/776/169/702588

Here is a media clip:

http://www.wjhg.com/home/headlines/40388992.html


      


From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 10:01:36 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:01:36 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] From $70k per year to $12 per hour
Message-ID: <49AABF70.60005@gmail.com>

Fascism or better put, extreme right-wing reaction can occur across any 
racial lines. Given the history of the U.S., obviously anti-Black racism 
can get turned into more overt fascist-like responses the crisis. But 
there is a strong grain of "populism" that is important politically for 
mobilizing far-right wing activists. This is why in spite of the 
opposition/hatred by the KKK in the 1920s and 1930s to Jews and 
Catholics, it never achieved the 'mass base' their anti-Black bigotry 
achieved. Not even close, though it existed residually.

Now, such fascist tendencies, I believe, will tend to focus on Latinos 
and immigrants specifically (never Canadians, of course, our 2nd or 3rd 
largest immigrant base, cuz they are white and "sound like us"). And, it 
will include Blacks and some native born Latinos as well. We've already 
seen how "anti-crime" organizations like the Guardian Angels have no 
problem recruiting Blacks and Latinos to their organizations. Overtly 
"non-" and "anti-" racist "fascism" based on hatred of immigrants 
already exists in some place and I can see it spread. The broader-based 
Conservative movement is grappling now with how to articulate this in a 
focused way, at least electorally...if not worse ways.

BTW...I'm one of those people that went from $70k a year  union job to 
ZERO. For a about 7 months now. Not fun.

David


From hunterbadbear at hunterbear.org  Sun Mar  1 10:14:45 2009
From: hunterbadbear at hunterbear.org (Hunter Gray)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 10:14:45 -0700
Subject: [Marxism] Shooting Lupus Dead
Message-ID: <000c01c99a91$38edbe10$0400a8c0@computer>

NOTE BY HUNTER BEAR: MARCH 1 2009

While, as recent history indicates, premature declarations of "victory" can prove fallacious, I can report -- as per my observations and, more to the point, those of my long-term and medically conservative physician who happens to be LDS, that's we've definitely turned a "good big corner" in our Lupus War. Here is my initial post, followed by Mack's query, and then by my response. I should add that I've just thrown off an upper bronchial problem -- now endemic here in southeastern Idaho during many days of atypical icy fog -- and have tossed it without any medicinal aid. [Still have troublesome sinus problems stemming from an old, serious facial injury.]

I am posting this on lists where significant numbers have been concerned about my med condition. Most are now aware that Systemic Lupus, relatively rare and considered "lethal", has a genetic base [in some cases, environmental factors play a secondary role] and a special preference for Native Americans, Blacks, Chicanos, and some Asian groups, and women in general. It's one of the most serious of the auto-immune diseases [where the body's immune system attacks various organs]. It has no cure and there have been no new Lupus medicines of substance for half a century -- although stem cell research offers grounds for some optimism.

For the rest [updated through February 28 2009], see

http://hunterbear.org/shooting_lupus.htm


HUNTER GRAY [HUNTER BEAR/JOHN R SALTER JR] Mi'kmaq /St. Francis
Abenaki/St. Regis Mohawk
Protected by Na?shdo?i?ba?i?
and Ohkwari'

Check out our Hunterbear website Directory http://hunterbear.org/directory.htm
[The site is dedicated to our one-half Bobcat, Cloudy Gray:
http://hunterbear.org/cloudy_gray.htm

I have always lived and worked in the Borderlands. 
http://hunterbear.org/outlaw_trail1.htm


In our Gray Hole, the ghosts often dance in the junipers and sage, on the
game trails, in the tributary canyons with the thick red maples, and on the
high windy ridges -- and they dance from within the very essence of our own
inner being. They do this especially when the bright night moon shines down
on the clean white snow that covers the valley and its surroundings.  Then
it is as bright as day -- but in an always soft and mysterious and
remembering way. [Hunter Bear]
 http://www.hunterbear.org/GRAY%20LANDS%20AND%20GRAY%20GHOSTS.htm

From sabocat59 at mac.com  Sun Mar  1 10:37:34 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 17:37:34 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Evangelical Christian Republican Activist Arrested
	for Murder of Chilean Students
Message-ID: <858138070-1235929151-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1056714258-@bxe1070.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

Looks like he really does believe his own bullshit. 

Straight out of a Flannery O'Conner short story.  

Greg McDonald
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T


From nmgoro at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 10:56:43 2009
From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 18:56:43 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight
In-Reply-To: <000.b09b04009db0aa49.099@lws-media.de>
References: <d5c.34270770.36dbaa72@aol.com>
	<000.b09b04009db0aa49.099@lws-media.de>
Message-ID: <2fa158550903010956k566ac87bo8886f58c436de679@mail.gmail.com>

2009/3/1 L?ko Willms <lueko.willms en t-online.de>:
> On Sun, 1 Mar 2009 04:08:02 EST, Jscotlive en aol.com wrote:
>
>> This crap presupposes that I think the FARC are making mistakes. On the
>> contrary, I think their resistance to the Colombian oligarchs and their death
>> squads over the past 30 years has been nothing short of heroic.
>
>  Being heroic does not prevent making mistakes both in a tactical and a
> strategical sense.

Ask Ernesto Guevara, who was as heroic as pure, something not every
member of FARC can say in the same degree.

>
>> What I do think IS determined is that oppression breeds resistance.
>
>  Yeah, but defeat breeds demoralisation. There is no automatism (we
> discussed this in relation to this Irish splinter group some time ago) that
> repression results in _increased_ resistance, following the motto "let's
> provoke the ruling class to be as vicious they can get, and this will result in
> the people rising up". That has never worked.
>

Ask the Colombian working class if TODAY (not yesterday, not
yesteryear, not some decades ago) they are repressed in the name of
the anti-FARC struggle, or not.  The FARC are more popular in the
"liberated" corners of the main cities in the West than they are in
the working class neighborhoods. And this includes the neighborhoods
of Bogot?...




-- 

N?stor Gorojovsky
El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a


From adambrichmond at yahoo.com  Sun Mar  1 10:59:58 2009
From: adambrichmond at yahoo.com (Adam Richmond)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 09:59:58 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] From $70k per year to $12 per hour
In-Reply-To: <49AABF70.60005@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <848031.10692.qm@web54603.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

I too have fallen from the mid-60s to zero per year, on food stamps and no longer eligible for unemployment.  I've cleaned bathrooms before, but now that I am in my 50s, I am not looking forward to it.  




      


From Jscotlive at aol.com  Sun Mar  1 11:14:19 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 13:14:19 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight
Message-ID: <c00.52dd424c.36dc2a7b@aol.com>

Luko:
 
Being heroic does not prevent making mistakes both in a tactical and a  
strategical sense. 

Reply:
 
And, again, I dispute your assertion that the FARC are making mistakes. I  
also find it unconscionable for Marxists living in the comfort of the West,  
risking nothing, judging those who are struggling on the front lines against  
imperialism.
 
They do not require our approval. On the contrary, it is we who require  
theirs for what we do and say in solidarity.
 
Luko:
 
Yeah, but defeat breeds demoralisation. There is no automatism (we  
discussed this in relation to this Irish splinter group some time ago) that  
repression results in _increased_ resistance, following the motto "let's  
provoke the ruling class to be as vicious they can get, and this will result  
in 
the people rising up". That has never worked. 

Reply:
 
Yeah, but no resistance breeds wholesale destruction. And to even suggest  
that people would 'provoke the ruling class' as you describe, as if it's some  
kind of sport they're engaged in, is simply baffling to me. Resistance 
movements  arise as necessity, not choice, and certainly in the case of the FARC. 
Sometimes  those resistance movements are crushed, occasionally they make 
advances, even  more rarely they win. Furthermore, your final assertion that action  
can never precede consciousness is demonstrably false. The experience of the  
Easter Rising in 1916 and what came after, the experience of the Cuban  
Revolution, teaches us that action can precede consciousness.

Luko:
 
This was not addressed to me, but while I have a lot of compassion with  
victims of oppression, or maybe just pity, I have sympathy for people who  
fight, and who have charted a way to fight successfully. 

Reply:
 
Oh, I see - so your approval for those who would dare get up off  their knees 
and resist their oppression is only accorded on the basis of their  success. 
What kind of solidarity is that? Seriously, again, I'm  astonished.
 
Luko:
 
Well, I am also in a position of weakness compared to the bourgeois state,  
but I would not dare to take prisoners and keep them as hostage for years,  
not even days. The so-called "Red Army Faction" (RAF) tried it and failed  
abysmally. 

Reply:
 
How very droll to compare yourself, living in Germany, with a movement  at 
war with one of the most reactionary and brutal regimes in the world. Great  
method you have there, Luko. Of course,in your sarcasm you fail  completely to 
address the point being made.
 
I hope there's isn't too much more of this to troll through.
 
Let's see.
 
Na, fuck it, I can't.     
 
 

From Jscotlive at aol.com  Sun Mar  1 11:23:43 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 13:23:43 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight
Message-ID: <cce.48831cb9.36dc2caf@aol.com>

Nestor:
 
Ask Ernesto Guevara, who was as heroic as pure, something not  every
member of FARC can say in the same degree.
 
Reply:
 
Something not every member of ANY movement can say in the same degree. What  
really is the point of such a statement? 
 
Nestor:
 
Ask the Colombian working class if TODAY (not yesterday, not
yesteryear,  not some decades ago) they are repressed in the name of
the anti-FARC  struggle, or not. The FARC are more popular in the
"liberated" corners of the  main cities in the West than they are in
the working class neighborhoods. And  this includes the neighborhoods
of Bogot?...

Reply:
 
Ask the Palestinians, the Iraqis, ask the Irish working class during the  
Troubles - ask any people who're trying best to survive in the midst of an  armed 
struggle - if they are or were repressed in the name of a  counterinsurgency 
struggle.
 
Again, what's your point? 
 
Perhaps resistance movements are more popular with people who are in  
possession of a certain consciousness. The IRA were more popular in the Irish  bars 
of New York than they ever were in Dublin. Did that in any  way diminish the 
righteousness of their cause?
 
 
 
 

From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sun Mar  1 12:06:36 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 14:06:36 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight
References: <c00.52dd424c.36dc2a7b@aol.com>
Message-ID: <B8E1AD7169C6437C908056D33E3AFA50@dmsthinkpad>

So how does someone living in the comfort of the West, risking nothing, 
demanding blind obedience to FARC, and I would guess from other statements, 
regarding any dissent from FARC "ideology" and practice as actual treason, 
differ from somebody living in the comfort of the West, risking nothing, 
criticizing the FARC?

Seems to me the same things were said to those criticizing Fatah, those who 
pointed out what a blind alley it's nationalism was; seems to me the same 
thing was said and recently to those who had the temerity to criticize 
Mugabe, Sinn Fein, Lula  etc.etc. etc.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Jscotlive at aol.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 1:14 PM
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight


> Luko:
>
> Being heroic does not prevent making mistakes both in a tactical and a
> strategical sense.
>
> Reply:
>
> And, again, I dispute your assertion that the FARC are making mistakes. I
> also find it unconscionable for Marxists living in the comfort of the 
> West,
> risking nothing, judging those who are struggling on the front lines 
> against
> imperialism.
>
> They do not require our approval. On the contrary, it is we who require
> theirs for what we do and say in solidarity.
>
> Luko:
>
> Yeah, but defeat breeds demoralisation. There is no automatism (we
> discussed this in relation to this Irish splinter group some time ago) 
> that
> repression results in _increased_ resistance, following the motto "let's
> provoke the ruling class to be as vicious they can get, and this will 
> result
> in
> the people rising up". That has never worked.
>
> Reply:
>
> Yeah, but no resistance breeds wholesale destruction. And to even suggest
> that people would 'provoke the ruling class' as you describe, as if it's 
> some
> kind of sport they're engaged in, is simply baffling to me. Resistance
> movements  arise as necessity, not choice, and certainly in the case of 
> the FARC.
> Sometimes  those resistance movements are crushed, occasionally they make
> advances, even  more rarely they win. Furthermore, your final assertion 
> that action
> can never precede consciousness is demonstrably false. The experience of 
> the
> Easter Rising in 1916 and what came after, the experience of the Cuban
> Revolution, teaches us that action can precede consciousness.
>
> Luko:
>
> This was not addressed to me, but while I have a lot of compassion with
> victims of oppression, or maybe just pity, I have sympathy for people who
> fight, and who have charted a way to fight successfully.
>
> Reply:
>
> Oh, I see - so your approval for those who would dare get up off  their 
> knees
> and resist their oppression is only accorded on the basis of their 
> success.
> What kind of solidarity is that? Seriously, again, I'm  astonished.
>
> Luko:
>
> Well, I am also in a position of weakness compared to the bourgeois state,
> but I would not dare to take prisoners and keep them as hostage for years,
> not even days. The so-called "Red Army Faction" (RAF) tried it and failed
> abysmally.
>
> Reply:
>
> How very droll to compare yourself, living in Germany, with a movement  at
> war with one of the most reactionary and brutal regimes in the world. 
> Great
> method you have there, Luko. Of course,in your sarcasm you fail 
> completely to
> address the point being made.
>
> I hope there's isn't too much more of this to troll through.
>
> Let's see.
>
> Na, fuck it, I can't.
>
>
> ________________________________________________
> 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 proletariandan at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 12:20:52 2009
From: proletariandan at gmail.com (Dan Russell)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 13:20:52 -0600
Subject: [Marxism] Orwell on Socialism, Fascism, and the Sinking Middle Class
Message-ID: <517f3cab0903011120m3c930e1ewb3b864c86b868508@mail.gmail.com>

This is a long but fairly succinct and vitally important chapter. I think
Eric Blair's advice is as important, maybe more important now, than it was
in the 1930s. One could argue that there is more at stake today than there
was then and socialists need to be pragmatic enough to dump tired rhetoric,
programmatic perfectionism, and sectarianism and unite behind a movement
that will not drive away the crumbling middle class.

I can personally say that I know Blair is right on many points. I have
considered myself a socialist, a Marxist, for some time now, yet the
unnecessary divisions and absurd sectarianism among the American left has
kept me from joining any explicitly socialist group and has pointed me
towards the Green Party as the only real hope at the moment. I also
empathize with many of Blair's 'lower-upper-middle' class prejudices despite
the fact neither I nor my family ever had much money but I think that I,
like Blair, came to socialism despite the obstacles that he describes and
that it will not be as easy to win over the rest of the middle class even as
the economy deteriorates.

http://www.george-orwell.org/The_Road_to_Wigan_Pier/12.html

[...] More important than any party label is the diffusion of Socialist
doctrine in
an effective form. People have got to be made ready to act as Socialists.
There are, I believe, countless people who, without being aware of it, are
in sympathy with the essential aims of Socialism, and who could be won over
almost with-out a struggle if only one could find the word that would move
them. Everyone who knows the meaning of poverty, everyone who has a genuine
hatred of tyranny and war, is on the Socialist side, potentially. My job
here, therefore, is to suggest--necessarily in very general terms--how
a reconciliation might be effected between Socialism and its more
intelligent enemies.

First, as to the enemies themselves--I mean all those people who
grasp that capitalism is evil but who are conscious of a sort of queasy,
shuddering sensation when Socialism is mentioned. As I have pointed out,
this is traceable to two main causes. One is the personal inferiority of
many individual Socialists; the other is the fact that Socialism is too
often coupled with a fat-bellied, godless conception of 'progress' which
revolts anyone with a feeling for tradition or the rudiments of an
aesthetic sense. Let me take the second point first.

(Our struggle in the US, I think, is nearly the opposite - to convince
people that socialism could in fact work but without the ecological
destruction wrought by capitalism nor a Stalinist police state - the fears
of a machine-civilization are coming about instead under capitalism.)

The distaste for 'progress' and machine-civilization which is so
common among sensitive people is only defensible as an attitude of mind. It
is not valid as a reason for rejecting Socialism, because it presupposes an
alternative which does not exist. When you say, 'I object to mechanization
and standardization--therefore I object to Socialism', you are saying in
effect, 'I am free to do without the machine if I choose', which is
nonsense. We are all dependent upon the machine, and if the machines
stopped working most of us would die. You may hate the machine-
civilization, probably you are right to hate it, but for the present there
can be no question of accepting or rejecting it. The machine-civilization
is here, and it can only be criticized from the inside, because all of us
are inside it. It is only romantic fools who natter themselves that they
have escaped, like the literary gent in his Tudor cottage with bathroom h.
and c., and the he-man who goes off to live a 'primitive' life in the
jungle with a Mannlicher rifle and four wagon-loads of tinned food. And
almost certainly the machine-civilization will continue to triumph. There
is no reason to think that it will destroy itself or stop functioning of
its own accord. For some time past it has been fashionable to say that war
is presently going to 'wreck civilization' altogether; but, though the next
full-sized war will certainly be horrible enough to make all previous ones
seem a joke, it is immensely unlikely that it will put a stop to mechanical
progress. It is true that a very vulnerable country like England, and
perhaps the whole of western Europe, could be reduced to chaos by a few
thousand well-placed bombs, but no war is at present thinkable which could
wipe out industrialization in all countries simultaneously. We may take it
that the return to a simpler, free, less mechanized way of life, however
desirable it may be, is not going to happen. This is not fatalism, it is
merely acceptance of facts. It is meaningless to oppose Socialism on the
ground that you object to the beehive State, for the beehive State is here.
The choice is not, as yet, between a human and an inhuman world. It is
simply between Socialism and Fascism, which at its very best is Socialism
with the virtues left out.

The job of the thinking person, therefore, is not to reject Socialism
but to make up his mind to humanize it. Once Socialism is in a way to being
established, those who can see through the swindle of 'progress' will
probably find themselves resisting. In fact, it is their special function
to do so. In the machine-world they have got to be a sort of permanent
opposition, which is not the same thing as being an obstructionist or a
traitor. But in this I am speaking of the future. For the moment the only
possible course for any decent person, however much of a Tory or an
anarchist by temperament, is to work for the establishment of Socialism.
Nothing else can save us from the misery of the present or the nightmare of
the future. To oppose Socialism now, when twenty million Englishmen are
underfed and Fascism has conquered half Europe, is suicidal. It is like
starting a civil war when the Goths are crossing the frontier.

Therefore it is all the more important to get rid of that mere nervous
prejudice against Socialism which is not founded on any serious objection.
As I have pointed out already, many people who are not repelled by
Socialism are repelled by Socialists. Socialism, as now presented, is
unattractive largely because it appears, at any rate from the outside, to
be the plaything of cranks, doctrinaires, parlour Bolsheviks, and so forth.
But it is worth remembering that this is only so because the cranks,
doctrinaires, etc., have been allowed to get there first J if the movement
were invaded by better brains and more common decency, the objectionable
types would cease to dominate it. For the present one must just set one's
teeth and ignore them; they will loom much smaller when the movement has
been humanized. Besides, they are irrelevant. We have got to fight for
justice and liberty, and Socialism does mean justice and liberty when the
nonsense is stripped off it. It is only the essentials that are worth
remembering. To recoil from Socialism because so many individual Socialists
are inferior people is as absurd as refusing to travel by train because you
dislike the ticket-collector's face.

And secondly, as to the Socialist himself--more especially the
vocal, tract-writing type of Socialist.

We are at a moment when it is desperately necessary for left-wingers
of all complexions to drop their differences and hang together. Indeed this
is already happening to a small extent. Obviously, then, the more
intransigent kind of Socialist has now got to ally himself with people who
are not in perfect agreement with him. As a rule he is rightly unwilling to
do so, because he sees the very real danger of watering the whole Socialist
movement down to some kind of pale-pink humbug even more ineffectual than
the parliamentary Labour Party. At the moment, for instance, there is great
danger that the Popular Front which Fascism will presumably bring into
existence will not be genuinely Socialist in character, but will simply be
a manoeuvre against German and Italian (not English) Fascism. Thus the need
to unite against Fascism might draw the Socialist into alliance with his
very worst enemies. But the principle to go upon is this: that you are
never in danger of allying yourself with the wrong people provided that you
keep the essentials of your movement in the foreground. And what are the
essentials of Socialism? What is the mark of a real Socialist? I suggest
that the real Socialist is one who wishes--not merely conceives it as
desirable, but actively wishes--to see tyranny overthrown. But I fancy
that the majority of orthodox Marxists would not accept that definition, or
would only accept it very grudgingly. Sometimes, when I listen to these
people talking, and still more when I read their books, I get the
impression that, to them, the whole Socialist movement is no more than a
kind of exciting heresy-hunt--a leaping to and fro of frenzied witch-
doctors to the beat of tom-toms and the tune of 'Fee fi, fo, fum, I smell
the blood of a right-wing deviationist!' It is because of this kind of
thing that it is so much easier to feel yourself a Socialist when you are
among working-class people. The working-class Socialist, like the working-
class Catholic, 's weak on doctrine and can hardly open his mouth without
uttering a heresy, but he has the heart of the matter in him. He does grasp
the central fact that Socialism means the overthrow of tyranny, and the
'Marseillaise', if it were translated for his benefit, would appeal to him
more deeply than any learned treatise on dialectical materialism. At this
moment it is waste of time to insist that acceptance of Socialism means
acceptance of the philosophic side of Marxism, plus adulation of Russia.
The Socialist movement has not time to be a league of dialectical
materialists; it has got to be a league of the oppressed against the
oppressors. You have got to attract the man who means business, and you
have got to drive away the mealy-mouthed Liberal who wants foreign Fascism
destroyed in order that he may go on drawing his dividends
peacefully--the type of hum-bug who passes resolutions 'against
Fascism and Communism', i.e. against rats and rat-poison. Socialism means
the overthrow of tyranny, at home as well as abroad. So long as you keep
that fact well to the front, you will never be in much doubt as to who
are your real supporters. As for minor differences--and the profoundest
philosophical difference is unimportant compared with saving the twenty
million Englishmen whose bones are rotting from malnutrition--the time to
argue about them is afterwards.

I do not think the Socialist need make any sacrifice of essentials,
but certainly he will have to make a great sacrifice of externals. It would
help enormously, for instance, if the smell of crankishness which still
clings to the Socialist movement could be dispelled. If only the sandals
and the pistachio-coloured shirts could be put in a pile and burnt, and
every vegetarian, teetotaller, and creeping Jesus sent home to Welwyn
Garden City to do his yoga exercises quietly! But that, I am afraid, is not
going to happen. What is possible, however, is for the more intelligent
kind of Socialist to stop alienating possible supporters in silly and quite
irrelevant ways. There are so many minor priggishness which could so easily
be dropped. Take for instance the dreary attitude of the typical Marxist
towards literature. Out of the many that come into my mind, I will give
just one example. It sounds trivial, but it isn't. In the old Worker's
Weekly (one of the forerunners of the Daily Worker) there used to be a
column of literary chat of the 'Books on the Editor's Table' type. For
several weeks miming there had been a certain amount of talk about
Shakespeare; whereupon an incensed reader wrote to say, 'Dear Comrade, we
don't want to hear about these bourgeois writers like Shakespeare. Can't
you give us something a bit more proletarian?' etc., etc. The editor's
reply was simple. 'If you will turn to the index of Marx's Capital,' he
wrote, 'you will find that Shakespeare is mentioned several times.' And
please notice that this was enough to silence the objector. Once
Shakespeare had received the benediction of Marx, he became respectable.
That is the mentality that drives ordinary sensible people away from the
Socialist movement. You do not need to care about Shakespeare to be
repelled by that kind of thing. Again, there is the horrible jargon that
nearly all Socialists think it necessary to employ. When the ordinary
person hears phrases like 'bourgeois ideology' and 'proletarian solidarity'
and 'expropriation of the expropriators', he is not inspired by them, he is
merely disgusted. Even the single word 'Comrade' has done its dirty little
bit towards discrediting the Socialist movement. How many a waverer has
halted on the brink, gone perhaps to some public meeting and watched self-
conscious Socialists dutifully addressing one another as 'Comrade', and
then slid away, disillusioned, into the nearest four-ale bar! And his
instinct is sound; for where is the sense of sticking on to yourself a
ridiculous label which even after long practice can hardly be mentioned
without a gulp of shame? It is fatal to let the ordinary inquirer get away
with the idea that being a Socialist means wearing sandals and burbling
about dialectical materialism. You have got to make it clear that there is
room in the Socialist movement for human beings, or the game is up.

And this raises a great difficulty. It means that the issue of class,
as distinct from mere economic status, has got to be faced more
realistically than it is being faced at present.

I devoted three chapters to discussing the class-difficulty. The
principal fact that will have emerged, I think, is that though the English
class-system has outlived its usefulness, it has outlived it and shows no
signs of dying. It greatly confuses the issue to assume, as the orthodox
Marxist so often does (see for instance Mr Alee Brown's in some ways
interesting book. The Fate of the Middle Classes), that social status is
determined solely by income. Economically, no doubt, there are only two
classes, the rich and the poor, but socially there is a whole hierarchy of
classes, and the manners and traditions learned by each class in childhood
are not only very different but--this is the essential point--generally
persist from birth to death. 'Hence the anomalous individuals that you find
in every class of society. You find writers like Wells and Bennett who have
grown immensely rich and have yet preserved intact their lower-middle-class
Nonconformist prejudices; you find millionaires who cannot pronounce their
aitches; you find petty shopkeepers whose income is far lower than that of
the bricklayer and who, nevertheless, consider themselves (and are
considered) the bricklayer's social superiors; you find board-school boys
ruling Indian provinces and public-school men touting vacuum cleaners. If
social stratification corresponded precisely to economic stratification,
the public-school man would assume a cockney accent the day his income
dropped below L200 a year. But does he? On the contrary, he immediately
becomes twenty times more Public School than before. He clings to the Old
School Tie as to a life-line. And even the aitchless millionaire, though
sometimes he goes to an elocutionist and leams a B.B.C. accent, seldom
succeeds in disguising himself as completely as he would like to. It is in
fact very difficult to escape, culturally, from the class into which you
have been born.

As prosperity declines, social anomalies grow commoner. You don't get
more aitchless millionaires, but you do get more and more public-school men
touting vacuum cleaners and more and more small shopkeepers driven into the
workhouse. Large sections of the middle class are being gradually
proletarianized; but the important point is that they do not, at any rate
in the first generation, adopt a proletarian outlook. Here am I, for
instance, with a bourgeois upbringing and a working-class income. Which
class do I belong to? Economically I belong to the working class, but it is
almost impossible for me to think of myself as anything but a member of the
bourgeoisie. And supposing I had to take sides, whom should I side with,
the upper class which is trying to squeeze me out of existence, or the
working class whose manners are not my manners? It is probable that I
personally, in any important issue, would side with the working class. But
what about the tens or hundreds of thousands of others who are in
approximately the same position? And what about that far larger class,
running into millions this time--the office-workers and black-coated
employees of all kinds--whose traditions are less definitely middle class
but who would certainly not thank you if you called them proletarians? All
of these people have the same interests and the same enemies as the working
class. All are being robbed and bullied by the same system. Yet how many of
them realize it? When the pinch came nearly all of them would side with
their oppressors and against those who ought to be their allies. It is
quite easy to imagine a middle class crushed down to the worst depths of
poverty and still remaining bitterly anti-working-class in sentiment; this
being, of course, a ready-made Fascist Party.

Obviously the Socialist movement has got to capture the exploited
middle class before it is too late; above all it must capture the office-
workers, who are so numerous and, if they knew how to combine, so powerful.
Equally obviously it has so far failed to do so. The very last person in
whom you can hope to find revolutionary opinions is a clerk or a commercial
traveller. Why? Very largely, I think, because of the 'proletarian' cant
with which Socialist propaganda is mixed up. In order to symbolize the
class war, there has been set up the more or less mythical figure of a
'proletarian', a muscular but downtrodden man in greasy overalls, in
contradistinction to a 'capitalist', a fat, wicked man in a top hat and fur
coat. It is tacitly assumed that there is no one in between; the truth
being, of course, that in a country like England about a quarter of the
population is in between. If you are going to harp on the 'dictatorship of
the proletariat', it is an elementary precaution to start by explaining who
the proletariat are. But because of the Socialist tendency to idealize the
manual worker as such, this has never been made sufficiently clear. How
many of the wretched shivering army of clerks and shopwalkers, who in some
ways are actually worse off than a miner or a dock-hand, think of
themselves as proletarians? A proletarian--so they have been taught to
think--means a man without a collar. So that when you try to move them by
talking about 'class war', you only succeed in scaring them; they forget
their incomes and remember their accents, and fly to the defence of the
class that is exploiting them.

Socialists have a big job ahead of them here. They have got to
demonstrate, beyond possibility of doubt, just where the line of cleavage
between exploiter and exploited comes. Once again it is a question of
sticking to essentials; and the essential point here is that all people
with small, insecure incomes are in the same boat and ought to be fighting
on the same side. Probably we could do with a little less talk about'
capitalist' and 'proletarian' and a little more about the robbers and the
robbed. But at any rate we must drop that misleading habit of pretending
that the only proletarians are manual labourers. It has got to be brought
home to the clerk, the engineer, the commercial traveller, the middle-class
man who has 'come down in the world', the village grocer, the lower-grade
civil servant, and all other doubtful cases that they are the proletariat,
and that Socialism means a fair deal for them as well as for the navvy and
the factory-hand. They must not be allowed to think that the battle is
between those who pronounce their aitches and those who don't; for if they
think that, they will join in on the side of the aitches.

I am implying that different classes must be persuaded to act together
without, for the moment, being asked to drop their class-differences. And
that sounds dangerous. It sounds rather too like the Duke of York's summer
camp and that dismal line of talk about class-cooperation and putting our
shoulders to the wheel, which is eyewash or Fascism, or both. There can be
no cooperation between classes whose real interests are opposed. The
capitalist cannot cooperate with the proletarian. The cat cannot cooperate
with the mouse; and if the cat does suggest cooperation and the mouse is
fool enough to agree, in a very little while the mouse will be disappearing
down the cat's throat. But it is always possible to cooperate so long as it
is upon a basis of common interests. The people who have got to act
together are all those who cringe to the boss and all those who shudder
when they think of the rent. This means that the small-holder has got to
ally himself with the factory-hand, the typist with the coal-miner, the
schoolmaster with the garage mechanic. There is some hope of getting them
to do so if they can be made to understand where their interest lies. But
this will not happen if their social prejudices, which in some of them are
at least as strong as any economic consideration, arc needlessly irritated.
There is, after all, a real difference of manners and traditions between a
bank clerk and a dock labourer, and the bank clerk's feeling of superiority
is very deeply rooted. Later on he will have to get rid of it, but this is
not a good moment for asking him. to do so. Therefore it would be a very
great advantage if that rather meaningless and mechanical bourgeois-
baiting, which is a part of nearly all Socialist propaganda, could be
dropped for the time being. Throughout left-wing thought and writing--and
the whole way through it, from the leading articles in the Daily Worker to
the comic columns in the News Chronicle--there runs an anti-genteel
tradition, a persistent and often very stupid gibing at genteel mannerisms
and genteel loyalties (or, in Communist jargon, 'bourgeois values'). It is
largely hum-bug, coming as it does from bourgeois-baiters who are bourgeois
themselves, but it does great harm, because it allows a minor issue to
block a major one. It directs attention away from the central fact that
poverty is poverty, whether the tool you work with is a pick-axe or a
fountain-pen.

Once again, here am I, with my middle-class origins and my income of
about three pounds a week from all sources. For what I am worth it would be
better to get me in on the Socialist side than to turn me into a Fascist.
But if you are constantly bullying me about my 'bourgeois ideology', if you
give me to understand that in some subtle way I. am an inferior person
because I have never worked with my hands, you will only succeed in
antagonizing me. For you are telling me either that I am inherently useless
or that I ought to alter myself in some way that is beyond my power. I
cannot proletarianize my accent or certain of my tastes and beliefs, and I
would not if I could. Why should I? I don't ask anybody else to speak my
dialect; why should anybody else ask me to speak his? It would be far
better to take those miserable class-stigmata for granted and emphasize
them as little as possible. They are comparable to a race-difference, and
experience shows that one can cooperate with foreigners, even with
foreigners whom one dislikes, when it is really necessary. Economically, I
am in the same boat with the miner, the navvy, and the farm-hand; remind me
of that and I will fight at their side. But culturally I am different from
the miner, the navvy, and the farm-hand: lay the emphasis on that and you
may arm me against them. If I were a solitary anomaly I should not matter,
but what is true of myself is true of countless others. Every bank clerk
dreaming of the sack, every shop-keeper teetering on the brink of
bankruptcy, is in essentially the same position. These are the sinking
middle class, and most of them are clinging to their gentility under the
impression that it keeps them afloat. It is not good policy to start by
telling them to throw away the life-belt. There is a quite obvious danger
that in the next few years large sections of the middle class will make a
sudden and violent swing to the Right. In doing so they may become
formidable. The weakness of the middle class hitherto has lain in the fact
that they have never learned to combine; but if you frighten them into
combining against you, you may find that you have raised up a devil. We had
a brief glimpse of this possibility in the General Strike.

To sum up: There is no chance of righting the conditions I described
in the earlier chapters of this book, or of saving England from Fascism,
unless we can bring an effective Socialist party into existence. It will
have to be a party with genuinely revolutionary intentions, and it will
have to be numerically strong enough to act. We can only get it if we offer
an objective which fairly ordinary people will recognize as desirable.
Beyond all else, therefore, we need intelligent propaganda. Less about
'class consciousness', 'expropriation of the expropriators', 'bourgeois
ideology', and 'proletarian solidarity', not to mention the sacred sisters,
thesis, antithesis, and synthesis; and more about justice, liberty, and the
plight of the unemployed. And less about mechanical progress, tractors, the
Dnieper dam, and the latest salmon-canning factory in Moscow; that kind of
thing is not an integral part of Socialist doctrine, and it drives away
many people whom the Socialist cause needs, including most of those who can
hold a pen. All that is needed is to hammer two facts home into the public
consciousness. One, that the interests of all exploited people are the
same; the other, that Socialism is compatible with common decency.

As for the terribly difficult issue of class-distinctions, the only
possible policy for the moment is to go easy and not frighten more people
than can be helped. And above all, no more of those muscular-curate efforts
at class-breaking. If you belong to the bourgeoisie, don't be too eager to
bound forward and embrace your proletarian brothers; they may not like it,
and if they show that they don't like it you will probably find that your
class-prejudices are not so dead as you imagined. And if you belong to the
proletariat, by birth or in the sight of God, don't sneer too automatically
at the Old School Tie; it covers loyalties which can be useful to you if
you know how to handle them.

Yet I believe there is some hope that when Socialism is a living
issue, a thing that large numbers of Englishmen genuinely care about, the
class-difficulty may solve itself more rapidly than now seems thinkable. In
the next few years we shall either get that effective Socialist party that
we need, or we shall not get it. If we do not get it, then Fascism is
coming; probably a slimy Anglicized form of Fascism, with cultured
policemen instead of Nazi gorillas and the lion and the unicorn instead of
the swastika. But if we do get it there will be a struggle, conceivably a
physical one, for our plutocracy will not sit quiet under a genuinely
revolutionary government. And when the widely separate classes who,
necessarily, would form any real Socialist party have fought side by side,
they may feel differently about one another. And then perhaps this misery
of class-prejudice will fade away, and we of the sinking middle class--
the private schoolmaster, the half-starved free-lance journalist, the
colonel's spinster daughter with L75 a year, the jobless Cambridge
graduate, the ship's officer without a ship, the clerks, the civil
servants, the commercial travellers, and the thrice-bankrupt drapers in the
country towns--may sink without further struggles into the working class
where we belong, and probably when we get there it will not be so dreadful
as we feared, for, after all, we have nothing to lose but our aitches.

From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Mar  1 12:26:48 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 14:26:48 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Paul Harvey
Message-ID: <49AAE178.3030100@panix.com>

March 1, 2009
Paul Harvey, Talk-Radio Pioneer, Is Dead at 90
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

CHICAGO ? Paul Harvey, the news commentator and talk-radio pioneer whose 
staccato style made him one of the nation?s most familiar voices, died 
Saturday in Arizona, according to ABC Radio Networks. He was 90.

Mr. Harvey died surrounded by family at a hospital in Phoenix, where he 
had a winter home, said Louis Adams, a spokesman for ABC Radio Networks, 
where Mr. Harvey worked for more than 50 years. No cause of death was 
immediately available.

Mr. Harvey had been forced off the air for several months in 2001 
because of a virus that weakened a vocal cord. But he returned to work 
in Chicago and was still active as he passed his 90th birthday. His 
death comes less than a year after that of his wife and longtime 
producer, Lynne.

?My father and mother created from thin air what one day became radio 
and television news,? their only child, Paul Harvey Jr., said in a 
statement. ?So in the past year, an industry has lost its godparents, 
and today millions have lost a friend.?

Known for his resonant voice and his trademark radio feature called ?The 
Rest of the Story,? Mr. Harvey had been heard nationally since 1951, 
when he began his ?News and Comment? feature for ABC Radio Networks.

He became a heartland icon, delivering news and commentary with a 
distinctive Midwestern flavor. ?Stand by for news!? he would tell 
listeners.

---

http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/03/01/the-rest-of-paul-harveys-story/
The Rest of Paul Harvey's Story
03/01/2009 by Jim Naureckas

On the death of radio's Paul Harvey, it's hard for me not to think of 
his June 23, 2005 broadcast as his most revealing moment.

That's the episode where he delivered this memorable rant (Extra! 
Update, 8/05):

     After the attack on Pearl Harbor, Winston Churchill said that the 
American people?he said, the American people, he said, and this is a 
direct quote, "We didn?t come this far because we are made of sugar candy."

     And that reminder was taken seriously. And we proceeded to develop 
and deliver the bomb, even though roughly 150,000 men, women and 
children perished in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. With a single blow, World 
War II was over.

     Following New York, September 11, Winston Churchill was not here to 
remind us that we didn?t come this far because we?re made of sugar candy.

     So, following the New York disaster, we mustered our humanity...and 
we sent men with rifles into Afghanistan and Iraq, and we kept our best 
weapons in our silos.

     Even now we're standing there dying, daring to do nothing decisive, 
because we?ve declared ourselves to be better than our terrorist 
enemies--more moral, more civilized.

     Our image is at stake, we insist.

     But we didn?t come this far because we?re made of sugar candy.

     Once upon a time, we elbowed our way onto and across this continent 
by giving smallpox-infected blankets to Native Americans. That was 
biological warfare. And we used every other weapon we could get our 
hands on to grab this land from whomever.

     And we grew prosperous. And yes, we greased the skids with the 
sweat of slaves.

     So it goes with most great nation-states, which--feeling guilty 
about their savage pasts--eventually civilize themselves out of business 
and wind up invaded and ultimately dominated by the lean, hungry 
up-and-coming who are not made of sugar candy.

To Harvey, in other words, failing to use nuclear and biological weapons 
because we feel guilty about genocide and slavery means that we're "made 
of sugar candy." And this will mean the end of U.S. civilization.

It's hard to know how to respond to that worldview, or to the fact that 
the person who promulgated it was one of the most popular and 
longest-running personalities, other than to note that he was taking 
Churchill out of context.   Churchill followed up his observation--which 
was made about the "peoples of the British empire," not about 
Americans--with the vow that "we shall never descend to the German and 
Japanese level," meaning the Nazis and the World War II-era Japanese 
Empire. Harvey seemed genuinely worried that we wouldn't descend to that 
level soon enough.

See also Extra!: "The Right of the Story: Harvey Peddles Tall 
Tales--With a Conservative Kick" (9-10/97) by Dan Wilson.


From bbauerly at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 12:27:36 2009
From: bbauerly at gmail.com (brad bauerly)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 14:27:36 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis
Message-ID: <55868ddf0903011127l5107f182x94f5ba62a6c8267b@mail.gmail.com>

>>>"the current economic crisis is most definitely rooted in the
profitability of production, and the decline in the return on investment">>>

Are you disaggregating ROI into financial and manufacturing?  Because
originally you said it was a crisis of manufacturing, mining, utilities,
etc. and now you just say ROI.  The two might be different. I don't think
leo and sam are saying that it has nothing to do with decreasing returns on
financial investments, quite the contrary, and the two are obviously not
separate in any concrete way.

Sure, the US is getting the collapse it avoided in 2001 and the one it
avoided in 1998, and so on, and so on.  That is the point, the displacement
of the contradictions of one moment led to *new* contradictions, not a
recurrence of the same crisis.

Is your argument that the financial sector sucked up investment that would
normally have gone to production, which led to a decrease in ROI in
production?

-- 
Brad A. Bauerly
PhD Candidate,
Political Science
York University
Toronto, Canada
647-345-2072
bauerly at yorku.ca

From binesi at gvtel.com  Sun Mar  1 12:37:45 2009
From: binesi at gvtel.com (David Thorstad)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 13:37:45 -0600
Subject: [Marxism] Arrest of Final Exit volunteers in Georgia
Message-ID: <49AAE409.7040205@gvtel.com>

Here's the news release of the Final Exit Network on the arrests. This 
is an outrageous attack on the fundamental rights of citizens. Below is 
a link to a story about Dr. Kevorkian's criticism of the group. He 
argues that only a doctor should be present when someone checks out. If 
this view is not merely a function of limitations placed on him by his 
release from prison, but one he actually believes, it is outrageous. 
Anyone ought to have the right to commit suicide, whether in the 
presence of friends/relatives or not, without a doctor being present 
(and without having to travel to Switzerland to do it).
David
========================================================================================
http://www.finalexitnetwork.org/
For Immediate Release

February 26, 2009

Chicago, IL ?  Yesterday agents of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation 
arrested volunteers from Final Exit Network and charged them with 
assisting a suicide. The charges are related to the death of John 
Celmer. Mr. Celmer was a member of Final Exit Network and a case in the 
Network?s Exit Guide Program.

Jerry Dincin, President of Final Exit Network, said, ?We believe Ted 
Goodwin, Larry Egbert, Nick Sheridan and Claire Blehr are innocent and 
will be exonerated. Final Exit Network works within the laws by 
providing counseling and training and support.? The Exit Guide Program 
serves people who are suffering from an intolerable medical condition 
which has become more than they can bear.

?Final Exit Network does not ?assist? suicide in any way, nor do we 
encourage individuals to hasten their deaths,? Dincin adds. Members who 
avail themselves of the Exit Guide Program must be capable of performing 
every required function without assistance of any type. At any time 
during the process a member can change his or her mind.

Final Exit Network has thousands of members. The Network?s revenues come 
exclusively from memberships and donations. Contrary to the widely 
published news reports the Network *never* charges for its Exit Guide 
services. The $50 fee so widely reported is the annual fee members pay 
to support the mission.

?Final Exit Network is a leader in the fight for the last human right,? 
said Dincin.

Final Exit Network is a four-year-old volunteer-run nonprofit 
organization. More information is available here on this website or by 
calling 800-524-EXIT (3948).

Contact: Jerry Dincin, President
Phone: 847-607-0711
Email: president at finalexitnetwork.org 
<mailto:president at finalexitnetwork.org>
=================================================
Here's a link to the Detroit Free Press story on Kevorkian:

http://www.freep.com/article/20090227/NEWS01/902270303



From pbond at mail.ngo.za  Sun Mar  1 12:37:48 2009
From: pbond at mail.ngo.za (Patrick Bond)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 21:37:48 +0200
Subject: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis
In-Reply-To: <55868ddf0903011127l5107f182x94f5ba62a6c8267b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <55868ddf0903011127l5107f182x94f5ba62a6c8267b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <49AAE40C.7000302@mail.ngo.za>

brad bauerly wrote:
> .... Sure, the US is getting the collapse it avoided in 2001 and the 
> one it
> avoided in 1998, and so on, and so on.  That is the point, the displacement
> of the contradictions of one moment led to *new* contradictions, not a
> recurrence of the same crisis.
>   

Hang on Brad, when I worked at York with Leo/Sam and the other comrades 
in 2003-04, I repeatedly invoked the David Harvey notion of crisis 
displacement (shifting and stalling the crisis through spatio-temporal 
techniques like financial speculation), and it was frowned upon. Is your 
interpretation widely shared at York, now?

I hear Leo/Sam saying the earlier crisis was *resolved* not displaced. 
That's a huge difference.

Cheers,
P.


From Jscotlive at aol.com  Sun Mar  1 12:46:59 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 14:46:59 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight
Message-ID: <c48.2bbc6ad3.36dc4033@aol.com>

Sartesian:
 
So how does someone living in the comfort of the West, risking nothing,  
demanding blind obedience to FARC, and I would guess from other statements,  
regarding any dissent from FARC "ideology" and practice as actual treason,  
differ from somebody living in the comfort of the West, risking nothing,  
criticizing the FARC?

Reply:
 
Nowhere in my posts have I demanded blind obedience to the FARC. But the  
question of life and death struggle does demand a level of analysis that  
transcends the simplistic offerings we've had thus far. In the process of  
excoriating a movement that has clearly been rocked back on its heels and now  has its 
back to the wall, struggling against a US funded, armed, and brutal  state, has 
there been any attempt to offer anything other than a collective  putting the 
boot in. Why? Because the FARC dare take hostages - though I'm sure  they 
would call them prisoners. Of course, the fact that currently rotting in  
Colombian prisons are thousands of political prisoners is neither here nor  there. Or 
so it would appear?
 
And to answer your sarcasm directly, yes, I do feel it is repugnant for  
Marxists and anti-imperialists to wade in with criticism of people who are  
struggling for their survival, and I literally mean survival.
 
In this I'm mindful of Marx's stance on the Paris Commune. At the start he  
was critical, viewed it as suicidal and wrongheaded. By the time it ended he'd  
earned himself the enmity of the international ruling class with his staunch  
support and solidarity with those on the front lines.
 
Just as a struggle, if it is to have any chance of success, requires a  
correct rendering of prevailing material conditions, so does the analysis of  said 
struggle by those on the periphery. 
 
 
 
 

From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sun Mar  1 13:47:53 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 15:47:53 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis
References: <55868ddf0903011127l5107f182x94f5ba62a6c8267b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <B528EBBCF2C7437D92EA83D9BFBBFED2@dmsthinkpad>

I am referring to the ROI on manufacturing.    My argument has been worked 
out over some time  in my blog: The Wolf Report, 
http://thewolfatthedoor.blogspot.com-- Not Just All About the Oil 1&2;  Pimp 
My Assets;  Dismal Science, Wonderful World;  Of Hats and Rabbits; The 
Shipping News and on and on and on and on-- I don't ever tire of whipping 
that horse-- and you need a lean horse for a long race.

I specifically do not think the FIRE sector "crowded out" manufacturing 
from investment.

The decline in profitability, the overproduction of the means of production 
as capital, began in manufacturing and industry-- those are the tectonic 
plates, the movement of which triggered the financial tsunami.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "brad bauerly" <bbauerly at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 2:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis




From pt_costello at yahoo.com  Sun Mar  1 13:49:10 2009
From: pt_costello at yahoo.com (Pat Costello)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 12:49:10 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Deputy Caught On Tape Punching,
	Kicking 15-Year-Old Girl (VIDEO)
Message-ID: <504524.10123.qm@web63108.mail.re1.yahoo.com>


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/28/paul-schene-king-county-d_n_170786.html


      


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sun Mar  1 14:00:23 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 16:00:23 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight
References: <c48.2bbc6ad3.36dc4033@aol.com>
Message-ID: <04D712F26BFC4E1099D1BE1023BAFFE8@dmsthinkpad>


We've had this discussion before.  Nothing's changed.  So today it's FARC or 
Hamas who can't be criticized-- and in fact you have argued that during 
conditions of siege, dissent is treason-- think you were referring to Cuba 
then,  when yesterday it was Arafat and Fatah, etc. etc. etc.--

I think truth is concrete, it is objective, and it can be apprehended by 
all.  So that means -- yep, we get to assess the tactics, program, and 
strategy of a FARC, a Fatah, an ANC, and make judgments.  We even get to 
assess the underlying economic strains in, say Cuba, and assess policies and 
how the policies reflect and manifest those strains.  We can even be 
critical of them.

Me?  I don't care if FARC takes hostages or not, personally, or on any moral 
basis.  The question is not if FARC is worthy of defense, because that on 
this list in particular is a given-- but whether what FARC does actually 
advances the prospects for socialist revolution.  And those two things--  
defense of,  agreement with -- are distinct and not mutually inclusive.

There is one more thing we should consider-- and that is that "those on the 
periphery of the struggle"  aren't those in the advanced countries, or in 
other countries than the location of FARC, but that the FARC itself is on 
the periphery, IS the periphery of the struggle.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Jscotlive at aol.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 2:46 PM
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight




From elishastephens at hotmail.com  Sun Mar  1 15:22:43 2009
From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 14:22:43 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Why do we criticize?
Message-ID: <COL112-W363426A1B866DFEC3F8A83D7A80@phx.gbl>


There's been a long discussion, mostly between Ruthless Critic and Jscotlive, around the question of criticizing anti-imperialists who might not meet with our 100% approval on some ground or other - FARC, Hamas, etc. Here's a key assertion from Ruthless in this discussion:

"Marxists *must* get out of this habit of defending some entities merely because imperialism attacks these entities. They *must* be criticized for their failings, whether they are under attack by imperialism or not. That is the only principled position for Marxists to take."

Actually it's rather interesting that in this one paragraph, Ruthless goes from saying we shouldn't *defend* some entities to saying we *must* (must!) criticize them.

So why *do* we "criticize" things? Well, we criticize our *own* imperialist governments because we want to overthrow them, and we need to rouse and/or educate those who will effectuate that overthrow. But why would we criticize an *anti-imperialist movement* in *another* country (and here I'm referring, as I believe Ruthless is, to *public* criticism, not criticism in a private, internal discussion amongst revolutionaries)? Not to belabor my lame analogy, but I think this relates directly back to my "cooties" theory (http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2007w47/msg00158.htm). It's very uncomfortable to be accused of being a "Saddam-lover" or an "apologist for Ahmadinejad" or a "supporter of Hamas or FARC terrorists" etc. People like Ruthless want to remain pure, uncontaminated by the "cooties" associated with something that people (liberals, generally) perceive as unacceptable about, e.g., FARC, Cuba, Hamas, etc. Far easier to join in the criticism (as if there isn't already enough).

What I'm saying, then, is that criticism of imperialism is about overthrowing imperialism. Criticism of anti-imperialists is, in my opinion, about one thing and one thing only - the criticizer. Allowing the criticizer to feel good about him or herself, *at the expense of the anti-imperialist movement* being criticized.


Eli Stephens
 Left I on the News
 http://lefti.blogspot.com


_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live? Contacts: Organize your contact list. 
http://windowslive.com/connect/post/marcusatmicrosoft.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!503D1D86EBB2B53C!2285.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_UGC_Contacts_032009

From schaffer at optonline.net  Sun Mar  1 15:31:20 2009
From: schaffer at optonline.net (Les Schaffer)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:31:20 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] reminder again to clip text before sending
Message-ID: <49AB0CB8.7050207@optonline.net>

a good rule of thumb is to clip text first, before writing any reply. 
otherwise, you get involved in your email and forget there is 12 kB of 
extraneous text attached at the bottom.

the best results we've had so far is to put people on moderation until 
they remember to clip that quoted text. i'll keep doing that.

les


From lnp3 at panix.com  Sun Mar  1 15:45:36 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:45:36 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] reminder again to clip text before sending
In-Reply-To: <49AB0CB8.7050207@optonline.net>
References: <49AB0CB8.7050207@optonline.net>
Message-ID: <49AB1010.1090104@panix.com>

Les Schaffer wrote:
> a good rule of thumb is to clip text first, before writing any reply. 
> otherwise, you get involved in your email and forget there is 12 kB of 
> extraneous text attached at the bottom.
> 
> the best results we've had so far is to put people on moderation until 
> they remember to clip that quoted text. i'll keep doing that.

Just a reminder why this is important. Primarily, it is to reduce 
bandwidth for people using dial-up connections. Remember that we have a 
subscriber in Cuba. We also have subscribers in South Africa where 
dial-up is typical.

Also, we don't want to get in the bad habit of sending along text from 
13 early replies. This is not only an eyesore, it also smacks of Menshevism.


From killakai at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 15:55:28 2009
From: killakai at gmail.com (Kai)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 17:55:28 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Why do we criticize?
In-Reply-To: <COL112-W363426A1B866DFEC3F8A83D7A80@phx.gbl>
References: <COL112-W363426A1B866DFEC3F8A83D7A80@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <4be0c4210903011455i70f8c59k212c95d10363ebc5@mail.gmail.com>

Eli,

I have to sharply disagree with you here. Being anti-imperialist does not
absolve a group of criticism. I wont speculate on Ruthless's understanding
but mine is clear: simply being anti-imperialist isn't enough. If you are
anti-imperialist, like Hamas but you fight for replacing all of Israel with
an Islamic state, you ought to be criticized for that. The mujahadeen were
fighting against Soviet imperialism, yet they were throwing acid in the face
of women who didn't wear the full islamic garb covering all of their body
and 90% of their faces. Do they get a pass on that type of thing, or the
fact that they advocated an repressive islamic state
which later materialized in the form of the Taliban?

We ought to be critical, because if a group is fighting a just cause
(anti-imperialism) but simply wishes to replace some other entities
oppressive rule with their own, what is the point? Unless I'm missing
something huge here, thats not marxism, and its not dialectical. Even if
these groups were nominally Marxists or substantively in some respects, as
is the case with the FARC, they still ought to be criticized for profitting
off of cocaine, among other things.



On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Eli Stephens <elishastephens at hotmail.com>wrote:

>
> There's been a long discussion, mostly between Ruthless Critic and
> Jscotlive, around the question of criticizing anti-imperialists who might
> not meet with our 100% approval on some ground or other - FARC, Hamas, etc.
> Here's a key assertion from Ruthless in this discussion:
>
> "Marxists *must* get out of this habit of defending some entities merely
> because imperialism attacks these entities. They *must* be criticized for
> their failings, whether they are under attack by imperialism or not. That is
> the only principled position for Marxists to take."
>
> Actually it's rather interesting that in this one paragraph, Ruthless goes
> from saying we shouldn't *defend* some entities to saying we *must* (must!)
> criticize them.
>
> So why *do* we "criticize" things? Well, we criticize our *own* imperialist
> governments because we want to overthrow them, and we need to rouse and/or
> educate those who will effectuate that overthrow. But why would we criticize
> an *anti-imperialist movement* in *another* country (and here I'm referring,
> as I believe Ruthless is, to *public* criticism, not criticism in a private,
> internal discussion amongst revolutionaries)? Not to belabor my lame
> analogy, but I think this relates directly back to my "cooties" theory (
> http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2007w47/msg00158.htm). It's
> very uncomfortable to be accused of being a "Saddam-lover" or an "apologist
> for Ahmadinejad" or a "supporter of Hamas or FARC terrorists" etc. People
> like Ruthless want to remain pure, uncontaminated by the "cooties"
> associated with something that people (liberals, generally) perceive as
> unacceptable about, e.g., FARC, Cuba, Hamas, etc. Far easier to join in the
> criticism (as if there isn't already enough).
>
> What I'm saying, then, is that criticism of imperialism is about
> overthrowing imperialism. Criticism of anti-imperialists is, in my opinion,
> about one thing and one thing only - the criticizer. Allowing the criticizer
> to feel good about him or herself, *at the expense of the anti-imperialist
> movement* being criticized.
>
>
> Eli Stephens
>  Left I on the News
>  http://lefti.blogspot.com
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Windows Live? Contacts: Organize your contact list.
>
> http://windowslive.com/connect/post/marcusatmicrosoft.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!503D1D86EBB2B53C!2285.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_UGC_Contacts_032009<http://windowslive.com/connect/post/marcusatmicrosoft.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns%21503D1D86EBB2B53C%212285.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_UGC_Contacts_032009>
> ________________________________________________
> 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/killakai%40gmail.com
>

From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 16:03:48 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 15:03:48 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Why do we criticize?
Message-ID: <49AB1454.4040407@gmail.com>

Eli...you could of sort of, kind of, stated what you wanted with the 
last paragraph and not all the mixing of metaphors...

"What I'm saying, then, is that criticism of imperialism is about 
overthrowing imperialism. Criticism of anti-imperialists is, in my 
opinion, about one thing and one thing only - the criticizer. Allowing 
the criticizer to feel good about him or herself, *at the expense of the 
anti-imperialist movement* being criticized."

I think, even being a diabetic, that I have a real sweat tooth for this 
sort of discussion...fortunately I will NOT eat that ice cream my kid 
has in the fridge so I'll be OK.

Eli, you have a very mixed-up, IMO, view about 'criticism'. To say it's 
"mechanical" is to do an injustice to people who look at things too 
mechanically. Criticism is ABOUT anti-imperialism. Period. There is no 
"here and there" in Marxism. Criticisms and analysis and blurting out 
this, that or the other thing is all part of parsing out an analysis of 
what is to be done.  Without it we simply remain stagnant and can NOT 
move on. This is the problem a previous subscriber to this list had with 
Sinn Fein in Ireland. They had been "anti-imperialist", few would 
disagree with that I suspect, and at a point later they became 
collaborators with the British occupation policing the north of the 
island for it's colonizers. The subscriber couldn't deal with people 
claiming they had gone over to the Dark Side. That we shouldn't 
"criticize" SF when they were anti-Imperialist (which of course what the 
debate was about). If we don't allow for (and that is what I hear from 
what you write: "do NOT criticize!") we have no way of determining WHAT 
they are doing and why. Or, if in fact, they have gone over from 
anti-Imperialism to accepting it. You method seems totally and very 
devoid of Marxism.

If you had applied this same method to the Comintern (at any period of 
it's short life) you would of been claiming Lenin an ultra-left 
sectarian for "criticizing" nationalist movements in the East. The idea 
of "not criticizing" seems to emanate from a form of 'liberalism' 
driven-by-guilt of being "Western" in origin. It certainly has zero do 
with revolutionary socialism, anti-Imperialism or Marxism.

David W.



From anthony.boynton at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 16:26:28 2009
From: anthony.boynton at gmail.com (Anthony Boynton)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 18:26:28 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt, FARC, criticism, etc.
Message-ID: <7b8a676d0903011526s2605e2e2v375e91a97f722d03@mail.gmail.com>

I have sort of skimmed this conversation, and don't intend to get too deeply
involved in it. But here are my two cents worth.

The FARC was very generous to the three US mercenaries they shot down and
captured. Those guys are lucky to be alive.

Ingrid Betancourt was very stupid to allow herself to be kidnapped by the
FARC, after they had warned all people out of the zone she decided to drive
through. She had a very small political following before her stunt
backfired, and a smaller one afterwords. Now she is simply a French
appendage of Uribismo. She has no indiependent political following here in
Colombia, and no prospects. Only her oligarchic family connnections, and
diplomatic relations with the Sarkozy government keep the Santos family
(Vice President and Defense Minister) publicizing her name through their
media empire.

The FARC has made tragic strategic mistakes that may be irreversible. They
are totally isolated from the working class and poor of Colombia, except for
in a few isolated areas. Alfonso Cano's efforts to reorient the FARC have so
far shown no results, although pro-FARC graffiti has reappeared on the walls
of the National University and in a few neighborhoods of Bogot? (places it
had been absent from for a whle.)

There is criticism and there is criticism. Most critics of the FARC are on
the side of imperialism, but there are others who wished they FARC had won,
and still hope that they survive.

Anthony

From jim.ferguson1917 at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 18:03:56 2009
From: jim.ferguson1917 at gmail.com (Jim Ferguson)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 20:03:56 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Alain Badiou doesn't mess around
Message-ID: <181b16100903011703w54c747a9u6c3a8f9ffb6b8de5@mail.gmail.com>

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2009/02/badiou-on-le-petit-nicolas.html

Wednesday, February 25, 2009
 Badiou on Le Petit
Nicolas<http://leninology.blogspot.com/2009/02/badiou-on-le-petit-nicolas.html>
posted
by lenin

<http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JNlxgs6qm2M/SaXBtct000I/AAAAAAAACiA/gLn_Xq6h_wI/s1600-h/sarkozy.jpg>
Alain Badiou doesn't mess around. As an advocate of direct action, contre
"capitalo-parliamentarism", he has pledged to reward his nastier critics
(largely idiots like BHL) with a slap whenever he sees them. These
opponents, with their accusations of antisemitism and fascism, were
responding to the publication of his book 'Polemics' (in French,
'Circonstances 3') and the more recent 'The Meaning of Sarkozy' ('De quoi
Sarkozy, est-il nom?'). The latter is less about the "fidgety mayor of
Neuilly", or "the Rat Man", than about what Sarkozy's ascendancy says of the
vacuity of the electoral process. Sarkozy himself is important only inasmuch
as he embodies the spirit of reaction, even if it is a dwarfish embodiment
compared to the Thermidoreans, the Orl?anists, the Versaillais, P?tain and
even d'Estaing. The book is a curious mixture of political philosophy and
acuminated satire. I had never thought of Badiou as an especially funny man
before, but - as is so often the case - it is because he is so serious that
his satire is so lethal. Through a series of essays and lectures, he takes
the occasion of Sarkozy's election victory and subsequent travailles to
subject parliamentary democracy to an acerbic critique - and behind all of
this witty and indomitable polemicising lurks the shade of communism.

According to Badiou, the French Left (and by extension, the Left as such)
has practised a reactive politics based on fear of the right, which in turn
is essentially mobilised by the fear of the leftist challenge. At the same
time, the politicians of the reformist left flaunt their impotence, their
inability to transform affairs, and cling to it. All they can do is keep the
right out of office and limit the reaction. Then Sarkozy wins, and
Socialists - many from the generation of the nouveau philosophes - flock to
join his administration, or be part of the clique. Sarkozy expresses his
'openness' to the left, the better to coopt its luminaries for the creation
of a technocratic single-party state (this is what the language of
bipartisanship always boils down to) and form what Badiou calls a Union for
Presidential Unanimity (a pun on the name of Sarkozy's party, the Union for
a Popular Movement). This is the state that neoliberal capitalism has
reduced politics to. As Badiou says, quoting Zizek, those who used to oppose
parliamentary democracy to Stalinism missed the point that Stalinism was the
future of parliamentary democracy. Indeed, "the technological means for
controlling the population are already such that Stalin, with his endless
handwritten files, his mass executions, his spies with hats, his gigantic
lice-ridden camps and bestial tortures, appears like an amateur from another
age".

And how many times have you heard pundits boasting about the big turnout for
a particular election? Boast they must, because it is happening with less
and less frequency these days. But what does this say about voting, as an
act? What matters, apparently is that people participate, and thus give the
system a democratic imprimatur. Badiou's conclusion is different. Observing
the heralds of Sarkozysme ratify the new administration with its engorged
turnout, he retorts: "If numbers alone are a cause for celebration, then
this means that democracy is strictly indifferent to any content". If people
vote for a mediocre clerk, then "all glory to them! By their stupid number,
they brought the triumph of democracy". The bards of parliamentarism are
"more 'respectful' than I am of the 'popular will', even when they see it as
idiotic and dangerous. Bow down before the numbers!"

Beyond which caustic banter lies the humane purpose of defending migrant
workers, upholding the hippocratic principle, supporting creative art,
putting emancipatory politics before managerial necessitarianism, and
ultimately restoring the 'communist hypothesis' to its proper place. Said
hypothesis, which is that the system of classes can be overthrown, is a
"real point" to hold onto against the alternative hypothesis of
parliamentarist impotence. Those who reject the communist hypothesis are
bound to market economics and parliamentary democracy, and therefore to the
very logic that leads to the Rat Man. You could wish that Badiou would not
say 'democracy' when he means 'parliamentary democracy', or that he would
not say 'left' when he means something much more ambiguous (is S?gol?ne
Royal really in any meaningful sense on the Left? Or Bernard Kouchner for
that matter?). But the provocative, ludic manner of the collection is part
of its charm. It is because Badiou doesn't respect the rules of the
'capitalo-parliamentarist' game that even his ultra-left tendencies - an
overhang from his wild Maoist days - become the basis for important
insights.

From billyoc at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 18:18:24 2009
From: billyoc at gmail.com (Bill O'Connor)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 20:18:24 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] reminder again to clip text before sending
In-Reply-To: <49AB1010.1090104@panix.com> (Louis Proyect's message of "Sun, 01
	Mar 2009 17:45:36 -0500")
References: <49AB0CB8.7050207@optonline.net> <49AB1010.1090104@panix.com>
Message-ID: <87bpskiuxr.fsf@t22.Belkin>

Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> writes:

> Also, we don't want to get in the bad habit of sending along text from 
> 13 early replies. This is not only an eyesore, it also smacks of Menshevism.

I've always tried to leave only the portions of an email that I'm
actually addressing, but could you explain the relationship between not
clipping them and Menshevism?



From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 19:09:05 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 21:09:05 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Thousands of Latinos rallying for immigration reform
In-Reply-To: <B824C48518A043FA8CCEEF9C483AFBCF@albanta>
References: <49A73D48.6070804@panix.com>
	<BAY123-W1698028FF982EC8D5F2576D3AB0@phx.gbl>
	<49A96793.9040006@panix.com>
	<BAY123-W5512842FDFCE16251C5C92D3AB0@phx.gbl>
	<9696618D2FB34466A8ADD88175508942@albanta>
	<2fa1449b0902281943y7d75e11ck7a5f608e2bd82914@mail.gmail.com>
	<B824C48518A043FA8CCEEF9C483AFBCF@albanta>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903011809j6b2ece4eg45a8f5d0e49203aa@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 11:27 PM, Joaquin Bustelo <jbustelo at gmail.com> wrote:

> Andy P: "Do the forces you mentioned have plans for other cities yet?"
>
> I should have made that clear, the evangelical churches-Hispanic caucus
> immigrant rights events are almost certainly coming to a city near you.
> They're doing about 20 cities in the next few weeks, and then the idea is to
> take some of the witnesses (i.e., US-born kids of deported parents) to
> Washington for a Congressional hearing.

See the contact address at the bottom. Andy, they would be able to
provide you with more information.

RC

--------- Forwarded message -----------
Family Unity Campaign - Detroit, Michigan

6pm
Thu March 5, 2009

Hosted by the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC).

This is a national listening tour to hear testimonies from families
impacted by our nation?s broken immigration system.The tour will be
here in Detroit on Friday March 27, 2009 .

We want to invite ALL concerned with Immigrant rights' and
Comprehensive Immigration Reform for a pre-meeting on March 5, 2009.
Such pre-meeting is to help organize the March 27 event.

We will have a delegation from "Familia Latina Unida/Sin Fronteras" to
give us more details as to how we can ALL Participate to make the
March 27 a successful event.

This in order to bring about a MORATORIUM on RAIDS AND DEPORTATIONS;
and eventually achieve Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

This pre-meeting will take place at The Holy Redeemer Parish 1721
Junction Street (West Vernor), Detroit, MI 48209-2198

Those of you who are not able to attend but would like to endorse this
event, please call or send an e-mail with pertinent information to
place you on the list of endorsing organizations.

Contact information:

from Latinos Unidos/United de Michigan:
Rosendo Dlegado 313 580 5474
rosendo at luum.org
or
Ignacio Meneses
313 575 4933
laborexchange at aol.com


From bbauerly at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 19:47:43 2009
From: bbauerly at gmail.com (brad bauerly)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 21:47:43 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis
Message-ID: <55868ddf0903011847v7a488128mfcb61354d67f71dc@mail.gmail.com>

<<<"I repeatedly invoked the David Harvey notion of crisis
displacement (shifting and stalling the crisis through spatio-temporal
techniques like financial speculation), and it was frowned upon. Is your
interpretation widely shared at York, now?

I hear Leo/Sam saying the earlier crisis was *resolved* not displaced.
That's a huge difference.>>>"

I don't know what they would say about that. I will ask. That was more me
than them, or it was my understanding of what they are saying combined with
my own analysis.

I also don't really see a big difference between a resolution of the crisis
and the displacement.  But I don't really think capitalism can overcome its
crises tendencies (contradictions).  I get your point and I think the
important thing is to keep your eye on the class struggle and how any crises
is caused by, impacts, and then are overcome/displaced.  Maybe you have a
different view and take them, resolution and displacement, as largely
different.


Sartesian-

When did this tectonic shift, decline in profitability, start?

-- 
Brad A. Bauerly
PhD Candidate,
Political Science
York University
Toronto, Canada
647-345-2072
bauerly at yorku.ca

From pt_costello at yahoo.com  Sun Mar  1 21:30:23 2009
From: pt_costello at yahoo.com (Pat Costello)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 20:30:23 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Those wacky conservative Christians
Message-ID: <348295.75726.qm@web63103.mail.re1.yahoo.com>


Criminal Ponzi Scheme Shockingly Run by Christians

http://gawker.com/5162003/criminal-ponzi-scheme-shockingly-run-by-christians



Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers (Utah is number one!)

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16680-porn-in-the-usa-conservatives-are-biggest-consumers.html


      


From theguavatree at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 21:32:34 2009
From: theguavatree at gmail.com (guava tree)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 23:32:34 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops?
In-Reply-To: <C9223B9E0844476F9175F5E3D7053B09@Nautilus>
References: <967270091-1235898905-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1234201991-@bxe1088.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
	<908b689f0903010126s1ce753c4y43e867a41d66df2@mail.gmail.com>
	<C9223B9E0844476F9175F5E3D7053B09@Nautilus>
Message-ID: <b0ebe69c0903012032o5d6c6d10kbb06e6a1ad84af46@mail.gmail.com>

On 3/1/09, David Pic?n ?lvarez <david at miradoiro.com> wrote:
> From: "Ruthless Critic of All that Exists" <ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com>
>
> > In any case,Cuba needs to be applauded for not kow-towing to the
>  > Luddite, reflexively anti-GM greenie-green bandwagon.
>
>
> Absolutely. A good part of this opposition seems to be rooted in
>  quasi-religious views about the goodness of nature


??? How does it concern religion to emphasize that most GM seed
development is tied to specific herbicides and fertilizers. Meaning
you "nuke" the field with a herbicide that kills everything except the
plant that is engineered to withstand the poison. I wonder what this
pesticide does to the ancestral wells of the indigenous populations
living nearby, not the mention the entire watershed and aquatic
ecosystem---or the petroleum-based fertilizer industry. Or what about
the corn bred to kill insects, what about the insects we maybe don't
want to kill like bees? Also these GM plants produce pollen which
flies around the world and infects every plant in that species,
creating seeds that bear the imprint of the genetic modification. So
even though Cuba might make a "good" GM plant, that doesn't mean that
some big Agrocapitalist company won't make a GM plant with horrible
genetic properties that then fly around the world and contaminate the
gene pool of all of our food.

in a nutshell: how is it anti-scientific to consider the scientific
ramifications of this technology?

Would it also be quasi-religious to be against human caused global
warming? Or is that reactionary and anti-technological?

So maybe some pollen flies from Florida to Cuba or mexico and farmers
there save their seeds that contain information that is "owned" by
monsanto. Why can't monsanto then sue the country, etc, sue the
farmers for stealing their technology, etc, etc. these things happen
all the time. monsanto has done it for years in canada. GM is about
imperialism.

file GM food with nuclear weapons under "technological advancements
made under capitalism that should be unconditionally banned."


From mqduck at sonic.net  Sun Mar  1 21:31:53 2009
From: mqduck at sonic.net (Jeffrey Thomas Piercy)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 20:31:53 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Volt temp agency asks employees to vote for pay cut
Message-ID: <49AB6139.7070800@sonic.net>

Volt is (apparently) the largest provider of temporary workers to
Microsoft. They sent out a memo to their employees that basically
consists of the following with lots of bullshit before and after:

----
We have evaluated all pay rates for our Microsoft agency temporary
workers and have concluded that we will be asking each of you to share
in these measures by accepting a 10% reduction in your pay rate. [...]
this is mandatory in order to continue your assignment at Microsoft and
to respond to this economic environment.

We want to support you in continuing your assignment at Microsoft and
respectfully ask that you respond by going to the upper left hand corner
of this email under the "Vote" response option and select, "Accept" by
close of business Tuesday, March 3, 2009. By accepting you agree to the
pay adjustment in your pay rate. Volt has prepared a formal written
amendment to your employment agreement for your signature and will
execute this amendment in your scheduled meeting.
----

The part of me that lacks any sense of ethics or justice really loves
this. It's a beautiful little psychological game.

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



From mqduck at sonic.net  Sun Mar  1 21:50:08 2009
From: mqduck at sonic.net (Jeffrey Thomas Piercy)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 20:50:08 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Obama to remove ALL troops from Iraq
In-Reply-To: <908b689f0902281110n676f6f8bsfa08c1368579775@mail.gmail.com>
References: <COL112-W594C5C9392C8EF37151E4BD7AB0@phx.gbl>	<b16d8daf0902272239p6c1e545dv8d72578ff34b3cce@mail.gmail.com>	<4be0c4210902272244h5a189abdja94a3e9bf77ab140@mail.gmail.com>	<908b689f0902272316v65d7a31esa2d8119e6261d15e@mail.gmail.com>	<4be0c4210902280848u733317f3r845754833484585a@mail.gmail.com>
	<908b689f0902281110n676f6f8bsfa08c1368579775@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <49AB6580.2020305@sonic.net>

You know, before the presidential election, I told my mother that a 
major part of Obama's platform was sending many more troops to 
Afghanistan and she didn't believe me. Now two of her nephews/my cousins 
are going to be shipped off to there and she's decided that she now 
supports the way because "Obama's not a war-monger".

Obama can say just about whatever he wants and the assholes at MoveOn 
(which she subscribes to) et al are going to support him every step of 
the way.

Why should any serious person give a shit about what he currently says 
he's going to do two years from now?


-Jeff

(sorry, i suppose that this post is just half is just me letter off some 
steam)

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


From mqduck at sonic.net  Sun Mar  1 21:52:25 2009
From: mqduck at sonic.net (Jeffrey Thomas Piercy)
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 20:52:25 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Obama to remove ALL troops from Iraq
In-Reply-To: <49AB6580.2020305@sonic.net>
References: <COL112-W594C5C9392C8EF37151E4BD7AB0@phx.gbl>	<b16d8daf0902272239p6c1e545dv8d72578ff34b3cce@mail.gmail.com>	<4be0c4210902272244h5a189abdja94a3e9bf77ab140@mail.gmail.com>	<908b689f0902272316v65d7a31esa2d8119e6261d15e@mail.gmail.com>	<4be0c4210902280848u733317f3r845754833484585a@mail.gmail.com>	<908b689f0902281110n676f6f8bsfa08c1368579775@mail.gmail.com>
	<49AB6580.2020305@sonic.net>
Message-ID: <49AB6609.9060600@sonic.net>

Note that she doesn't support it now because her relatives are fighting 
in it, just that it proves to her that it's real.

Jeffrey Thomas Piercy wrote:
> You know, before the presidential election, I told my mother that a 
> major part of Obama's platform was sending many more troops to 
> Afghanistan and she didn't believe me. Now two of her nephews/my cousins 
> are going to be shipped off to there and she's decided that she now 
> supports the way because "Obama's not a war-monger".
> 
> Obama can say just about whatever he wants and the assholes at MoveOn 
> (which she subscribes to) et al are going to support him every step of 
> the way.
> 
> Why should any serious person give a shit about what he currently says 
> he's going to do two years from now?
> 
> 
> -Jeff
> 
> (sorry, i suppose that this post is just half is just me letter off some 
> steam)
> 


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


From ivanddrury at yahoo.ca  Sun Mar  1 22:56:26 2009
From: ivanddrury at yahoo.ca (Ivan D. Drury)
Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 21:56:26 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Take Hamas off the EU terror list - sign on...
Message-ID: <777397.13281.qm@web55508.mail.re4.yahoo.com>

Sorry to forward this without comment, but I think it's an important initiative and encourage all to sign on.
Ivan

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

Appeal for the removal of Hamas from the EU terror list!

On the occasion of the June 2009 European elections, we are launching an urgent appeal to all candidates for the 736 seats in the European parliament.

We ask that they actively pursue the immediate and unconditional removal of Hamas and all other Palestinian liberation organizations from the European list of proscribed terrorist organizations.

We further ask that they acknowledge the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and, by so doing, recognise, Hamas as a legitimate voice for the Palestinian people's aspirations for national liberation.

First signatories (extract):

Jose Saramago (writer, Portugal)
Mairead Maguire (peace nobel price laureate, Ireland)
Danny Morrison (writer, Ireland)
Ronnie Kasrils (former South African minister)
Giulietto Chiesa (European MP, Italy)
Lucio Manisco (former European MP)
Gianni Vattimo (philosopher and former European MP)
Domenico Losurdo (director of the institute for philosophy, University Urbino, Italy)
Augusto Boal (theatre director, Brazil)
Gretta Duisenberg (chair Foundation Stop the Occupation, Netherlands)
Fran?ois Houtart (professor emeritus Catholic University Louvain, Belgium)
Tariq Ramadan (professor, Oxford/Erasmus Universities)
Tariq Ali (writer, film-maker and editor of New Left Review, Britain)
Jan Myrdal (writer, Sweden)
James Petras (Bartle professor emeritus Binghamton University, USA)
Franco Cavalli (oncologist and president of the International Union of Cancer (IUCC), Switzerland)
Daniel Vischer (MP of the Green Party, Switzerland)
Alima Boumediene Thiery (senator, France)

See full list:
www.antiimperialista.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6060&Itemid=229

The initiative was launched by Nadine Rosa-Rosso, a teacher and independent communist militant living in Bruxelles. It is a result of the Beirut Resistance Forum from 16-18 January 2009. 

The call can be signed by sending a message to camp at antiimperialista.org.

************************************
Anti-imperialist Camp
www.antiimperialista.org
camp at antiimperialista.org
************************************


      __________________________________________________________________
Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail.  Click on Options in Mail and switch to New Mail today or register for free at http://mail.yahoo.ca


From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 23:03:12 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 01:03:12 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight
In-Reply-To: <c00.52dd424c.36dc2a7b@aol.com>
References: <c00.52dd424c.36dc2a7b@aol.com>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903012203k19dd1a5fx19fe749e54340c64@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 1:14 PM,  <Jscotlive at aol.com> wrote:


> I
> also find it unconscionable for Marxists living in the comfort of the West,
> risking nothing, judging those who are struggling on the front lines against
> imperialism.
>
> They do not require our approval. On the contrary, it is we who require
> theirs for what we do and say in solidarity.

JScotlive's West-o-centrism is showing. Notice how (s)he assumes that
"we" (i.e. the denizens of Marxmail) are all "living in the comfort of
the West".

JScotlive, news for you: Marxmail is an *international* mailing list,
with readers from many countries, including Marxists living in
countries in the non-West.

And in any case, who has or has not the right to criticize should not
depend on one's geographical location. Truth is objective, and, as
someone pointed out already, the bedrock of Marxism is that truth can
be apprehended. Critique is a means of approaching truth. Truth does
not vary depending on geographical location of the truth seeker. By
insinuating that it does, JScotlive smuggles postmodernist relativism
into Marxism via the back door.

Ironically, JScotlive's insistence on geographical positionality as
the validator of the right to critique, is itself a moralistic
insistence -- ironic because JScotlive is quick to diagnose moralism
in others.


From glparramatta at greenleft.org.au  Sun Mar  1 23:08:49 2009
From: glparramatta at greenleft.org.au (glparramatta)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 17:08:49 +1100
Subject: [Marxism] What's new at Links: John Bellamy Foster,
 Michael Lebowitz on Marx, economic crisis, Venezuela, Philippines, Pakistan,
 Caribbean strikes, Marx the ecologist, Tamils, Zimbabwe
Message-ID: <49AB77F1.2000209@greenleft.org.au>

What's new at Links: John Bellamy Foster, Michael Lebowitz on Marx, 
economic crisis, Venezuela, Philippines, Pakistan, Caribbean strikes, 
Marx the ecologist, Tamils, Zimbabwe

* * *
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/.

* * *


    John Bellamy Foster: `A whole different kind of struggle is
    emerging' <http://links.org.au/node/925>

*J**ohn Bellamy Foster* is editor of /Monthly Review/ and professor of 
sociology at the University of Oregon. He is the coauthor with Fred 
Magdoff of /The Great Financial Crisis: Causes and Consequences/, 
recently published by Monthly Review Press. This interview was conducted 
by *Mike Whitney* and first appeared at /Dissident Voice/. It has been 
posted at /Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal/ with 
Whitney's permission.

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/925>


    `Let us rediscover Marx' -- Two talks on Michael Lebowitz's `Beyond
    Capital: Marx's Political Economy of the Working Class'
    <http://links.org.au/node/921>

By *Michael A. Lebowitz*
[Michael Lebowitz 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.]
February 16, 2009 -- It is well known that when Karl Marx heard what 
people calling themselves Marxists were saying, he commented, ``all I 
know is that I am not a Marxist''. It is not as well known, however, 
that Marx had little respect for disciples in general. A theory 
disintegrates, he said, when disciples try to ``explain away'' problems 
in the theory -- when they engage in ``crass empiricism'', use ``phrases 
in a scholastic way'', and employ ``cunning argument'' to support the 
theory. A theory disintegrates, he said, when the point of departure of 
the disciples is ``no longer reality'' but the theory that the master 
produced.

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/921>


    Economic crisis: Skyrocketing unemployment in Asia hits women and
    young people hardest <http://links.org.au/node/920>

By *Reihana Mohideen*
[Reihana Mohideen 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.]
February 23, 2009 -- Recent International Labour Organisation (ILO) 
reports on global and regional employment trends paint a stark picture 
of rapidly increasing unemployment in 2008; the situation is expected to 
worsen in 2009 with the prediction of massive job losses. The message is 
clear: workers and the poor are already paying heavily for the 
capitalist economic crisis. Especially hard hit are working-class and 
poor women and young people.

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/920>


    Venezuela: Referendum victory advances process of change
    <http://links.org.au/node/927>

By *Chris Kerr*
Caracas, February 20, 2009 -- "Today we opened wide the gates of the 
future ... Truth against lies [and] the dignity of the homeland has 
triumphed", Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez insisted to tens of 
thousands of celebrating supporters after Venezuelans voted to amend the 
constitution to end term limits on all elected politicians --- allowing 
Chavez to stand for re-election in 2012.'' ``Venezuela will not return 
to its past of indignity", Chavez stated, referring to the four decades 
of alternating rule by two corrupt parties that followed the overthrow 
of a military dictatorship in 1958.

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/927>


    Pakistan: Punjab provincial government deposed; PPP resorts to
    dictatorial measures <http://links.org.au/node/926>

By *Farooq Tariq*
Lahore, February 27, 2009 -- The Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) leadership 
has a problem on its hands. There are not many ways to defend the 
governor of Punjab's ruling on February 25, which imposed a two-month 
suspension of the Punjab Assembly. The most respected and moderate 
leader of PPP and chairperson of the Senate, Mian Raza Rubani, justified 
the decision by saying that it was necessary to stop the ``prevailing 
state of anarchy''.

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/926>


    General strike shakes France's Caribbean colonies
    <http://links.org.au/node/924>

Introduction by *Richard Fidler*
February 26, 2009 -- /Life on the Left/ -- The general strike in two 
French colonies in the Caribbean is firm, with no end in sight. It began 
in Guadeloupe on January 20 and spread to neighbouring Martinique on 
February 5 as a protest against the high cost of living and, more 
generally, the gross inequality between the conditions of the black 
population and a tiny white elite, descendants of slaveholders, who 
control most industry and agriculture.

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/924>


    Karl Marx the ecologist <http://links.org.au/node/923>

By *Simon Butler*
February 21, 2009 -- As the world economy spirals down into its deepest 
crisis since the great depression, the writings of Karl Marx have made a 
return to the top seller lists in bookstores. In his native Germany, the 
sales of Marx's works have trebled. His theories have been treated with 
contempt by conservative economists and historians. Yet, in the context 
of the latest economic downturn, even a few mainstream economists have 
been compelled to ask whether Marx was right after all. Marx argued that 
capitalism is inherently unstable, fraught with contradictions and prone 
to deep crises. Only a move to a democratic socialist society, where 
ordinary people are empowered to make the key decisions about the 
economy and society themselves, can open the path to genuine freedom and 
liberation.

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/923>


    Australian Tamils call for ceasefire in Sri Lanka -- sign the crisis
    statement <http://links.org.au/node/922>

In an attempt to put an urgent stop to the humanitarian catastrophe, a 
group of young Tamil Australians have written a Sri Lankan Crisis 
Statement for the wider Australian community to sign.

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/922>


    Venezuela: A balance sheet of the constitutional referendum victory
    <http://links.org.au/node/919>

By *Gonzalo Villanueva*
Venezuela's February 15 constitutional amendment referendum, which 
proposed to modify the existing constitution to allow politicians to 
stand for re-election without restrictions, was triumphant. However, the 
referendum was more than a legal amendment -- the removal of term limits 
-- it was a political issue: to continue the revolutionary project or 
not? The Venezuelan people have convincingly signalled their desire to 
continue with the Bolivarian process, under the leadership of Hugo 
Chavez. The victory undoubtedly opens a path to advance and deepen the 
Bolivarian Revolution.

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/919>


    Australia: Full agenda for World at a Crossroads conference -
    Fighting for Socialism in the 21st Century
    <http://links.org.au/node/918>

*World at a Crossroads - Fighting for Socialism in the 21st Century*
*Sydney, Australia, April 10-13*

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/918>


    A spectre haunts imperialism ... a rebirth of the left
    <http://links.org.au/node/917>

By *Kavita Krishnan*
[Kavita Krishnan 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.]
February 25, 2009 -- The people of the United States (through their vote 
for US President Barack Obama and ``change'') and Iraqi journalist 
Muntadar al-Zaidi alike may have given George W. Bush (and all he stood 
for) the boot -- but India's Congress Party wants to give Bush the 
/Bharat Ratna/![1] Congress Party spokesperson Abhishek Manu Singhvi, 
addressing the annual general meeting of the Federation of Indian 
Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI), declared, "Give /Bharat 
Ratna/ to Bush. I don't know what the rules are but I will officially do 
something."

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/917>


    Zimbabwe socialists: Fight for fresh elections under a new
    people-driven constitution! <http://links.org.au/node/916>

February 6, 2009 -- The *International Socialist Organisation Zimbabwe* 
(ISOZ) has consistently argued for the last few years that the poor and 
working people would pay dearly if they naively followed the false calls 
for "change" championed by the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) and 
its imperialist-supported civic society allies, and subordinated their 
organisations to the same.

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/916>

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/915>


    Philippines: 'We need system change', says military rebel
    <http://links.org.au/node/914>

By *Peter Boyle*
February 19, 2009 -- Major Jason Aquino is one of the 28 officers of the 
Armed Forces of the Philippines charged with allegedly attempting a 
mutiny in February 2006. Aquino was detained on February 22 that year 
and held incommunicado in a windowless cell for five months.
I met Major Aquino and several other detained rebel officers in Camp 
Aguinaldo in early February 2009. They were all outspoken against the 
grossly corrupt government of Philippines President Gloria Arroyo, and 
their years of incarceration (as yet without being convicted of a single 
crime) have only deepened their politicisation. But Major Aquino -- who 
has studied the speeches and writings of Fidel Castro and read 
everything he can get his hands on about the revolution in Venezuela led 
by Hugo Chavez -- wanted to make it clear a that he was "not a reformist".

    * Read more <http://links.org.au/node/914>

* * *

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 ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 23:13:58 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 01:13:58 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Fidel feeling well, takes a walk in Havana
Message-ID: <908b689f0903012213x36b34946na078b0e7ab1ed917@mail.gmail.com>

"?l presidente Ch?vez [...] revel? que la vitalidad de Fidel es tal
que sali? a pasear por las calles de La Habana y que le hizo llegar
cuatro cartas solamente el d?a de ayer."

Prensa Web YVKE (PR)
Viernes, 27 de Feb de 2009

<http://www.radiomundial.com.ve/yvke/noticia.php?20439>


From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Sun Mar  1 23:20:09 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 01:20:09 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight
In-Reply-To: <c48.2bbc6ad3.36dc4033@aol.com>
References: <c48.2bbc6ad3.36dc4033@aol.com>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903012220j67d87212ydcb5c027817c999c@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 2:46 PM,  <Jscotlive at aol.com> wrote:

> In this I'm mindful of Marx's stance on the Paris Commune. At the start he
> was critical, viewed it as suicidal and wrongheaded. By the time it ended he'd
> earned himself the enmity of the international ruling class with his staunch
> support and solidarity with those on the front lines.

<http://links.org.au/node/921>

By *Michael A. Lebowitz*

February 16, 2009 --                         It is not as well known
that Marx had little respect for disciples in general. A theory
disintegrates, he said, when disciples try to ``explain away'' problems
in the theory --  a theory disintegrates, he said, when the point of
departure of
the disciples is ``no longer reality'' but the theory that the master
produced.


[Michael Lebowitz 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/.]


From Waistline2 at aol.com  Mon Mar  2 00:01:04 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 02:01:04 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops?
Message-ID: <ca9.43b6de42.36dcde30@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/1/2009 11:33:08 P.M.  Eastern Standard Time, 
theguavatree at gmail.com writes:
On 3/1/09, David Pic?n  ?lvarez <david at miradoiro.com> wrote:
> From: "Ruthless Critic of All  that Exists" <ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com>
>
> > In any  case,Cuba needs to be applauded for not kow-towing to the
>  >  Luddite, reflexively anti-GM greenie-green bandwagon.
>
>
>  Absolutely. A good part of this opposition seems to be rooted in
>   quasi-religious views about the goodness of nature  


FROM HYBRIDS, TO FOOD IRRADIATION, TO GMOS: The Blade Runner Paradox. 
 

The process of hybridization of food began when humans first began to  
cultivate the wild foods that grew in their environments. Hybridization became  more 
sophisticated over the years as humans noticed certain traits in foods and  
in order to enhance those traits began to selectively breed plants with other  
plants, within the same genus. (This process was also occurring in the animal  
kingdom. Most of the animals that surround human lifestyles are domesticated  
from their wild cousins: cows, dogs, chickens, cats, turkeys, etc.) Desirable 
 traits in plants often include greater and more consistent size, sweeter, 
more  pronounced taste, smaller or no seeds, brighter colors. Most of the foods 
that  we consume today have been through the selective breeding process to 
produce  familiar foods. These include most vegetables, like potatoes, corn, 
tomatoes,  apples, carrots, broccoli, rice, all greens, cauliflower, as well as 
most of the  animal foods consumed. 
 
The process of selective breeding for desirable traits began the subtle  
alteration of the DNA of the foods. Minor changes in gene sequence and structure  
that allows for the desirable traits activate or deactivate the genes for the  
traits of the occurrence of the organism in nature. 
 
The subtle alteration of the DNA of the food that humans consume will  affect 
subtle alteration of the DNA of those consuming the food. This happens  when 
the food is broken down into cellular and subcellular components and then  in 
some cases is restructured to the configuration that the body can use. In  
other cases the cellular and subcellular components are easily bioassimilable.  
When these components are less than optimal, they may be usable by the body, 
but  important components are missing. This causes the cells to mitosis daughter 
 cells that look identical but have subtle flaws in their gene sequences. 
Thus,  begins the slow decline, the degeneration or devolution of a people into a 
less  conscious, less connected, less aware state. Constitutional cellular 
weakening  can and often appears in generation cycles, traditionally requiring 
up to seven  generations to correct. 
 
In this state of historic disconnection, metabolic breach, from self and  
environment ? which is microcosm and macrocosm, internal and external ? the  
devolution and warping of consciousness causes increase in fear to be a prime  
motivator; and when combined with relentless production for exchange value,  
inexorably results in maddening and insane attempts to control energy in all its  
forms, rather than to use focused energy and intention to create and flow 
with  observed outcomes, in harmony with the natural order of the earth itself. . 
 
These "disconnected ones," in fear of the environment, fearing organisms,  ?
germs, viruses, bacteria, molds,? developed food irradiation as a means of  
eliminating ?pathogens? from foods. The "disconnected ones" in their greed  
state, unable or unwilling to sense the subtle shift in the energy of the  
irradiated food, purported to bamboozle the consumers into consuming more and  more 
dead genetically selected, radioactive food. Consumers in the classic  ?
double-think? fear-state could not recognize the term ?radiation? in food  ?
irradiation? and also unable to see or sense the subtle shifts in energy  patterns of 
the foods, continue, lazily oblivious, to ingest radioactive food.  Greed has 
a biological component buttressed and reproduced as capital and the  capital 
relations. All of us intimately know the cycle but not a conscious level  and 
most certainly not on the level as Marxist outlook, which speaks to why this  
cycle is self reproduced as an intimate part of the value  relations. The  
body enters a cycle of relentless craving because its cellular structure has  
been weakened and is not being sustained and reproduced by molecularly complete  
fruits and vegetation. One becomes and remains hungry while bodily "full." 
 
Completely disconnected, suffering from metabolic breach, with subtly  
altered DNA, in an increased and artificially created fear state and irradiated;  
the consumers in the U.S. have now been ingesting transgenic food for 10 years.  
Ten years ago this subject was discussed here on Marxism with more sympathy 
for  th protest, riots and opposition to what was then called "frankenfood" in  
Europe. At that time European governments were refusing to allow genetically  
altered American meats in their markets. Somewhere in Marxism archives these  
discussions can be found. 
 
Trans-genetic food, commonly termed ?genetically modified? (frankenfood) is  
yet the most insidious form of DNA manipulation occurring to date. 
Genetically  modified organisms cross classification, genus, and even species that arose 
in  the evolution of the myriad of life forms on the planet. The danger comes 
from  combining gene sequences in ways that violate the subtle laws of 
evolution and  creation out of which all life forms have arisen ? until now. 
 
With the same selective breeding mentality that brought about  hybridization, 
albeit with greater technology, and now driven by the pursuit of  exchange 
value, the idea of selecting certain desired traits continues at a  higher 
level. The real problem is that "desired traits" is established as and on  the 
basis of the value relation and the law of unknown long term results. Most  folks 
of my generation still remember "real tomatoes" without the thick skins,  "to 
meaty insides" and less robust juices, whose properties had evolved over  ages 
in unison with the nature that is man/women. 
 
With the advent of gene mapping, researchers can now isolate the gene that  
contains the desired trait, and/or import desired traits to enhance  
marketability. Apples are far to hard and depleted of much of  their  alkaline juice 
properties. With the use of a rather relatively unsophisticated  technology, 
known as a ?gene gun?, the desired genes are ?fired? into the  sequence of the 
DNA of the cells of the target organism. The result, hard  strawberries with 
fish genes, hard tomatoes with potato genes, sheep with monkey  genes and other 
such combinations as befit the fancy of the financiers of the  research, at 
the call of the madmen of finance capital. More often, the traits  of single 
celled organisms are fired into the gene sequences of the target  organisms. 
 
The hardness, firmness and rate of decay of vegetables is historically  
evolved and alters the human body through our senses, also historically evolved,  
the optimal time in which to consume these foods. Mother nature cannot be  
fooled, although the body can be fooled - blunted, in such a way that we no  
longer remember life's biological cycles. Capitalism in agriculture has not  
reckoned well with ecology because nature is torn from its normal biological -  
metabolic, cycles. Once upon a time beautiful "Sun Flowers" golden heads would  
literally follow the sun across the sky, which is why they were called sun  
flowers. Today, sunflowers hang their heads in same at their debasement,  
hybridization and being transported to areas that does not support their unique  
properties. 
 
Genetic engineering crosses the phenotype barrier to genotype. 
 
Phenotype is the appearance or manifestation of the gene sequence, whereas  
genotype relates to the actual gene structure. Hybridization of foods must 
still  followed certain laws of nature because it allowed whole series of genes to 
be  transmitted between plants within the same genus. For example, a white 
rose  could be bred with a red rose to produce a pink rose. We are still talking 
about  plant to plant transmission, within the same family, rose. There is a 
whole  series of genes that is transmitted to the offspring from both parents. 
Whereas  with genetic engineering, only one gene or a snippet of a gene is 
introduced  into the target organism, without knowledge of what that one gene 
inserted into  an already existing sequence will produce. Thus the gene is 
inserted without the  accompaniment of other genes or gene sequences with which 
that gene has existed  for millennia. With genetic engineering we cross species 
barriers in performance  of experiments that have not occurred in this cycle of 
existence. Perhaps we  have forgotten that tampering with natural and 
physical laws have brought about  the end of all of the other great cycles on earth? 
Including things like  patterns of bird migration. 
 
Further, much of the subtle alteration of genes remain below the eye, even  
when using the most powerful microscope, and below the understanding of the  
observer, who more often that not does not deeply understand what is being  
viewed because a desired result block their field of vision. 
 
The dangers of genetically modifying organisms has been underplayed and it  
is not in the interest of the agrochemical companies that produce these  
combinations to disclose all of their facts. In fact, there are currently no  
labeling requirements for genetically modified foods. In the U.S., if the food  is 
not labeled, ?non-GMO,? then it is safe to assume that it is genetically  
modified. This process started quietly in 1995 when Americans were distracted by  
the Gulf War,  ?Monica Lewinskya," and the Clinton administration  destroying 
"welfare as we know it."  Meanwhile, around the world, most  other countries 
vehemently protested and defrayed the attempts of Monsanto,  Novaris, Dow and 
others to push gmos down their throats. The agrochemical  companies quietly 
lobbied, wooed, seduced and bedded their counterparts in  Congress. And in fact 
there is a revolving door policy between the government  and these big chemical 
companies. For example, Donald Rumsfeld, current  Secretary of Defense, held 
a position of at Monsanto. 
 
Moreover, the genetic modification of food assures, unless there is a  
successful counter movement, the elimination of genetic diversity that has  existed 
on this planet for millennia. It is a mistake to label these spontaneous  
movements quackery. Since all that we have to consume is increasingly  genetically 
altered food, how is that affecting us? It has been proven that  genetically 
modified organisms, through the natural propagation processes of  plants, 
infests, supersedes and eliminates non-gmo foods in the field. Also,  there is a 
concerted effort by the agrochemical companies to eliminate heirloom  seeds. In 
the past several years, aggressive grassroots movements have arisen  around 
the globe to preserve heirloom seeds and thus all of our genetic  heritage. 
 
All genetically altered food is not bad because it has been altered.  
Capitalism alters food in its image: value expansion at all cost. 
 
Several years ago Monsanto began taking farmers to court whose fields their  
seeds found their way into and the farmers harvested the fruits and 
vegetables.  Monsanto claimed this produce as their property and could prove its genetic 
 markers as theirs, regardless to the fact that the culprit was the wind. 
 

No references provided, no links, no author. However, all of the  material is 
available on line for those who seek the information. 

WL. 
 
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. Roy is 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. 
 
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 . . ." 
 
( 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?" 
 
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." 
 
 
 
**************Need a job? Find employment help in your area. 
(http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=employment_agencies&ncid=emlcntusyelp00000005)

From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Mon Mar  2 00:26:54 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 02:26:54 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Why do we criticize?
In-Reply-To: <COL112-W363426A1B866DFEC3F8A83D7A80@phx.gbl>
References: <COL112-W363426A1B866DFEC3F8A83D7A80@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903012326l64aaa4eal4db67481c1a97ce8@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Eli Stephens <elishastephens at hotmail.com> wrote:

> So why *do* we "criticize" things? Well, we criticize our *own* imperialist governments because we want to overthrow them, and we need to rouse and/or educate those who will effectuate that overthrow. But why would we criticize an *anti-imperialist movement* in *another* country

Who are the "we" here?

Why are you assuming that all those who post on Marxmail are from
imperialist countries?

> perceive as unacceptable about, e.g., FARC, Cuba, Hamas, etc. Far easier to join in the criticism (as if >there isn't already enough).

Notice that even Raul Castro is encouraging debate inside Cuba. Why?
Because it is healthy.



    BY MIAMI HERALD STAFF
    cuba at MiamiHerald.com

    Dec 8, 2007

    HAVANA -- Voices that once whispered are rising to a crescendo.

    Call it the law of unintended consequences: Since Cuba's interim
president, Ra?l Castro, called for public meetings to debate the
country's innumerable problems, more and more people are speaking out
-- and not just about empty store and pharmacy shelves and lousy
public transportation but topics long off-limits like democracy and
freedom.

   [...]

    While no one is suggesting that the Cuban government has knocked
down the door to freedom of expression, experts say that little by
little, the entrance has widened. The fact that Cubans, invited by
Ra?l to speak up in workplace and community meetings, now also feel
more comfortable doing so in other settings represents a significant
shift and underscores the subtle changes slowly taking place in the
nearly 1 ? years since Fidel Castro fell ill.

    Some experts wonder whether the move to allow more open criticism
will backfire and, instead of allowing Cubans to let out steam, will
make them boil over.

   [...]

    Cubans agree that some are becoming more vocal in their complaints.

    ''People can't take it anymore. This revolution was supposed to be
one thing, and now we realize it is something else,'' said a laborer
who asked that his name not be published. ``People want change. The
government held meetings to hear what we had to say, and let me tell
you, people went for it.''

    TAKING ACTION

    Last month, several youth were arrested for protesting Cuba's
municipal elections, calling it a sham. Weeks later, an organization
of rural women presented the national legislature with a petition
allegedly signed by thousands of women demanding an end to Cuba's dual
currency system. A few days after that, a youth group said it
collected 5,000 signatures from students demanding independent
universities.

    In a rare move, the Cuban Communist Party newspaper Granma alluded
this week to the petition drives in its pages -- coverage that
dissidents said was both new and surprising.

    One of the most unexpected displays of debate came last month,
when several intellectuals who spoke out earlier this year against a
government official who in the 1970s led a crackdown on artists were
invited on a state-run television show called Open Dialogue.

    ''We accustomed ourselves to not debating,'' filmmaker Alfredo
Guevara, a longtime Fidel Castro ally, said on the show, Mexico's La
Jornada newspaper reported. ''We answered Fidel with silence'' and
later ''Ra?l had to come'' to begin a dialogue.

    The television appearance was thought to be the first time the
government-controlled media openly discussed the 1970s crackdown on
intellectuals. It was also the first time the Cuban press mentioned
the massive nationwide grievance meetings held in October at Ra?l
Castro's request.

    Cuba-based blogger Yoani S?nchez dismissed the importance of the
TV appearance, calling the show a one-sided ``debate among
revolutionaries.''

    But the head of the Communist Party's culture committee recently
cast the debate in much broader terms, telling a Cuban magazine that
the revolution is considering a profound transformation.

    ''The party itself is rethinking its relationship with society to
seek a more direct, more efficient dialogue and greater participation
of the people in decisions,'' El?ades Acosta told the website Cubarte.
``We aspire to have a society that speaks aloud about its problems,
without fear . . . in which mistakes are publicly aired to seek
solutions, in which the people can express themselves honestly.''

    He called for an end of the ``the abuse of institutional practices
to limit criticism.''

    Opposition journalist Rodr?guez noted that government media seem
to have responded to Ra?l Castro's call for openness: Cuban television
recently broadcast a speech by President Bush, and then aired the King
of Spain telling Cuba's No. 1 ally, Venezuelan President Hugo Ch?vez,
to shut up.

    ''There it was, clear as day, on Cubavisi?n, the king telling
Ch?vez to shut up,'' he said. ``In the past, we would never have been
allowed to see that.''

    He cautioned, however, that the Cuban government is still
controlling the news and rounding up activists at will. Three youth
leaders who presented the university petitions were detained for a
week. Washington's anti-Castro television programming, TV Mart?, is
continuously jammed, and Cubans are largely kept off the Internet.

    So while more and more people are feeling free to speak out, a
50-year legacy of repression against free speech is hard to overcome,
Cubans say. Ra?l Castro has been described as both a consensus-driven
reformer and a tough security enforcer.

    ''You know in the universities they are now offering a course
called `Reflections'?'' said Felipe, the carpenter.

    Fidel Castro 'writes little essays, calls them `reflections,' and
now students have to study it,'' he said. ``The students will read
those essays and study them, but they will not really debate them.
Maybe people are speaking up more, but they don't do it where it
counts, so in the end, it's all bull.''

    A POLICY SHIFT?

    Dissidents in Cuba say the change is not only indicative of a
policy shift pushed by Ra?l Castro, but also of a fed-up society.

    ''It's been more than 40 years of this crap already,'' said a
Havana cleaning lady, who admits she voted ''no'' for all the
candidates listed on a recent municipal election ballot. ``Now they
want us to tell them what's wrong.

    ``We'll tell them a thing or two. We're going to unleash our tongues.''

    [The Miami Herald withheld the name of the correspondent who
prepared this report and the surnames of the people quoted, because
the reporter did not have the journalist visa required by the Cuban
government to report from the island.]


From Jscotlive at aol.com  Mon Mar  2 00:35:23 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 02:35:23 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Betancourt's halo [SIC] under spotlight
Message-ID: <d57.1caa98a3.36dce63b@aol.com>

Kai:
 
The mujahadeen were
fighting against Soviet imperialism
 
Reply:
 
Soviet imperialism - really? And here was me thinking that the Soviet Union  
intervened, after the then leftist Afghan government requested help against a 
US  funded and trained insurgency, to prevent the country being plunged back 
into  the abyss of feudalism.
 
How does Soviet imperialism work economically, btw? My understanding is  that 
imperialism is an economic category. 
 
As for Ruthless:
 
Truth is objective, and, as
someone pointed out already, the bedrock of  Marxism is that truth can
be apprehended. Critique is a means of approaching  truth. Truth does
not vary depending on geographical location of the truth  seeker. By
insinuating that it does, JScotlive smuggles postmodernist  relativism
into Marxism via the back door.

Reply:
 
Interesting that Ruthless ascribes truth to his views on the FARC and all  
other matters, 99.9 percent over which I disagree with him. His is a subjective  
opinion, based on his understanding of the world and viewed through the prism 
of  that understanding. We can only ever take objective facts, which may or 
may not  be distorted by propaganda, quality and extent of information at our  
disposal, both influenced largely by, yes, factors such as our  geographical 
location, and use those facts to arrive at a subjective opinion. To  ascribe 
absolute truth to an opinion is the method of the charlatan. 
 
 

From Jscotlive at aol.com  Mon Mar  2 01:21:15 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 03:21:15 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Bidder Refuses To Pay For Looted Chinese Auction Items
Message-ID: <c88.43596001.36dcf0fb@aol.com>

 
A Chinese man who won a high profile auction for two bronze  artworks claimed 
by China says he will not pay for them.  
The sculptures, which sold for 15m euros ($19m; ?13m) each in Paris last  
week, were originally looted from Beijing in 1860.  
In full: 
_http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7918128.stm_ 
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7918128.stm)  


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Mon Mar  2 02:05:24 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 04:05:24 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis
References: <55868ddf0903011847v7a488128mfcb61354d67f71dc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6ADDE74C8C5C4B9D8E2A09E07809F874@dmsthinkpad>

When it all gets sorted,  2006 will be identified as the peak in the ROI.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "brad bauerly" <bbauerly at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 9:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis




From donaloc at hotmail.com  Mon Mar  2 04:30:50 2009
From: donaloc at hotmail.com (D OC)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:30:50 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Thoughts on 8 Theses
Message-ID: <BLU138-W382D0BE678630D421B46FDABA90@phx.gbl>


A chairde,

 

I have been reading much of this discussion. 

 

It seems to me that neo-classical conceptions have crept into marxist analysis. Specifically, while the eight theses are a very useful explanation of the apparent unfolding of the recent economic crisis, it is an analysis which appears to lack materialist depth.

 

What does financial investment constitute in real economic terms? Of course some element represents nothing more than the fiction of price over value but it is more than simply that.

 

Financial investment is integral to globalised production in the imperialist mode. As such, the dominance of 'financial' capital over productive capital is reflective of the dominance of imperialist over domestic production. 

 

The crisis would appear to be at least highly conditioned by (and I would tend to believe caused by) the imbalance of trade that lies underneath the trends which have been analysed by the (unduly insular) eight theses. These underlying trends are conditioned by the global imbalance in the metabolism of production. Just as agriculture is imbalanced between countryside and town, so too now production and consumption on a global scale. The eight theses make a critical point in terms of how financial instruments have been developed to enable globalisation of investment but fails to develop this argument from that point - it seems to me at least. 

 

Credit has allowed that situation to extend beyond the ordinary limits of balance. The gains of social reformism (which were always underpinned by imperialist super-profits) were largely rolled back but the relative position of privilege in imperialist centres remained and even extended relative to the peoples of the third world. The imbalance of consumption over production is reflected in some way in the aggregate price differential known as the 'trade deficit'; however, I would argue that this is a significant underestimation of the imbalance of trade due to prices not reflecting value. In marxist terms, much of the GDP per capita in imperialist centres has no intrinsic value whereas the value of production in the third world is very close to the price of its export. The bulk of value generated by most imperialist economies is surplus value obtained from foreign production/exploitation. The price of this surplus value is extenuated by mark up between the productive and consumptive markets. The dependence of the British economy on financial services and the parallel deindustrialisation and unprecedented contraction in agricultural production in the same country is a case-in-point. Britain's society is built on the profits of super-exploitation just as is Iceland's and to a lesser extent that of the USA. Consumption on that basis could only be facilitated by the extension of (inflated) credit and a graduated build up of national debt to 'net producer' economies. 

 

Credit overextended to its very limits has now has collapsed - aka the financial deleveraging - and this will not be simply reversed in the short to medium term. Such leveraging was only sustainable with an inflation in global prices and profits underpinned by a growth in the net real global capital base. As a result, there are two crises - a crisis of the financial institutions which have facilitated the overextension of credit - and a crisis of consumption in the imperialist core. This will naturally spread outwards to a crisis of the productive centres - which is what we're seeing in drops in economic output across the world.

 

It would appear that the only way to steady the boat on the long-term is to rebalance the productive economy. There are two relatively obvious ways to do that - first is to lower consumption in the imperialist centres (a lowering of the standard of living) - which is already happening - and second to address the imbalance of trade. Hence the talk of keynesian stimulus and the possibility of protectionism. The alternative for the west is to control a critical raw material for production i.e. oil or something similar, but I don't see that as viable at this time.

 

Necessarily, this is a generalised presentation but it stands in fairly stark contrast to the analysis of the eight thesis which I fear seeks to explain the crisis in terms which are *fundamentally* national and loses the connection which marxist economics need to retain to materialist analysis. 

 

Thoughts, anyone?

 

Le meas,

DoC.

_________________________________________________________________
Get 30 Free Emoticons for your Windows Live Messenger
http://www.livemessenger-emoticons.com/funfamily/en-ie/

From sartesian at earthlink.net  Mon Mar  2 04:44:39 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 06:44:39 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Fed Stares at AIG, and blinks
Message-ID: <95696C683827491A811524DDC4A149DB@dmsthinkpad>

http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/other/20090302a.htm



Fed revises the terms of its preferred shares so AIG does not have to pay dividends.  That's taking care of the taxpayers' interests, sure.  Whatever happened to fiduciary responsibility?

Fed creates another special revolving credit facility of up to $30 billion which AIG can access in exchange for more non-dividend paying preferred shares.

As for the already existing $60 billion revolving credit facility--  Fed gets, not preferred stock, which isn't quite so preferred anyway, but preferred interest in  two SPVs holding the all common stock of AIG's like insurance holding company subsidiaries (which might still be profitable).  Fed estimates its interest values out at app $26 billion.

Fed will make loans to these life insurance SPVs of $8.5 billlion,  which will collateralized by the issuance of securities based on the cash flow from the insurance premiums.  Does this sound familiar???? Can you say  CDO?  ABS?  SIV?   These loans would then be used by AIG to repay an equivalent amount of Revolving Credit facility debt.  Are you fucking kidding me?  Christ, they put Andy Fastow in jail for doing this shit.  Free Andy Fastow!

So I give you the money; you issue securities collateralized by cash flow from insurance policies in companies that I now have preferred interests in common stock.  You take the money I gave you with my left hand, and use it to repay the additional money I am lending you with my right hand which is was supposedly secured by the issuance of preferred shares, which don't pay dividends.  "Hey Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat"  Hey moose, that's my hat, and the rabbit's dead.

And what must AIG do?  It must issue for the sole benefit of the US Treasury,  preferred shares representing a 77.9% equity interest in AIG by March 4 2009.  

Well, as of Friday Feb 27  the equity in AIG was about $1.35 billion... 

Amazing....even for this bunch of murdering morons.


Crazy Feddie-- prices so low he's actually giving it all away.

From sartesian at earthlink.net  Mon Mar  2 05:04:00 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 07:04:00 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Thoughts on 8 Theses
References: <BLU138-W382D0BE678630D421B46FDABA90@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <11748C70B8D5442CA5C648E079A59485@dmsthinkpad>

Sure.  Mostly I disagree.

Agree that neo-classical conceptions have crept in-- and most neo-classical 
of all, and most of the creeping is in this notion of trade imbalances--  
trade imbalances neither reflect nor cause breakdowns in capitalism as 
capital-- as the reproduction of expanded value.

As a matter of fact this dependence, reliance, on trade imbalance theory is 
a little more than neo-classical.  It is positively mercantilist.  Engels 
wrote an interesting piece in 1843 in the Jahrbucher on the critique of 
political economy; includes a great attack on mercantilist "balance of 
trade" worhippers.

The proof, more or less, of the inapplicability of "balance of trade" 
theorizing, you provide when you make the analogy between agriculture and 
city-- absolutely--  cities "import" much more from the countryside than 
they "export" to the countryside-- that's an index to the relative 
development of the city over the countryside-- this doesn't make the city 
financially or economically subservient to the countryside-- to the 
production of exchange value in agriculture.  There is no NEED in capitalism 
for balance; for balance between industry and agriculture-- balance is 
necessary in barter, but not in capitalist exchange.  Profit is what counts. 
Expanded value.  Not balance.

Financial investment has always been intrinsic to capitalist development, 
just as international, global expansion has always been intrinsic to 
domestic capital investment.  The bulk of the value generated, appropriated 
by the advanced capitalist countries is most certainly NOT value 
expropriated, seized, looted, unequally exchanged from "foreign 
exploitation"  if you mean by foreign exploitation-- super-profits derived 
from poorer, less-developed countries.   The overwhelming bulk of 
imperialist investment is inter-imperialist, or maybe better 
INTRA-imperialist, the overwhelming source of profits is, again, inter/intra 
imperialist, and is not derived from investments in the less-developed 
countries.

Regarding productive cores and advance countries--  US still provides the 
largest portion of the world's industrial production-- about 24-21% [think 
this is a 2007 figure] and even poor old decadent super-annuated Britain has 
a manufacturing sector providing about 15% of GDP-- not very much less than 
France's ratio.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "D OC" <donaloc at hotmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 6:30 AM
Subject: [Marxism] Thoughts on 8 Theses




From sabocat59 at mac.com  Mon Mar  2 05:25:50 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 12:25:50 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops?
Message-ID: <1493087746-1235996847-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1780072990-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

WL (The subtle alteration of the DNA of the food that humans consume will affect subtle alteration of the DNA of those consuming the food. This happens when the food is broken down into cellular and subcellular components and then in some cases is restructured to the configuration that the body can use.)

Greg: This is a big leap from alteration of the domesticated plants and animals to that of humans simply by their consumption.  It's been a while since I studied microbiology but this somehow doesn't ring true to me.  



WL: (In other cases the cellular and subcellular components are easily bioassimilable. When these components are less than optimal, they may be usable by the body, but important components are missing. This causes the cells to mitosis daughter cells that look identical but have subtle flaws in their gene sequences. Thus, begins the slow decline, the degeneration or devolution of a people into a less conscious, less connected, less aware state.) 

Greg: This is reductionist.  The lack of connectedness and awareness of our inner nature and the nature outside us (at the sensory level) is a long historical, socioeconomic and cultural process, not just a biological process.  There are readily available practices that seek to recover this connection and they do work. The connection is recovered by going inside the body with the mind's awareness.  Problem is most people are so unaware of their own unrelatedness to nature and their own inner nature that they don't take the necessary steps, and more often than not they ridicule those who do. Unawareness is another symptom.  

WL: (Constitutional cellular weakening can and often appears in generation cycles, traditionally requiring up to seven generations to correct. In this state of historic disconnection, metabolic breach, from self and environment ? which is microcosm and macrocosm, internal and external ? the devolution and warping of consciousness causes increase in fear to be a prime motivator; and when combined with relentless production for exchange value, inexorably results in maddening and insane attempts to control energy in all its forms, rather than to use focused energy and intention to create and flow with observed outcomes, in harmony with the natural order of the earth itself. . These "disconnected ones," in fear of the environment, fearing organisms, ?germs, viruses, bacteria, molds,? developed food irradiation as a means of eliminating ?pathogens? from foods. The "disconnected ones" in their greed state, unable or unwilling to sense the subtle shift in the energy of the irradiated food, purported to bamboozle the consumers into consuming more and more dead genetically selected, radioactive food.)

I think you're onto something here.  "Focused energy and intention."  You're sounding like a yoga teacher. Anyone who has reconnected to the flow of energy inside themselves becomes acutely aware of the differences resulting from the cosumption of overly processed energetically dead food and organic food which still has some energetic vitality. 

Also, who wants to consume deadened food which was  harvested by slave labor? Better to cosume locally grown organic food produced by family farms.                    

And any old taoist, acupuncturist or old school massage therapist will tell you that control of energy is possible only by letting the energy flow. You have to ride the wave and channel it. If you try to forcibly control the energy you get into trouble.  When the flow is blocked eventually disease is the result.  

Of course the dinosaur mechanistic materialists still stuck in the 19th century will have fun with this but who cares? 

Greg McDonald
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

From markalause at gmail.com  Mon Mar  2 05:34:45 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 07:34:45 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Obama to remove ALL troops from Iraq
In-Reply-To: <49AB6609.9060600@sonic.net>
References: <COL112-W594C5C9392C8EF37151E4BD7AB0@phx.gbl>
	<b16d8daf0902272239p6c1e545dv8d72578ff34b3cce@mail.gmail.com>
	<4be0c4210902272244h5a189abdja94a3e9bf77ab140@mail.gmail.com>
	<908b689f0902272316v65d7a31esa2d8119e6261d15e@mail.gmail.com>
	<4be0c4210902280848u733317f3r845754833484585a@mail.gmail.com>
	<908b689f0902281110n676f6f8bsfa08c1368579775@mail.gmail.com>
	<49AB6580.2020305@sonic.net> <49AB6609.9060600@sonic.net>
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0903020434l794a231ag9c37a57869517ba2@mail.gmail.com>

That's the dynamic of electoral politics in the US.  It's
substantively how the system works.  Your mother is one of millions.

I was just listening to an NPR report of an interview with Secretary
Robert Gates on which he was discussing the need for a military
presence in Afghanistan in terms of the Taliban supporters in
Pakistan.  One wonders how many people hearing that are actually
asking themselves "how did the Taliban supporters in Pakistan"
actually get there?  And, related, is a greater US military presence
in Afghanistan going to make this "problem" in Pakistan more
manageable or less?  These are obvious questions that boil down to
plain old common sense.

It's hard to imagine that the questions don't occur to more people
across society, but they don't seem to do so.

ML


From david at miradoiro.com  Mon Mar  2 05:52:24 2009
From: david at miradoiro.com (=?Windows-1252?Q?David_Pic=F3n_=C1lvarez?=)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 13:52:24 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops?
References: <1493087746-1235996847-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1780072990-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
Message-ID: <992A17F214254866A093E9323B6485F7@Nautilus>

With all my respects to Greg and WL, I couldn't have written a better parody 
of the type of nonsense that passes itself off as informed opinion on GMO 
and similar matters than they wrote themselves. When people start 
disregarding physics to postulate mystic forces that act on whole organisms 
(and conscioussness, no less!) we know we've arrived at an idealist dead 
end.

--David.
Maybe Guava Tree, whose concerns and policy prescriptions are, in my view, 
although exagerated, at least grounded in reality, will understand what I 
mean now.

--David.



From sabocat59 at mac.com  Mon Mar  2 06:06:52 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 13:06:52 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops?
Message-ID: <1306618260-1235999305-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1702265231-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

No offense taken David. In fact your response was anticipated. Fact is there is nothing mystical about energy. Can you say PHYSICS? 

It would not seem incongruent to those of us aware of the energy flowing through our bodies to seek explanation in current understanding of sub atomic reality, which in other cultures, namely the Chinese and Indian,  is considered a mundane and readily observable reality at the level of sensory awareness. Of course your sensory apparatus has to be refined somewhat through personal practice, something most westerners living in urban settings are simply incapable of understanding. 

Thus the tendency to react with dismissive labelling and name calling. 

Greg McDonald 

Greg McDonaled
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T


From Jscotlive at aol.com  Mon Mar  2 06:27:24 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 08:27:24 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Israel may face war crimes trials
Message-ID: <d41.3729edea.36dd38bc@aol.com>

 
The international criminal court is considering whether the Palestinian  
Authority is "enough like a state" for it to bring a case alleging that Israeli  
troops committed _war crimes_ (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/war-crimes)  in 
the recent assault on _Gaza_ (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gaza) .  
The deliberations would potentially open the way to putting Israeli military  
commanders in the dock at The Hague over the campaign, which claimed more 
than  1,300 lives, and set an important precedent for the court over what cases 
it can  hear. 
Full: _http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/02/israel-war-crimes-gaza_ 
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/02/israel-war-crimes-gaza)  


From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Mar  2 06:59:43 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 08:59:43 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Ukraine teeters
Message-ID: <49ABE64F.9060609@panix.com>

NY Times, March 2, 2009
Ukraine Teeters as Citizens Blame Banks and Government
By CLIFFORD J. LEVY

KIEV, Ukraine ? Steel and chemical factories, once the muscle of 
Ukraine?s economy, are dismissing thousands of workers. Cities have had 
days without heat or water because they cannot pay their bills, and 
Kiev?s subway service is being threatened. Lines are sprouting at banks, 
the currency is wilting and even a government default seems possible.

Ukraine, once considered a worldwide symbol of an emerging, free-market 
democracy that had cast off authoritarianism, is teetering. And its 
predicament poses a real threat for other European economies and former 
Soviet republics.

The sudden, violent protests that have erupted elsewhere in Eastern 
Europe seem imminent here now, too. Across Kiev last week, people spoke 
of rising anger about the crisis and resentment toward a government that 
they said was more preoccupied with squabbling than with rallying the 
country.

The sign held by Vasily Kirilyuk, an unemployed plumber camped out with 
other antigovernment demonstrators here in the past week, summed up the 
pervasive frustration: ?Get rid of them all,? it said.

Mr. Kirilyuk did not hesitate to take that further. ?There will be a 
revolt,? he said. ?And people will come because they are just fed up.?

Mr. Kirilyuk, 29, was standing in the same central square where throngs 
in 2004 carried out the Orange Revolution, a seminal event that brought 
to power a pro-Western government in Ukraine. He said he was a fervent 
supporter then of the protesters, but now he and a few dozen others who 
have set up tents here are demanding that the heroes of that revolution 
step down.

It is not hard to understand why world leaders are increasingly worried 
about the discontent and the financial crisis in Ukraine, which has 46 
million people and a highly strategic location. A small country like 
Latvia or Iceland is one thing, but a collapse in Ukraine could wreck 
what little investor confidence is left in Eastern Europe, whose 
formerly robust economies are being badly strained.

It could also cause neighboring Russia, which has close ethnic and 
linguistic ties to eastern and southern Ukraine, to try to inject itself 
into the country?s affairs. What is more, the Kremlin would be able to 
hold up Ukraine as an example of what happens when former Soviet 
republics follow a Western model of free-market democracy.

?Ukraine is a linchpin for stability in Europe,? said Olexiy Haran, a 
professor of comparative politics at Kiev Mohyla University. ?It is a 
key player between the expanding European Union and Russia. To use an 
alarmist scenario, you could imagine a situation in Ukraine that Russia 
tried to exploit in order to dominate Ukraine. That would make for a 
very explosive situation on the border of the European Union.?

That Ukraine can cause problems for Europe was highlighted in January 
when Ukraine engaged in a dispute with Russia over how much it would pay 
Russia for natural gas, as well as over gas transport to the rest of 
Europe. The Kremlin shut off the gas for several days, and some European 
countries went without heat. The Kremlin also shut off gas to Ukraine in 
2006 in a pricing dispute.

While Ukraine?s economy is dependent on exports of steel and chemicals, 
which have plummeted, the crisis has cut deeply because people are 
disillusioned with the government.

President Viktor A. Yushchenko, a leader of the Orange Revolution, who 
garnered attention around the world in 2004 when his face was scarred in 
a poisoning episode, is so widely scorned that a recent poll found that 
57 percent of people wanted him to resign.

His rivals have also lost popularity, as the public has become 
exasperated by years of political bickering. In February, the 
International Monetary Fund refused to release the next installment of a 
$16.4 billion rescue loan to Ukraine because the government would not 
adhere to an earlier agreement to pare its budget.

Around the same time, Ukraine?s finance minister resigned, saying that 
the job had been ?hostage to politics.?

On Friday, the monetary fund projected that Ukraine?s economy would 
shrink by 6 percent this year, and said that it was continuing to work 
with the government to find a way to disburse the rest of the rescue loan.

A presidential election is coming, probably to be held next January, and 
this prospect is making politicians, especially Prime Minister Yulia V. 
Tymoshenko, reluctant to adopt an austerity program that might alienate 
voters.

Mr. Yushchenko and Ms. Tymoshenko were pro-Western allies during the 
Orange Revolution, but have bitterly feuded since then, and he fired her 
once. A third rival, Viktor F. Yanukovich, a former prime minister who 
heads an opposition party that favors closer ties with Russia, also 
wants to be president.

On Friday, Mr. Yushchenko and Ms. Tymoshenko held a public meeting in an 
effort to demonstrate that they were working together. Mr. Yushchenko 
said he wanted ?to show the readiness of all sides to take political 
responsibility for decisions which today are not easy.?

Even so, the two did not announce further anticrisis measures.

All over Kiev have been signs that tensions are building.

On the city?s outskirts, more than 200 tractor-trailer rigs were parked 
Thursday, their drivers threatening to block roads if the government did 
not help them with their debts, which they said were caused in part by 
the drop in the value of Ukraine?s currency, the hryvnia.

The truckers dispersed Friday, only after the government said it would 
try to address their demands, but they said they would be back soon if 
they were ignored.

?The government is to blame for all this,? said a trucker, Viktor V. 
Zarichnyuk, 26, who had been at the protest for 12 days. ?We want the 
government and the national bank to agree that the money allocated by 
the International Monetary Fund, at least part of it, should go to 
regular people.?

At a branch of the Rodovid Bank across town, a tense crowd gathered 
Friday morning. The bank, close to failing, was allowing withdrawals of 
only $35 a day. And so people, some of them pensioners fearful for their 
life savings, have been trooping each day, ever more aggravated, to try 
to get what they can.

?Every day we come here ? it?s insulting ? in the cold and line up,? 
said Alevtina A. Antonyuk, 58, an engineer. ?They are nothing at this 
bank but a bunch of thieves.?

Who is to blame, she was asked. Before she could answer, Dmitri I. 
Havrilkiv, 78, a retired crane operator, interrupted.

?The government has to be replaced,? he shouted. ?They just can?t handle 
it!?




From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Mar  2 07:04:12 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:04:12 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Rashid Khalidi
Message-ID: <49ABE75C.30700@panix.com>

http://chronicle.com/weekly/v55/i26/26b00601.htm

 From the issue dated March 6, 2009
Rashid Khalidi's Balancing Act

The Middle-East scholar courts controversy with his Palestinian advocacy

By EVAN R. GOLDSTEIN

New York

On a bright, frozen morning in January, Rashid Khalidi is set to talk 
about his new book, Sowing Crisis: The Cold War and American Dominance 
in the Middle East (Beacon Press), a concise glance back at the 
four-and-a-half-decade-long superpower struggle in the Middle East 
between Washington and Moscow. He eases into a blue chair in his 
spacious, book-filled corner office at Columbia University, crosses one 
leg over the other, and begins to vent about Israel's recent military 
campaign in the Gaza Strip: "The discourse in America is dominated by 
one incredibly mendacious and tendentious version of events," Khalidi 
fumes, his voice rising from a near whisper. That narrative, "hammered 
home by Israel and all its supporters," forms the "bedrock of how 
Americans view" the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians.

Holder of the Edward Said Chair in Modern Arab Studies at Columbia ? 
named for the prominent Palestinian literary critic and public 
intellectual ? Khalidi is a lean, compact man with a narrow face, sharp 
features, and a graying, tightly clipped beard. Clearly indignant about 
the subject, he chops the air with his right hand for emphasis. The 
moment is classic Khalidi: gruff, passionate, a bit sermonic.

His views and style place the respected scholar, and his field of Middle 
Eastern studies, at the center of increasingly acrimonious debates about 
the direction of American foreign policy, the meaning of academic 
freedom, and the future of his discipline. Khalidi has been embroiled in 
nasty disputes about anti-Israel bias on campus and been barred from 
participating in a teacher-education program in New York City's public 
schools. As a commentator for The New York Times, The Nation, and the 
London Review of Books, as well as on PBS's Charlie Rose Show and 
National Public Radio, he has earned both scorn and admiration for his 
harsh indictments of America and Israel. The Republican 
vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin denounced him as a "radical 
professor"; The Washington Post once described his demeanor as that of 
"a good doctor with a lousy bedside manner"; The New York Sun called him 
"the professor of hate."

But academe's assessment is far different; many of his peers insist that 
he is no provocateur or rabble-rouser. As evidence, scholars point to 
Khalidi's longstanding support of a two-state solution to the 
Israeli-Palestinian conflict ? unlike the views of Said, who by the end 
of his life was advocating one state for both peoples, which would 
undermine Israel's Jewish identity. "The fact that someone like Rashid 
Khalidi can be characterized as a radical tells you how skewed the 
parameters of the discourse are in this country," says Zachary Lockman, 
a professor of Middle Eastern and Islamic studies at New York University.

Khalidi, editor of the Journal of Palestine Studies, has been courted by 
Princeton University, and his scholarship is respected even by those who 
disagree with his politics. "He is a serious scholar with a reputation 
for honesty and fair dealing," says Bernard Wasserstein, a professor of 
modern European Jewish history at the University of Chicago and an 
occasional adversary of Khalidi in debates about the Middle East. 
"Khalidi is mainstream," says Michael B. Oren, a visiting professor of 
international affairs at Georgetown University. "But," he adds, "the 
stream itself has changed. The criteria for scholarship have become very 
political."

Middle Eastern studies, in its modern guise, was born in the early years 
of the cold war, part of a newfound interest in regions of strategic 
importance to the United States. Before that, as the renowned French 
Arabist Maxime Rodinson bluntly put it, "the modern development of 
Muslim nations was not considered an important subject of scholarly 
inquiry and was disdainfully relegated to people such as economists, 
journalists, diplomats, military men, and amateurs." After World War II, 
however, the federal government began pouring money into area studies, 
and in 1958, Title VI of the National Defense Education Act began 
support for research centers on the Middle East.

Until the early 1970s, says Lockman, the field was dominated by 
third-world-development theories filtered through what has come to be 
called an Orientalist lens, which tended to exoticize the Muslim Middle 
East. By the early 80s, the discipline had been reshaped by the 
publication of Said's hugely influential 1978 book, Orientalism, which 
argued that Western scholarship on the Middle East was suffused with 
racism and imperialist motives. "There is an unmistakable coincidence 
between the experiences of Arab Palestinians at the hands of Zionism and 
the experiences of those black, yellow, and brown people who were 
described as inferior and subhuman by 19th-century imperialists," Said 
wrote in an essay from the same period. In a critique of Orientalism 
that ran in The New York Review of Books, Bernard Lewis, a professor of 
Near Eastern studies at Princeton University ? whose work Said derided 
as "political propaganda" ? accused Said of grinding political and 
ideological axes and betraying "a disquieting lack of knowledge of what 
scholars do and what scholarship is about."

The Lewis-Said schism continues to frame debate about Middle Eastern 
studies 30 years later. To his supporters, Khalidi is celebrated for 
bringing to light a history that, some say, has been long obscured by 
the immense tragedy of Jewish suffering in the 20th century. His first 
book, British Policy Towards Syria and Palestine, 1906-1914 (Ithaca 
Press for St. Antony's College, 1980), explored how the people of those 
areas responded to early indications of the Ottoman Empire's collapse. 
His seminal work, Palestinian Identity: The Construction of Modern 
National Consciousness (Columbia University Press, 1997), which was 
awarded the Middle East Studies Association's top book prize, argues 
that Arabs living in Palestine began to regard themselves as a distinct 
people decades before the establishment of Israel, in 1948, and that the 
struggle against Zionism does not by itself sufficiently explain 
Palestinian nationalism.

Palestinian Identity solidified Khalidi's reputation as ? in the words 
of John Esposito, a professor of religion and international affairs at 
Georgetown ? "one of the pre-eminent historians of Palestinian 
nationalism." The book can be read as a delayed retort to Israeli Prime 
Minister Golda Meir's famous 1969 statement, "There was no such thing as 
Palestinians. ... They did not exist."

But Martin Kramer, a senior fellow at the Olin Institute for Strategic 
Studies at Harvard University and one of Khalidi's most dogged critics, 
believes that Palestinian Identity "is a deliberate attempt to be 
another brick in the wall of the Palestinian national narrative," 
another instance of Khalidi placing his scholarship in service to his 
politics. "At no point in his career has Khalidi ever knocked a brick 
out of that wall," Kramer says. "The circles of Palestinian 
intellectuals are so disappointing when it comes to people who are 
prepared to speak truth to their own that there is a general tendency to 
see Rashid Khalidi as some kind of moderate, or as good as it gets. I 
think it could get better."

Efraim Karsh, a professor of Mediterranean studies at King's College 
London, places Khalidi among those in Middle Eastern studies waging an 
"academic intifada against the Jewish state" ? a war of ideas, 
bankrolled in part by oil-rich Arab states, to stigmatize Israel. Karsh 
is hard-pressed to find books in the field that don't portray Israel as 
inexplicably oppressive toward the Palestinians. Scholars of a different 
view, he argues, are attacked and marginalized.

Nor is the academic left always sympathetic toward Khalidi's work. Benny 
Morris is a professor of history at Ben Gurion University of the Negev 
and a prominent member of the Israeli New Historians, a small group of 
scholars who have challenged national myths about the founding of the 
Jewish state. He has done groundbreaking work assigning some blame to 
Israel for the creation of the Palestinian refugee problem in 1948. 
While he calls Palestinian Identity a "reasonable book" that unearths 
some new information, in the final analysis he thinks that it tries in 
vain to establish that Palestinian nationalism emerged earlier than it 
actually did. It was written, he says, "in accordance with politically 
correct opinion among Palestinians."

Khalidi seemed to answer detractors who questioned whether he could turn 
a critical gaze toward the Palestinians with The Iron Cage: The Story of 
the Palestinian Struggle for Statehood (Beacon Press, 2006). Seeking an 
explanation for why Palestinians have failed in their quest for 
statehood, he emphasized the role of outside forces ? Israeli, British, 
American ? but also excoriated the ineptitude of Palestinian leadership. 
In the years before the establishment of Israel, he argued, Palestinian 
political elites failed to build a coherent governing structure that 
might have allowed them to more effectively resist the Zionists. 
Instead, Palestinian society crumbled. He described the Palestine 
Liberation Organization, which reconstituted the Palestinian national 
movement in the early 1960s and morphed into the Palestinian Authority 
after the 1993 Oslo Accords, as patronage-laden, corrupt, and 
ineffective. Khalidi's despair about the direction of Palestinian 
politics is even more acute today: "The state of the Palestinian 
national movement is worse than it has ever been since 1948," he says in 
his office. "I can't find words strong enough to criticize either Hamas 
or the Palestinian Authority."

That assessment has earned him a comparison to the New Historians. He 
rejects the parallel. "Revisionist history has to kick against an 
established, hegemonic, historical narrative," he says. "Such a version 
of Palestinian history arguably exists in Arabic, but it isn't yet well 
established internationally." More accurate, he says, is to view his 
work as an attempt to shape a still-unsettled story.

Khalidi, who is 60, is a scion of one of Jerusalem's oldest and most 
prominent families, members of which have long been fixtures among the 
city's political, religious, and intellectual elite. (His father is 
Palestinian, his mother Lebanese.) To this day, the Khalidi family 
library, known as Al-Khalidiya, stands near the center of the Old City 
and is a major repository of Islamic and Palestinian manuscripts.

Born in New York, where his father was a senior official at the United 
Nations Security Council, Khalidi recalls a steady stream of 
intellectuals from the Arab world passing through the family home. 
Dinner-table talk revolved around politics, and by the time he graduated 
from Yale University, in 1970, he was passionate about Palestinian 
statehood. "The challenge Rashid has always set for himself is being a 
scholar and an activist at the same time, and I think he handles that 
tension about as well as anybody," says Bruce Cumings, a professor of 
history at Chicago. "He continues to have access to The New York Times, 
to the NewsHour With Jim Lehrer, and other mainstream media outlets, 
which is a mark of Rashid's success, because it is easy to get 
buttonholed, sidetracked, and marginalized when you make your views so 
clear."

When Khalidi entered the field, in the mid-70s, the Middle East Studies 
Association was an intentionally nonpolitical organization. Its leaders 
? primarily patrician WASP's ("In the mid-60s, what else was there in 
academe?" jokes Juan Cole, a historian at the University of Michigan at 
Ann Arbor) ? were keenly aware of how polarized opinion was on the 
modern Middle East. They made what Cole calls a "gentleman's bargain" to 
avoid discussion of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Many professors feared 
weighing in publicly on current events, says Georgetown's Esposito, 
because "it might compromise them as scholars."

In his presidential address to the association, in 1994, Khalidi decried 
what he saw as the discipline's turn to provinciality and 
overspecialization and its willingness to allow the national discourse 
about the region it studied to be shaped by nonscholars, "ill-informed 
sensationalists" who "hog the headlines and grace the podiums of think 
tanks and lecture halls." If he were addressing the group today, Khalidi 
says, he would deliver the same tough message: "We have some of the 
cushiest jobs around, and we have a responsibility to use that comfort 
to educate."

His early work was pitched to a scholarly audience. But even by the time 
British Policy Towards Israel and Palestine came out, in 1980, he was 
already being drawn into a wider dialogue. He had received his Ph.D. in 
modern history from the University of Oxford in 1974 and was teaching at 
the American University of Beirut, in a city engulfed by civil war. Home 
to Yasir Arafat's PLO, parts of Beirut were something like a Palestinian 
ministate. Foreign journalists soon made Khalidi's office a regular stop 
on their daily reporting rounds, sometimes identifying him as a 
spokesman for the PLO. His wife, Mona, worked at Wafa, the official news 
agency of the organization. "I was someone journalists talked to as both 
a scholar and an analyst," Khalidi firmly explains, "but never as a 
spokesman. Journalists came to me when they knew the spokesman was lying 
and they wanted to find out what was really going on." When Israel 
invaded Lebanon in 1982, pushing into parts of Beirut, "those of us who 
were politically involved felt in some sense threatened," he recalls.

Khalidi's close ties to the PLO and Arafat earned him unique access to 
the organization's archives. Under Siege: PLO Decisionmaking During the 
1982 War (Columbia, 1986) is an inside account of the political and 
military calculations that led to the organization's ouster from Beirut. 
Thomas L. Friedman, then a Jerusalem-based reporter for The New York 
Times, called Under Siege "generally objective, lucid, and incisive"; 
Daniel Pipes, a conservative author and commentator, writing in The Wall 
Street Journal, decried it as a piece of "propaganda parading as 
scholarship," an attempt to "improve the image of a terrorist 
organization." It was an early skirmish in the larger war over the 
direction of Middle Eastern studies that would intensify considerably in 
the years ahead.

In 1991, Khalidi signed on as an adviser to the Palestinian delegation 
to the Madrid Peace Conference, an attempt to negotiate an end to the 
conflict between Israel and its Arab neighbors. That effort, which was 
supplanted by the Oslo Accords in 1993, deepened Khalidi's understanding 
of how Palestinians perceive themselves; it was like "watching 
Palestinian national identity slowly but inexorably become embodied in 
concrete form," he wrote in Palestinian Identity.

Upon the death of his close friend Edward Said, in 2003, Khalidi left 
the University of Chicago and took the chair named for Said at Columbia, 
assuming an even higher public profile. (When Arafat died, in 2004, 
Khalidi spoke to 34 news-media outlets in a 24-hour period, New York 
magazine reported.) "With the passing of Edward, Rashid became one of, 
if not the, most significant voice on Palestinian issues," says Ussama 
Makdisi, a professor of history at Rice University, who is Said's 
nephew. Khalidi jokes: "It means that I inherited the target that was on 
his back."

Khalidi was torn about leaving Chicago, where he had been a professor of 
history and Near Eastern languages and civilizations for 16 years. The 
mortally ill Said "put lots of pressure on Rashid," says W.J.T. 
Mitchell, who was close to Said and remains close to Khalidi. After 
three months, "Edward persuaded Rashid that he was not going to be 
around much longer, and that the Palestinians need a spokesman who is 
knowledgeable," says Mitchell, a professor of English and art history at 
Chicago. As Khalidi told The Chronicle at the time, "the U.S. is about 
to go to war with an Arab country, and there is a gross misunderstanding 
of the Middle East in the public here. There's an obligation to do 
everything we can to help people understand the region, and I think I 
can do that better at Columbia."

His latest book, Sowing Crisis, was born out of Khalidi's commitment to 
place America's current approach to the Middle East in historical 
context. A sharp criticism of U.S. policies during the cold war, the 
book's principal thesis is that those policies, formulated to oppose the 
Soviets, consistently undermined democracy and exacerbated tensions in 
the Middle East. For instance, "outright disdain" for democracy and 
human rights led policy makers to exploit militant political Islam as an 
"ideological tool" against Communism, Khalidi writes. "It may seem hard 
to believe today, but for decades the United States was in fact a major 
patron, indeed in some respects the major patron, of earlier 
incarnations" of Islamic fundamentalism. The maladies that plague the 
Middle East today, he argues, are in large part the "toxic debris" of 
American interventions during the cold war.

The new book reads like a companion volume to Resurrecting Empire: 
Western Footprints and America's Perilous Path in the Middle East, 
Khalidi's 2004 indictment of the Bush administration's decision to 
invade Iraq. In both works, the historian listens to contemporary echoes 
of the past with an unflagging outrage at the inaccuracies and 
distortions that he thinks dominate public perceptions of the Middle 
East. "Rashid has all along spoken out, but now he is writing out," says 
Juan Cole.

In the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001, the Middle East moved 
to the center of the foreign-policy agenda in Washington. Ever since, 
Middle Eastern studies has attracted considerable attention ? and 
outside scrutiny. One blow landed just six weeks after September 11, in 
the form of a slim book by Martin Kramer, Ivory Towers on Sand: The 
Failure of Middle Eastern Studies in America (Washington Institute for 
Near East Policy). "America's academics have failed to predict or 
explain the major evolutions of Middle Eastern politics and society over 
the past two decades," Kramer charged. Due in large part to a sharp 
leftward turn in the discipline, he argued, the credibility of 
campus-based expertise among foreign-policy professionals has been 
devastated. A few months later, Daniel Pipes unveiled Campus Watch, a 
Web site that says it "reviews and critiques Middle East studies in 
North America, with an aim to improving them," and monitors the work of 
professors it considers biased against Israel and America. Khalidi, who 
is a primary target of the site, has described the people behind it as 
"intellectual thugs" conducting "a well-financed campaign of black 
propaganda."

Arriving at Columbia in 2003, "I came under fire right away," Khalidi 
says. External groups had pressured the university administration to 
deny his appointment, according to an essay in Daedalus by Jonathan R. 
Cole, who was provost at Columbia at the time Khalidi was hired. Some 
New York newspapers accused Khalidi of supporting acts of violence 
against Israeli soldiers in the occupied territories; The Washington 
Times declared that he had spent decades "shilling for terrorists," and 
that "neither his vocabulary nor his agenda has changed, except that he 
now oversees a major university's interpretation of the Arab-Israeli 
conflict." The New York Post pointed out that Khalidi, as director of 
Columbia's Middle East Institute, would oversee the expenditure of close 
to $1-million in federal funds over the next three years. A " biased 
professor is taking over a biased department ... and administering a 
taxpayer-subsidized program," a Campus Watch staff member wrote in an 
op-ed in the Post.

At issue was Title VI, the federal law. In September 2003, in response 
to claims that Middle Eastern studies had developed an anti-American and 
anti-Israeli agenda, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill 
that would create an advisory board to ensure that federally supported 
programs "reflect diverse perspectives and the full range of views on 
world regions, foreign languages, and international affairs." (The 
legislation died in the Senate.) Michigan's Juan Cole, among many other 
scholars, argues that Middle Eastern studies is not ideologically 
homogenous. But Georgetown's Michael Oren responds that by the 1980s, 
almost all departments were toeing the Said line and have continued to 
do so.

For Khalidi, there was worse to come. That winter an activist group 
called the David Project Center for Jewish Leadership produced a 
half-hour video documentary, Columbia Unbecoming, in which several 
Jewish students accused professors in the university's department of 
Middle East and Asian languages and culture, known as Mealac, of 
displaying a pro-Palestinian bias and of intimidation of dissenting 
students in the classroom. The video caused a sensation. Columbia 
convened a faculty investigatory committee, which concluded in a lengthy 
report that little evidence of systematic classroom bullying and 
discrimination existed. But a short time later, the chancellor of the 
New York public-school system, citing Khalidi's views on the 
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, barred him from lecturing about the Middle 
East in a university-sponsored professional-development course for 
high-school teachers.

Khalidi was not part of the Mealac faculty, and no wrongdoing on his 
part was alleged. He was, however, outspoken in defense of his 
colleagues, delivering speeches, organizing events, and making himself 
available to journalists. "Rashid took a major portion of the heat, and 
he did so with considerable grace and incredible aplomb," says John H. 
Coatsworth, dean of the School of International and Public Affairs at 
Columbia.

But even the relatively unflappable Khalidi was shaken by the political 
storm that engulfed him during the 2008 presidential campaign. In April 
the Los Angeles Times published a story about a 2003 party at which 
Barack Obama, then a state senator from Illinois, reportedly described 
his many talks with Khalidi as "consistent reminders to me of my own 
blind spots and my own biases." Another person at the party allegedly 
compared "Zionist settlers on the West Bank" to Osama bin Laden, and a 
poem was read that accused Israel of terrorism. The conservative 
talk-radio host Laura Ingraham branded Khalidi a "racist terrorist," and 
John McCain likened him to a neo-Nazi. (Google ranked "Rashid Khalidi" 
the ninth-most-popular political buzzword of 2008.)

Khalidi is not interested in revisiting that unpleasantness; he 
describes the episode, quoting Bob Dylan, as an "idiot wind." Friends 
and colleagues remain outraged ? Ussama Makdisi, at Rice University, 
calls the attacks "vicious" and "obviously racist" ? but Khalidi 
displays less anger. "Nobody likes to have tendentious half-truths and 
falsehoods shown 24/7 on the news cycle," he says in measured tones. He 
is heartened that Obama won despite having been called a closet Muslim. 
As Khalidi said in an address in Cairo in December, "it spoke well of 
the American people that enough of them were able to ignore these 
ridiculous, scandalous, scurrilous, defamatory statements."

Sitting in his office last month, the professor looks back on his 
career. "I have tried to argue and show that you can work on these 
subjects and not be partisan," he says, sounding almost wistful. "It has 
long been considered an offense against good manners to say the word 
'Palestine' in certain quarters. Israel was established in 1948, a 
source of great joy for some people. Fine, that is well and good. But 
for Palestinians, that was a disaster in terms of their own history."

The Palestinians' national trauma, Khalidi says, has been subordinated 
to another people's joy: "I wouldn't ask an Israeli to feel misery at 
the establishment of his state, so I don't see why a Palestinian should 
be asked to feel joy about the destruction of his society."

He falls silent for a moment and looks around the room. "One day we will 
have a textbook like the Franco-German textbook created [in 2006] for 
students of both countries for a common understanding of their history," 
he says. "How long did it take them to get there? How many European wars 
and devastating world conflicts were unleashed before those people 
stopped butchering one another and wrote a joint textbook? One day that 
will be possible for Israelis and Palestinians."

There is a knock at the door, Khalidi pops up and commiserates in hushed 
tones with an assistant. That morning the death toll in Gaza had climbed 
above 1,000 Palestinians. There is a crew from CBS News waiting to 
interview him. "I've got to go," he says.

Evan R. Goldstein is a staff editor at The Chronicle Review.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Mar  2 07:23:29 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:23:29 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] The Israel advocacy push to "reclaim" York University
Message-ID: <49ABEBE1.9030706@panix.com>

http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/20755


From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Mar  2 07:26:12 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:26:12 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] War hidden in plain sight
Message-ID: <49ABEC84.9000605@panix.com>

War Hidden in Plain Sight: There has recently been much reporting on, 
and even some debate here about, the efficacy of the Obama 
administration's decision to increase the intensity of CIA missile 
attacks from drone aircraft in what Washington, in a newly coined 
neologism reflecting a widening war, now calls "Af-Pak" -- the Pashtun 
tribal borderlands of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Since August 2008, more 
than 30 such missile attacks have been launched on the Pakistani side of 
that border against suspected al-Qaeda and Taliban targets. The pace of 
attacks has actually risen since Barack Obama entered the Oval Office, 
as have casualties from the missile strikes, as well as popular outrage 
in Pakistan over the attacks.

Thanks to Senator Diane Feinstein, we also know that, despite strong 
official Pakistani government protests, someone official in that country 
is doing more than looking the other way while they occur. As the 
Senator revealed recently, at least some of the CIA's unmanned aerial 
vehicles (UAVs) cruising the skies over Af-Pak are evidently stationed 
at Pakistani bases. We learned recently as well that American Special 
Operations units are now regularly making forays inside Pakistan 
"primarily to gather intelligence"; that a unit of 70 American Special 
Forces advisors, a "secret task force, overseen by the United States 
Central Command and Special Operations Command," is now aiding and 
training Pakistani Army and Frontier Corps paramilitary troops, again 
inside Pakistan; and that, despite (or perhaps, in part, because of) 
these American efforts, the influence of the Pakistani Taliban is 
actually expanding, even as Pakistan threatens to melt down.

Mystifyingly enough, however, this Pakistani part of the American war in 
Afghanistan is still referred to in major U.S. papers as a "covert war." 
As news about it pours out, who it's being hidden from is one of those 
questions no one bothers to ask.

On February 20th, the New York Times' Mark Mazzetti and David E. Sanger 
typically wrote:

     "With two missile strikes over the past week, the Obama 
administration has expanded the covert war run by the Central 
Intelligence Agency inside Pakistan, attacking a militant network 
seeking to topple the Pakistani government... Under standard policy for 
covert operations, the C.I.A. strikes inside Pakistan have not been 
publicly acknowledged either by the Obama administration or the Bush 
administration."

On February 25th, Mazzetti and Helene Cooper reported that new CIA head 
Leon Panetta essentially bragged to reporters that "the agency's 
campaign against militants in Pakistan's tribal areas was the 'most 
effective weapon' the Obama administration had to combat Al Qaeda's top 
leadership... Mr. Panetta stopped short of directly acknowledging the 
missile strikes, but he said that 'operational efforts' focusing on 
Qaeda leaders had been successful." Siobhan Gorman of the Wall Street 
Journal reported the next day that Panetta said the attacks are 
"probably the most effective weapon we have to try to disrupt al Qaeda 
right now." She added, "Mr. Obama and National Security Adviser James 
Jones have strongly endorsed their use, [Panetta] said.

full: 
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175040/the_dictionary_of_american_empire_speak


From teenik at kolumbus.fi  Mon Mar  2 07:49:01 2009
From: teenik at kolumbus.fi (Shok Teenik)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 16:49:01 +0200
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops?
In-Reply-To: <1306618260-1235999305-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1702265231-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
References: <1306618260-1235999305-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1702265231-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
Message-ID: <49ABF1DD.10904@kolumbus.fi>

sabocat59 at mac.com kirjoitti:
> Fact is there is nothing mystical about energy. Can you say PHYSICS? 
>   
Fact is your definition of "energy" seems to be incompatible with 
physics as you claim organic food alone has some type of "energetic 
vitality" missing in other types of food, which you label "energetically 
dead". This is mystical thinking or, at best, a misuse of the word energy.

I'm not claiming processed food is better than organic, in fact I'm all 
for organic farming, but justifying this with "energies" that cannot be 
quantified instead of actual nutritional, economical and moral 
considerations is highly counterproductive.
> It would not seem incongruent to those of us aware of the energy flowing through our bodies to seek explanation in current understanding of sub atomic reality
The energy we get from food is extracted on the molecular level, orders 
of magnitude larger than sub-atomic particles. What mechanism are you 
suggesting to link these two? Which sub-atomic particles are you talking 
about? And how can one possibly "refine their sensory apparatus" to 
detect them? (I bet many physicists would be very grateful for this 
skill; they could just stop building those multi-million dollar particle 
detectors.)

Regards,
- Shok Teenik


From sabocat59 at mac.com  Mon Mar  2 07:50:31 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:50:31 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Energy and biology
Message-ID: <327023386-1236005524-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1699291706-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

     Electricity moves through all living things. A charged atom is called an ion. Ions are created when two atoms form an ionic bond. An Ionic bond is when one atom donates one or more electrons to another atom so that they both will be stable. This causes one atom to be positively charge and the other to be negatively charged. The opposite charges attract each other and hold the atoms together. This bond is easily broken in solvents such as water where they then become free ions. In the human body ions move through all of the tissue assisting in many physiological functions. They are often referred to as electrolytes. Any time there is a surge of ions of the same charge in the same direction there is an electrical current and so an electromagnetic field is created.

There is a subtle pisoelectrical negative ion charge in the interstitial fluid flowing through the connective tissue in our bodies, which is mainly composed of hyaluronic acid.  

This, in my opinion, is the reality behind the feeling of being recharged after practicing yoga or soft martial arts. Yoga stretches the connective tissue which wraps around muscle fibers, groups of muscle fibers, individual muscles and groups of muscles. This allows for the free flow of interstitial fluid and the sensation of a free flow of energy.  Its just the perception of the negative pisoelectrical  ion charge.   
Interesting that the free flow of fluid produces a corresponding energetic sensation which is perceived as very pleasant. This is the positive feedback produced by healthy practice for the body. The sensation can become as addictive as any drug but since it is a bodily resonse to a healthy practice what's the problem?

Greg McDonald
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

From sartesian at earthlink.net  Mon Mar  2 07:57:48 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 09:57:48 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Energy and biology
References: <327023386-1236005524-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1699291706-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
Message-ID: <0B79661E702548EF84D47936ADF35987@dmsthinkpad>

Not for nothing, and with no prejudice to anybody or any body's position on 
this, I would suggest that the list avoid this discussion as a list.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <sabocat59 at mac.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 9:50 AM
Subject: [Marxism] Energy and biology




From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Mar  2 08:01:36 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:01:36 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Energy and biology
In-Reply-To: <0B79661E702548EF84D47936ADF35987@dmsthinkpad>
References: <327023386-1236005524-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1699291706-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
	<0B79661E702548EF84D47936ADF35987@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <49ABF4D0.2010307@panix.com>

S. Artesian wrote:
> Not for nothing, and with no prejudice to anybody or any body's position on 
> this, I would suggest that the list avoid this discussion as a list.
> 

I agree. Our unit of analysis is the state, the social class, the 
nation, etc. Not the human body.


From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Mon Mar  2 08:06:17 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:06:17 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan (was: Betancourt's halo [SIC] under
	spotlightm
Message-ID: <48EE2BB8397B48B483E5A705518A2328@office1pc>

Kai wrote:
The mujahadeen were
fighting against Soviet imperialism

Jscotlive replied:
Soviet imperialism - really? And here was me thinking that the Soviet Union 
intervened, after the then leftist Afghan government requested help against
a 
US funded and trained insurgency, to prevent the country being plunged back 
into the abyss of feudalism.

Fred comments:
Let's get our facts right. The President of Afghanistan, Hafizullah Amin,
asked for Soviet troops to come to Afghanistan to defend the country against
the reactionary, US-supported rebellion which had some serious popular
support especially in the countryside.

The Soviet troops arrived, overthrew Amin, executed him without a trial, and
imposed Karmal, who had been basically in exile as Afghan ambassador to
Czechoslovakia, as President.

Afghanistan did not fall back into the abyss of feudalism. They had never
emerged from it. NO country which has escaped feudalism has ever gone back
to it. 

I don't want to go into all the ways the Afghan revolutionary process was
screwed up by the leadership of the PDPA, including such things as imposing
coeducation of boys and girls by force (and I do mean military force which
was required in much of the country) rather than expanding the education of
girls and boys, and men and women.

Frankly, the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan make the FARC, with
all their weaknesses, look like geniuses in the art of revolution.  

I suspect that when real bourgeois national revolution comes to Afghanistan,
it will take aRn Islamist form, as happened in Iran, where -- despite many
reactionary limitations and restrictions and oppressions -- women are way
ahead of where they were in 1979, not without fighting for this. 

This thread, which began with Adam Richmond's totally indefensible
endorsement of the three US mercenaries' treacherous and sexist attack on
Ingrid Betancourt, has wandered a fur piece. Maybe it needs a new name.
Maybe the underlying theme is the revolutionary character of getting your
facts right. SLANDERING bourgeois individuals is worth less than nothing to
the cause.
Fred Feldman

Fred Feldman






From schaffer at optonline.net  Mon Mar  2 08:13:29 2009
From: schaffer at optonline.net (Les Schaffer)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:13:29 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops?
In-Reply-To: <49ABF1DD.10904@kolumbus.fi>
References: <1306618260-1235999305-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1702265231-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
	<49ABF1DD.10904@kolumbus.fi>
Message-ID: <49ABF799.8040006@optonline.net>

Shok Teenik wrote:
> The energy we get from food is extracted on the molecular level, 
> orders  of magnitude larger than sub-atomic particles. What mechanism 
> are you suggesting to link these two? Which sub-atomic particles are 
> you talking about? And how can one possibly "refine their sensory 
> apparatus" to detect them?

funny you should mention this. there is a paper getting some notoriety 
lately -- Quantum experiments with human eyes as detectors based on 
cloning via stimulated emission" -- by some physicists in which they 
calculate that the human eye could be used as a detector for certain 
kinds of quantum entanglement experiments. mainly a fun thing. but one 
of the really interesting areas of quantum physics lately is not the 
massively expensive collider experiments but the experiments that probe 
the boundary between quantum and classical behavior.


here are abstracts for those interested:

  http://arxiv.org/abs/0902.2896
  http://arxiv.org/abs/0804.0341

otherwise, i am with Shok on "energy" ....

Les



From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Mon Mar  2 08:20:08 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 07:20:08 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Latest update on the situation in Guadeloupe, March 2.
Message-ID: <49ABF928.6070708@gmail.com>

Dear Friends:

Here is the latest update on the situation in Guadeloupe, based on a 
report issued Monday, March 2nd, at 8 a.m. by Robert Fabert. Here is the 
report:

The largest LKP Strike Assembly to date last night (Sunday, March 1) 
voted to maintain the general strike.

Why?

Because despite the tentative agreement that was reached with the French 
authorities and local employers' associations on Feb. 27 [see below], no 
final agreement has been signed yet -- and also because the French 
authorities and the bosses, based on that tentative agreement, went to 
the media and told the people of Guadeloupe that an agreement had been 
reached, that the strike was over, and that everyone should go back to 
work Monday morning.

The angry crowd at the Assembly said that it is up to the people, who 
organized this general strike for  six weeks, and NOT the government, to 
decide whether the strike continues or it does not continue. They also 
denounced the French authorities for telling the press that the strike 
was over when nothing had been signed; all that existed was a tentative 
agreement.

The Prefect of Guadeloupe announced late last night, in the aftermath of 
the Strike Assembly, that he would bring the final agreed-upon proposal 
to the LKP Strike Collective this morning for their final review and 
approval. There is a meeting scheduled at 6 p.m. with the Prefect to 
sign the agreement, provided nothing has been modified from the previous 
tentative agreement -- which cannot be excluded.

Throughout the day there will be mobilizations and general assemblies of 
the picket line committees, barricade committees, neighborhood 
committees, food distribution committees, cultural committees, etc.

The LKP Strike Collective also has scheduled a meeting with the 
Employers Association to review the final agreement regarding lowering 
the prices on 100 basic staples and other retail items.

There will be a mass assembly of the LKP Strike Collective at 9 p.m. 
tonight to vote on whether the conditions have been met for the workers 
and people to end the general strike. If the authorities don't try to 
pull another fast one, and if the tentative agreement has not been 
modified under pressure from Paris (which, again, is possible), it 
appears that the conditions will have been gathered to end the strike -- 
as the workers and people, through their determined struggle, will have 
won the majority of their demands, including all their main economic 
demands.

*******************

*Notes about the Tentative Agreement*

The first breakthough in the general strike took place on Feb. 24, when 
the local employers' association agreed to a formula that would grant 
increase the monthly minimum wage by 200 euros.

Negotiations with the French government resumed Feb. 26. After a 
marathon session, an agreement granting both the 200 euro minimum wage 
increase, as well as across-the-board-wage increases for workers with 
higher wages was reached in the wee hours of Feb. 27.

The agreement grants a 200 euro monthly increase to workers making the 
minimum wage, or SMIC, and up to 1.4 times the minimum wage. All workers 
making between 1.5 and 1.6 times the minimum wage get a 6% pay increase. 
Workers making 1.7 times the minimum wage or more get a 3% wage increase.

Negotiations continued on Feb. 27 on the remaining core demands of the 
LKP Strike Collective. By the end of the day, the French government 
accepted the large bulk of the workers' demands. The main additional 
demands that were agreed to by the government include the following:

- lowering of cost of 100 basic staples and items

- lowering of all utility costs, including lowering of water costs by 6%

- agreement to increase enrollment in schools and universities to 
Guadeloupans

- subsidies to public transportation to lower costs of public transit

- payment of pensions -- and increased pensions -- for agricultural and 
other workers

- provisions to aid the fishing and agricultural workers and industries.

Many other demands were also agreed to.



From sabocat59 at mac.com  Mon Mar  2 08:34:43 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 15:34:43 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops
Message-ID: <1839093444-1236008178-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-468965676-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

In terms of food absorption and energy this is a complicated topic which I have not worked out in my mind. I do know that when I eat junk food or overly processed food or a lot of red meat I feel lethargic whereas when I eat organic veggies and drink enough water I feel energized.  This probably has more to do with absorption of pure food at the molecular level than at the subatomic level.  So maybe you're right. 

The more readily absorbed food can be processed more quickly by the body and since 40 percent of all available energy is used for digestion perhaps this explains the feeling of lethargy. I still feel there is a concurrent ion charge reality behind processed vs. Organic food however.  It probably has to do more with the lack of lag time between harvest and cosumption than anything else.  

Greg
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T


From donaloc at hotmail.com  Mon Mar  2 08:48:53 2009
From: donaloc at hotmail.com (D OC)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 15:48:53 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Thoughts on 8 Theses
Message-ID: <BLU138-W543935F47A540176719E20ABA90@phx.gbl>


S, a chara,

 

Many thanks for your response. 

 

> Sure. Mostly I disagree.

 

Good. I look forward to the discussion and learning something more.


> Agree that neo-classical conceptions have crept in-- and most neo-classical 
of all, and most of the creeping is in this notion of trade imbalances-- 
trade imbalances neither reflect nor cause breakdowns in capitalism as 
capital-- as the reproduction of expanded value.


I'm not sure that I mean the same thing as the neo-classical concerns around imbalance but we'll see.


> As a matter of fact this dependence, reliance, on trade imbalance theory is 
a little more than neo-classical. It is positively mercantilist. Engels 
wrote an interesting piece in 1843 in the Jahrbucher on the critique of 
political economy; includes a great attack on mercantilist "balance of 
trade" worhippers.


I will check this out. Someone was recently quoting me sections on this elsewhere. I will come back to you on it. Thanks.


> The proof, more or less, of the inapplicability of "balance of trade" 
theorizing, you provide when you make the analogy between agriculture and 
city-- absolutely-- cities "import" much more from the countryside than 
they "export" to the countryside-- that's an index to the relative 
development of the city over the countryside-- this doesn't make the city 
financially or economically subservient to the countryside-- to the 
production of exchange value in agriculture. There is no NEED in capitalism 
for balance; for balance between industry and agriculture-- balance is 
necessary in barter, but not in capitalist exchange. Profit is what counts. 
Expanded value. Not balance.


True. But the balance I speak of is different to that you speak of. There are very many types of balance so it is critical we speak of the same thing. In the case of city-countryside exchange, in a stable capitalist scheme, cities export commodities produced in factories in return for the raw materials produced in fields and mines (for an example). There is balance to the trade in value terms. The cities cannot hope to extract greater value from the rural areas indefinitely and although the trade is imbalanced in relative productivity terms, it is balanced in terms of value exchanged.

 

This is precisely not the case in the current international metabolism of trade. By definition, net surplus value is taken (exploited) from capital-dependent countries by those with its surplus. There is an imbalance in value exchanged from third world to first world (imperialist) economies. It is this imbalance that I speak of; not the imbalance of trade spoken of by the vulgar economists - an imbalance defined by 'price' in any case.


> Financial investment has always been intrinsic to capitalist development, 
just as international, global expansion has always been intrinsic to 
domestic capital investment. 

 

I don't deny this. What I believe, however, is that this has undergone a 'qualitative' change - about a hundred years ago. Indeed, that is the social basis of 'imperialism' by Lenin. My contention is that the crisis is rooted in the structural changes which have occurred in the social relations of production which remain characteristic of imperialism in the era of 'globalisation'. You may choose to see the root as a falling rate of profit - which I don't deny is a trend - but to bypass that tendency - the imperialists have concentrated production in the third world and accrued both surplus value and super-exploited surplus value as a result. To avoid the polarity of the contradiction in domestic production, they have abstracted to a new and more severe contradiction on a global scale.

 

The problem is that that this has allowed the inflation of the financial superstructure and the growth of predatory finance-capital but has left behind the working class in the imperialist core. To some extent, this tendency has been mitigated by social reformist concessions (facilitated by transfer of super-exploited surplus value to the 'privileged' sections of the 'domestic' working class) but also through the extension of credit (itself facilitated by a 'price' inflation on unproductive assets e.g. houses). Of course, all of this occurs in a period of high productivity which has enabled more (in use value terms) to be done with less (in exchange value terms) - but essentially the net transfers in value terms has remained qualititatively the same.

 

Of course, the availability of credit and the increasing productivity of labour have enabled wages to be depressed further in imperialist centres (and this also challenges social 'transfers'). So progressively the latter factor  (credit) has became more dominant in enabling consumption to increase.

 

> The bulk of the value generated, appropriated 
by the advanced capitalist countries is most certainly NOT value 
expropriated, seized, looted, unequally exchanged from "foreign 
exploitation" if you mean by foreign exploitation-- super-profits derived 
from poorer, less-developed countries. The overwhelming bulk of 
imperialist investment is inter-imperialist, or maybe better 
INTRA-imperialist, the overwhelming source of profits is, again, inter/intra 
imperialist, and is not derived from investments in the less-developed 
countries.

 

On what do you base this? No doubt on basis of 'prices'. The reality is that little is produced in imperialist countries but instead they generate a lot of 'value added' through simply repackaging things. Take the blossoming industry of 'supply-chain management'. It is a classic example. Cloth is produced in one country, stitched into garments in another and exported to a third where the customer pays a handsome mark up. The bulk of the profit accrues to the SCM company located in a fourth country. So let's look at price-based 'value added' as the european capitalists call it. The cloth sells for pennys. The garment for perhaps twice or five times that. The consumer pays a massively inflated price many multiples higher. The net profit in price terms accruing to the SCM company is huge relative to the cost of production. The GDP figures you quote will give significant 'value-added' contributions from the service sector, which by definition produces minimal value in marxist terms. Just think about that for a second.

 

This happens repeatedly across the global economy in the real world; all over the place. The net impact is that GDPs in the imperialist countries grow at rates considerably above the parallel rate of growth in 'trade deficits' (measured in price terms). From a capitalist perspective, it is sustainable because of the difference is sufficient to enable it the imperialists to continue to borrow to pay off that accumulated trade deficit. The crucial gap in the model is, however, the imperialist end 'consumer'. They are 'paying' for the huge mark-up in price. That is financed from our two sources of 'transfer' identified above and possibly income from a 'service sector' job. The problem is that if the capitalist class is to make sufficient profits as a percentage of investment from this exercise, the only way for this to happen is for consumption to be financed by an expansion in credit.

 

In a sense, I therefore agree that the problem is related to the tendency of profit to fall but it is also rooted in the international division of labour. To fail to see the importance of the multi-trillion dollar debt held by the Chinese over the USA is to miss the essence of the contradiction. This is my criticism of the eight theses. 

> Regarding productive cores and advance countries-- US still provides the 
largest portion of the world's industrial production-- about 24-21% [think 
this is a 2007 figure] and even poor old decadent super-annuated Britain has 
a manufacturing sector providing about 15% of GDP-- not very much less than 
France's ratio.

 

Again, just how much of this 'production' is simply repackaged production from the third world. What proportion of your figures for UK GDP is made up from 'service sector' production. What does this represent in real value terms? How many components are produced elsewhere,  bought cheap, assembled and then parceled on at a huge price 'markup'? To simply accept 'price' based estimates of GDPs as reflecting underlying 'value' from various sectors is surface only analysis at its worst.

 

Even if in the real world, manufacturing and agricultural production provided 90% of GDP - what does that tell you? It says that 10% of the net GDP is directly accumulated from exploitation overseas and that's on the basis of GDP figures alone and a massively inflated figure of 90% as opposed to your 15% - a very poor indicator of what's really happening (which can only be determined by a analysis of gross national consumption as against gross national production). This is the centre of the crisis in my opinion. That differential was sustainable in periods of expanding credit, and expanding growth, but unsustainable in periods of contraction in both growth and credit.

 

Anyhow, thanks for your response. I have to get back to work but hope others who know more join in this discussion.

 

le meas,

DoC.


_________________________________________________________________
Get 30 Free Emoticons for your Windows Live Messenger
http://www.livemessenger-emoticons.com/funfamily/en-ie/

From sabocat59 at mac.com  Mon Mar  2 08:52:50 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 15:52:50 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Energy and Biology
Message-ID: <462210276-1236009264-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-998796471-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>


That's fine Louis.  It is your list after all.  But is not the human body caught up in all of these larger processes?

Are we not enraged at imperialist war because of the effect it has on human bodies?

Are we not outraged at transnationals that poision and exploit human bodies?

Is it not the human body that breaks down with the stress of repetitive motion on the assembly line?

And are we not concerned with the lack of heath care coverage for all human bodies?

If the human body is not a touchstone for materialist analysis and politics then what is?

Greg McDonald
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Mon Mar  2 08:57:49 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 10:57:49 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Thoughts on 8 Theses
References: <BLU138-W543935F47A540176719E20ABA90@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <982C679950EC42A7B3EF54D071052DAF@dmsthinkpad>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "D OC" <donaloc at hotmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Thoughts on 8 Theses


>
> S, a chara,
>
>
>
> Many thanks for your response.
>
>
>
>> Sure. Mostly I disagree.
>
>
>
> Good. I look forward to the discussion and learning something more.
>
>
>> Agree that neo-classical conceptions have crept in-- and most 
>> neo-classical
> of all, and most of the creeping is in this notion of trade imbalances-- 
> trade imbalances neither reflect nor cause breakdowns in capitalism as
> capital-- as the reproduction of expanded value.
>
>
> I'm not sure that I mean the same thing as the neo-classical concerns 
> around imbalance but we'll see.
>
>
>> As a matter of fact this dependence, reliance, on trade imbalance theory 
>> is
> a little more than neo-classical. It is positively mercantilist. Engels
> wrote an interesting piece in 1843 in the Jahrbucher on the critique of
> political economy; includes a great attack on mercantilist "balance of
> trade" worhippers.
>
>
> I will check this out. Someone was recently quoting me sections on this 
> elsewhere. I will come back to you on it. Thanks.
>
>
>> The proof, more or less, of the inapplicability of "balance of trade"
> theorizing, you provide when you make the analogy between agriculture and
> city-- absolutely-- cities "import" much more from the countryside than
> they "export" to the countryside-- that's an index to the relative
> development of the city over the countryside-- this doesn't make the city
> financially or economically subservient to the countryside-- to the
> production of exchange value in agriculture. There is no NEED in 
> capitalism
> for balance; for balance between industry and agriculture-- balance is
> necessary in barter, but not in capitalist exchange. Profit is what 
> counts.
> Expanded value. Not balance.
>
>
> True. But the balance I speak of is different to that you speak of. There 
> are very many types of balance so it is critical we speak of the same 
> thing. In the case of city-countryside exchange, in a stable capitalist 
> scheme, cities export commodities produced in factories in return for the 
> raw materials produced in fields and mines (for an example). There is 
> balance to the trade in value terms. The cities cannot hope to extract 
> greater value from the rural areas indefinitely and although the trade is 
> imbalanced in relative productivity terms, it is balanced in terms of 
> value exchanged.
>
>
>
> This is precisely not the case in the current international metabolism of 
> trade. By definition, net surplus value is taken (exploited) from 
> capital-dependent countries by those with its surplus. There is an 
> imbalance in value exchanged from third world to first world (imperialist) 
> economies. It is this imbalance that I speak of; not the imbalance of 
> trade spoken of by the vulgar economists - an imbalance defined by 'price' 
> in any case.
>
>
>> Financial investment has always been intrinsic to capitalist development,
> just as international, global expansion has always been intrinsic to
> domestic capital investment.
>
>
>
> I don't deny this. What I believe, however, is that this has undergone a 
> 'qualitative' change - about a hundred years ago. Indeed, that is the 
> social basis of 'imperialism' by Lenin. My contention is that the crisis 
> is rooted in the structural changes which have occurred in the social 
> relations of production which remain characteristic of imperialism in the 
> era of 'globalisation'. You may choose to see the root as a falling rate 
> of profit - which I don't deny is a trend - but to bypass that tendency - 
> the imperialists have concentrated production in the third world and 
> accrued both surplus value and super-exploited surplus value as a result. 
> To avoid the polarity of the contradiction in domestic production, they 
> have abstracted to a new and more severe contradiction on a global scale.
>
>
>
> The problem is that that this has allowed the inflation of the financial 
> superstructure and the growth of predatory finance-capital but has left 
> behind the working class in the imperialist core. To some extent, this 
> tendency has been mitigated by social reformist concessions (facilitated 
> by transfer of super-exploited surplus value to the 'privileged' sections 
> of the 'domestic' working class) but also through the extension of credit 
> (itself facilitated by a 'price' inflation on unproductive assets e.g. 
> houses). Of course, all of this occurs in a period of high productivity 
> which has enabled more (in use value terms) to be done with less (in 
> exchange value terms) - but essentially the net transfers in value terms 
> has remained qualititatively the same.
>
>
>
> Of course, the availability of credit and the increasing productivity of 
> labour have enabled wages to be depressed further in imperialist centres 
> (and this also challenges social 'transfers'). So progressively the latter 
> factor  (credit) has became more dominant in enabling consumption to 
> increase.
>
>
>
>> The bulk of the value generated, appropriated
> by the advanced capitalist countries is most certainly NOT value
> expropriated, seized, looted, unequally exchanged from "foreign
> exploitation" if you mean by foreign exploitation-- super-profits derived
> from poorer, less-developed countries. The overwhelming bulk of
> imperialist investment is inter-imperialist, or maybe better
> INTRA-imperialist, the overwhelming source of profits is, again, 
> inter/intra
> imperialist, and is not derived from investments in the less-developed
> countries.
>
>
>
> On what do you base this? No doubt on basis of 'prices'. The reality is 
> that little is produced in imperialist countries but instead they generate 
> a lot of 'value added' through simply repackaging things. Take the 
> blossoming industry of 'supply-chain management'. It is a classic example. 
> Cloth is produced in one country, stitched into garments in another and 
> exported to a third where the customer pays a handsome mark up. The bulk 
> of the profit accrues to the SCM company located in a fourth country. So 
> let's look at price-based 'value added' as the european capitalists call 
> it. The cloth sells for pennys. The garment for perhaps twice or five 
> times that. The consumer pays a massively inflated price many multiples 
> higher. The net profit in price terms accruing to the SCM company is huge 
> relative to the cost of production. The GDP figures you quote will give 
> significant 'value-added' contributions from the service sector, which by 
> definition produces minimal value in marxist terms. Just think about that 
> for a second.
>
>
>
> This happens repeatedly across the global economy in the real world; all 
> over the place. The net impact is that GDPs in the imperialist countries 
> grow at rates considerably above the parallel rate of growth in 'trade 
> deficits' (measured in price terms). From a capitalist perspective, it is 
> sustainable because of the difference is sufficient to enable it the 
> imperialists to continue to borrow to pay off that accumulated trade 
> deficit. The crucial gap in the model is, however, the imperialist end 
> 'consumer'. They are 'paying' for the huge mark-up in price. That is 
> financed from our two sources of 'transfer' identified above and possibly 
> income from a 'service sector' job. The problem is that if the capitalist 
> class is to make sufficient profits as a percentage of investment from 
> this exercise, the only way for this to happen is for consumption to be 
> financed by an expansion in credit.
>
>
>
> In a sense, I therefore agree that the problem is related to the tendency 
> of profit to fall but it is also rooted in the international division of 
> labour. To fail to see the importance of the multi-trillion dollar debt 
> held by the Chinese over the USA is to miss the essence of the 
> contradiction. This is my criticism of the eight theses.
>
>> Regarding productive cores and advance countries-- US still provides the
> largest portion of the world's industrial production-- about 24-21% [think
> this is a 2007 figure] and even poor old decadent super-annuated Britain 
> has
> a manufacturing sector providing about 15% of GDP-- not very much less 
> than
> France's ratio.
>
>
>
> Again, just how much of this 'production' is simply repackaged production 
> from the third world. What proportion of your figures for UK GDP is made 
> up from 'service sector' production. What does this represent in real 
> value terms? How many components are produced elsewhere,  bought cheap, 
> assembled and then parceled on at a huge price 'markup'? To simply accept 
> 'price' based estimates of GDPs as reflecting underlying 'value' from 
> various sectors is surface only analysis at its worst.
>
>
>
> Even if in the real world, manufacturing and agricultural production 
> provided 90% of GDP - what does that tell you? It says that 10% of the net 
> GDP is directly accumulated from exploitation overseas and that's on the 
> basis of GDP figures alone and a massively inflated figure of 90% as 
> opposed to your 15% - a very poor indicator of what's really happening 
> (which can only be determined by a analysis of gross national consumption 
> as against gross national production). This is the centre of the crisis in 
> my opinion. That differential was sustainable in periods of expanding 
> credit, and expanding growth, but unsustainable in periods of contraction 
> in both growth and credit.
>
>
>
> Anyhow, thanks for your response. I have to get back to work but hope 
> others who know more join in this discussion.
>
>
>
> le meas,
>
> DoC.
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get 30 Free Emoticons for your Windows Live Messenger
> http://www.livemessenger-emoticons.com/funfamily/en-ie/
> ________________________________________________
> 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  Mon Mar  2 09:03:34 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 11:03:34 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Energy and Biology
In-Reply-To: <462210276-1236009264-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-998796471-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
References: <462210276-1236009264-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-998796471-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
Message-ID: <49AC0356.5000308@panix.com>

sabocat59 at mac.com wrote:
> If the human body is not a touchstone for materialist analysis and politics then what is?
> 

I am not interested in discussing alternative health issues here. You 
obviously feel very strongly about this but it is really beyond the 
scope of this mailing list. Here are the things that are worth discussing:

1. GM crops
2. chemical-based farming in general
3. the food industry
4. public health under capitalism and socialism
5. the social and economic roots of epidemics

I personally have been studying this sort of thing for the past 20 years 
and look forward to continuing discussions of them here.

I hope that this is clear.


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Mon Mar  2 09:14:13 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:14:13 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Thoughts on 8 Theses
References: <BLU138-W543935F47A540176719E20ABA90@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <903ED32D78394E718250CBE7CA95AD3E@dmsthinkpad>

Unfortunately, the closest thing we have to a measure of value is prices, 
prices historically adjusted, prices exchange rate adjusted, but prices all 
the same so, yep, that's what I'm using.

As for the city/countryside schema-- no, there is no balance of trade; 
cities do not export the commodities they produce with the raw materials to 
the sources or origin of the raw materials.  The cities may not export 
anything to do those areas, but rather to other cities, or to its own 
domestic market in the cities.  Again, there is no necessity for balance in 
the reproduction of capital.

And of course the cities can hope to import more value from the countryside 
than they export to the countryside forever--- they've been doing it pretty 
much forever-- it's part of the uneven and combined development of 
capitalism right in the heart of its most developed areas.

Little is produced in the imperialist centers?  Really?  Number 1 exporter 
in the world of capital goods is Germany.  Capital goods.  US had the 
highest rate of export increase in the period 2004, 2005, 2006-- in capital 
goods.  Does the US import these goods from China, Japan, and re-export 
them-- not hardly.  The US is actually an export and then re-import economy 
for its domestic market-- 40%-50% of its imports "related party" imports--  
imports from wholly and majority owned foreign subsidiaries.  That's what we 
would expect from the most developed capitalism, with a greater social 
productivity of its labor force-- which is exactly what the US has.

China is the import and re-export economy-- importing components, 
reassembling them and shipping them back-- not the US, not Germany.

As for the Chinese holding's of US debt instruments-- these are not 
government reserves, unless the government decides to seize them.   These 
are dollar instruments held on deposit for various clients, not the least of 
which are multinational corporations.  That China has such vast quantities 
of reserves as an index to its inability to create a domestic market.

Keep in mind that none of the $587 billion Chinese stimulus plan involves 
liquidation of the the US debt instruments.    China's economic power over 
the US is zero-- just like Japan's was zero despite its accumulated dollar 
reserves.

Anyway, good discussion.  Snowing like hell here in NYC.



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "D OC" <donaloc at hotmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Thoughts on 8 Theses




From sabocat59 at mac.com  Mon Mar  2 09:18:07 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 16:18:07 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] energy and biology
Message-ID: <1870020407-1236010782-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1403717505-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>


Understood.  Very clear and quite fair. 
But there is that little problem of public health, economics and efficacy of different types of medical interventions, as well as the weight of institutional interests on which kind of modalities are offered. 

The power politics involved go way beyond the disinterest of scientific objectivity especially when popular understanding of the mythology behind how science operates in the real world  is way off the mark.   

But since this is seemingly a controversial topic I will try to limit myself to topics upon which we can all agree.  

Your list is a very good one I might add.   
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T


From horaciooliveira at mac.com  Mon Mar  2 09:39:04 2009
From: horaciooliveira at mac.com (Horacio Oliveira)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 08:39:04 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Lev Vygotsky
In-Reply-To: <49A73135.5080706@sonic.net>
References: <49A73135.5080706@sonic.net>
Message-ID: <D781902D-EED5-4A41-8FE0-47E0F8EED506@mac.com>

Give Carl Ratner's site a try...

http://www.humboldt1.com/~cr2/



From StevenCeci at aol.com  Mon Mar  2 09:23:41 2009
From: StevenCeci at aol.com (StevenCeci at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:23:41 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Insight article by Sam Marcy on 1987 that is very
	revelent to now
Message-ID: <ca3.48d9897b.36dd620d@aol.com>

 
Wall Street CRASH: What does it  mean? 
By Sam Marcy 
November 2, 1987 
[This pamphlet by Sam Marcy, published in February 1988,  was originally 
written as an article for Workers World newspaper shortly after  the 1987 stock 
market crash. It is filled with Marxist insight into the nature  of the 
capitalist system, together with valuable information illuminated by  those insights. 
The central role of the stock exchange in the capitalist system;  the role of 
the exchange in promoting colonialism; the central contradictions of  
capitalist overproduction and the anarchy of production are all described in  order to 
lay bare the underlying forces behind the 1987 stock market  crisis. 
The basis for Marcy?s confidence in the revival of the  class struggle was 
the changed character of the working class. Technology was  undermining the 
predominance of the higher-paid workers and expanding the  lower-paid workforce. 
This new workforce was composed of more and more Black,  Latin@, Asian, women 
and lesbian, gay and (now it is recognized) bi and trans  workers. This 
low-paid workforce would bring the energy of the oppressed into  the class struggle 
and would be able to lead it under conditions of economic  crisis. The Wall 
Street crash of 1987, which came a year after Marcy had written  his book 
High-Tech, Low Pay, seemed to foreshadow that crisis and open  the road to an early 
revival of the class struggle 
The following quote is from the upcoming book Colossus  with Feet of Clay by 
WWP Secretariat member Fred Goldstein, now in  production. It explains why 
Marcy's prognosis on the question of an economic  crisis after the stock market 
crash of 1987 was correct under the circumstances  of the time, but was then 
superseded by catastrophic world developments that  could not be anticipated. 
"Marcy and other communists were rightfully anticipating  that the high-tech 
assault on the workers would lead to an upsurge of the class  struggle in the 
near period. The basis for this prognosis was both subjective  and objective. 
The process of pauperization of the working class would project  the more 
militant sections of the workers forward, while the increase in the  productivity 
of labor would turn out more and more commodities which would be  harder and 
harder to sell in the limited world capitalist markets. This would  intensify 
the classical capitalist malady of overproduction, accelerate an  economic 
crisis and stimulate the class struggle. But the collapse of the  USSR transformed 
the world  situation and, along with it, the immediate prospects for class 
struggle in the  U.S. and the imperialist camp as a  whole.? 
In fact, the fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of  the USSR from 
1989-1991 opened up a  period of the first territorial expansion of imperialism 
since before the  Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. The sphere of exploitation of 
imperialism had  contracted steadily for 75 years under the impact of socialist 
revolutions and  national liberation movements, including the Chinese socialist 
revolution of  1949, which removed one fourth of humanity from imperialist 
domination. With the  collapse of the socialist camp, hundreds of millions of 
workers were newly  available for super-exploitation. The anti-labor offensive 
that Marcy refers to  in the pamphlet intensified in the U.S. and other 
capitalist countries.  This collapse and the retreat of China from the road of 
socialist  construction opened up vast new markets all over the world for 
imperialist  investment and trade, giving the capitalist system a new, temporary lease 
on  life. 
Whether or not the present gyrations of the stock market  are a harbinger of 
a major capitalist collapse, whether or not the sub-prime  mortgage crisis 
will ripple through the capitalist economy and precipitate a  crisis of 
overproduction, this pamphlet by Marcy gives invaluable assistance in  sharpening the 
tools of analysis in the present situation and in preparing for  the coming 
struggle of the workers and the  oppressed.] 
When the decline in the stock market took on a really  swift momentum in 
mid-October [1987] and the market started to drop by 50, 60  and even 100 points, 
the financial analysts, stockbrokers, and investment  banking officials, all 
apologists for the capitalist system, insisted that these  momentous drops were 
merely a "correction." They held firmly to that position  even after the 
market crashed 508 points on that critical Monday, Oct.  19. 
Even then, the apologists continued to defend their  views. They feared the 
truth might deepen the crisis. For instance, among the  networks, ABC and NBC 
continued to stick with the word "plunge." Only CBS dared  to call it a crash, 
but then corrected itself and retreated back to  plunge. 
Rockefeller: It's a crash, but  ? 
Only here and there did any stock analysts mention the  term crash. Finally, 
when the results were only too obvious, it took none other  than David 
Rockefeller himself, appearing on CNN on Oct. 29 and 30, to  legitimize it as a 
stock-market crash of the dimensions of 1929. But he then  added, and again 
reiterated a week later, that it "might cause a recession" if  Washington  didn't 
institute "the right policies" (meaning, of course, deep budget cuts  affecting 
the vital interests of the working  people). 
Thus, the first inclination of the apologists for the  capitalist system was 
to deny what had actually happened - an unprecedented  stock-market crash that 
went beyond the dimensions of the one in 1929. And even  after the debacle, 
the ruling class economists continue to allege that the crash  was unrelated to 
the "fundamentals," meaning the economic  situation. 
They persist in propagandizing the view that this global,  cataclysmic 
phenomenon was something strictly within the framework of the stock  market and did 
not affect the economic situation. In this way they try to  divorce the stock 
market and the banks - that is, the nerve center of the  capitalist system - 
from its anatomy, the entire economic and class structure on  which the stock 
market is built. 
Only slowly does it begin to come out that there may be  "economic 
consequences," as they put it. 
Can't have it both ways 
For decades now the bourgeois economists have been  trumpeting the glories of 
the stock market and its vital significance for the  economic wellbeing of 
the country as a whole. Now their first instinct on  sensing the emergence of 
the crash is to deny what they have been saying for  years, and, in fact, to say 
the very opposite! They want to have it both  ways. 
It soon became impossible to maintain this position, so  they moved away from 
it ever so slightly, some saying that the crash might have  "marginal 
significance" for the economy as a whole. But they immediately  qualified this with 
the hopeful note that a rebound is  inevitable. 
Yes, a rebound is inevitable, as the whole history of  capitalism shows. But 
when? One week from now, one year, ten years? And on what  historical scale? 
Will a rebound of the stock market alone be able to avoid the  inevitable 
economic collapse? 
What happens at the stock market is a representation of  the conditions of 
capitalist production. Before much time passes, all this will  surely become 
clear. But it is indispensable to say it, because capitalist  propaganda shrouds 
in mystery the functions of the stock market and financial  dealings in 
general. It cultivates the greatest amount of confusion and  deception regarding the 
true nature of the capitalist  economy. 
Millions directly  affected 
How broadly does the financial crisis reach? "As of the  early 1980s, three 
out of four men, women and children in the  U.S. either owned shares of 
corporate  stock or stock mutual funds directly in their own names or had an indirect 
stake  through their pension funds, insurance policies, savings accounts or 
other forms  of institutional investments." (From the Money Encyclopedia, 1984, 
edited by  Harvey Rachlin.) Now they're trying to play it  down. 
The stock market, which had been an example of capitalist  prosperity, now 
will turn out to be the instrument to facilitate the wholesale  expropriation of 
millions of workers and middle-class people through the loss of  their 
savings, pensions and other retirement funds, insurance funds and other  
institutions, all of which have played the stock  market. 
The onus is put on the yuppies, but their numbers have  been greatly 
exaggerated in the capitalist media during the period of capitalist  stability, so as 
to take the heat off the giant multinationals, banks and the  stock exchanges 
and divest them of responsibility. 
Engels on the stock  exchange 
Before going further, it is necessary to put in  historical perspective the 
role of the stock market in the capitalist economy,  without either 
embellishing it or denying its vast significance. As long ago as  1894, Frederick Engels, 
in supplementary notes updating Volume 3 of  Capital, said about the stock 
exchange: 
"The position of the stock exchange in capitalist  production in general is 
clear from Vol. III, Part 5. ? But since 1865 when the  book was written, a 
change has taken place which today assigns a considerably  increased and 
constantly growing role to the stock exchange, and which, as it  develops, tends to 
concentrate all production, industrial as well as  agricultural, and all 
commerce, the means of communication as well as the  functions of exchange, in the 
hands of stock exchange operators, so that the  stock exchange becomes the most 
prominent representative of capitalist  production itself." 
Engels also provided valuable insight into the relation  of foreign 
investment to the stock exchange, in England as well as the U.S. At that  early stage 
of the imperialist epoch, when it was still on the very edge of the  
transformation of competitive capitalism into expansionist monopoly capitalism,  Engels 
already discerned that colonization was "purely a subsidiary of the stock  
exchange"!!! 
It was in the interests of the stock exchange, wrote  Engels, that the 
European powers partitioned Black Africa and the French  conquered parts of northern 
Africa and Vietnam. "Africa [was] leased  directly to companies (Niger,  
South Africa, German  South-West and German East Africa), and Mashonaland and 
Natal [were] seized by [Cecil] Rhodes for the stock  exchange." 
Stock exchange concentrates  production 
How many bourgeois historians of the colonial era ever  show this connection 
between the stock exchanges and the exploitation and  enslavement of the 
colonized peoples? Today the hundreds of billions in  indebtedness of the oppressed 
countries are a continuation on an immense scale  of what was merely in 
embryonic form when Engels noted  it. 
How prophetically Engels put it, almost 100 years  ago! 
The stock exchange even then was becoming increasingly  more important. Why? 
Because it tends to concentrate all industry, agriculture,  commerce and the 
means of production in the hands of stock exchange operators.  They should be 
understood not in the narrow sense of stock exchange officials  alone, but more 
broadly as encompassing the heads of the biggest banks  (particularly the 
central banks such as the Federal Reserve in the  U.S.), the heads of other 
exchanges  and the governmental agencies like the Securities and Exchange 
Commission. All  these make up the network of what is nowadays referred to as the 
financial  industry. So that the stock exchange has indeed become the most 
prominent  representative of capitalist production itself. 
Temporary ups and downs in  market 
Of course, it should be stated that not every stock  market plunge results in 
a capitalist economic crisis. Some just reflect the  temporary gyrations of 
the moment and may be due to one or two financial  disasters, such as when 
Lockheed or New York Central went bankrupt. An  individual industrial or financial 
collapse, even of such a large corporation,  may have only limited 
significance for the economy as a  whole. 
There have also been oscillations of this or that  industry. For instance, 
only recently there was capitalist overproduction in  microchips, followed by a 
moderate recovery based partly, in this case, on  limiting Japanese imports. 
What if there were overproduction in such a key  industry as lumber? This would 
affect construction, housing, furniture -  probably most forest products. But 
again, it might affect only an individual  industry, even thought it has 
multiple effects on the  economy. 
In understanding the nature of the present crisis, it  helps to examine the 
summary provided by Engels in Socialism: Utopian and  Scientific that describes 
how a capitalist crisis develops, bearing in mind  that each crisis occurs in 
a specific historical  setting. 
When a crisis does occur, says Engels, "Commerce is at a  standstill, the 
markets are glutted, products accumulate, as multitudinous as  they are 
unsellable, hard cash disappears, credit vanishes, factories are  closed, the mass of 
the workers are in want of the means of subsistence, because  they have 
produced too much of the means of subsistence; bankruptcy follows upon  bankruptcy, 
execution upon execution. 
"The stagnation lasts for years; productive forces and  products are wasted 
and destroyed wholesale, until the accumulated mass of  commodities finally 
filters off, more or less depreciated in value, until  production and exchange 
gradually begin to move again. Little by little the pace  quickens. It becomes a 
trot. The industrial trot breaks into a canter, the  canter in turn grows 
into the headlong gallop of a perfect steeplechase of  industry, commercial 
credit, and speculation which finally, after breakneck  leaps, ends where it began 
- in the ditch of a crisis. And so over and over  again. We have now, since 
the year 1825, gone through this five times, and at  the present moment (1877) 
we are going through it for the sixth  time." 
Relation of stock market to capitalist economy as a  whole 
We challenge the innumerable bourgeois economists who  have been awarded 
Nobel prizes for "economic science" since this was written to  present a clearer 
exposition of the capitalist cycle of development! Don't they  instead try to 
obscure it? 
How do we relate the current historical market crash to  the classical 
Marxist concept of an economic crisis?   
The stock market is an integrated element of the entire  financial services 
industry, as it is now called, and is intimately bound up  with all the credit 
institutions - the pension funds, the multitude of banks,  credit unions, 
insurance companies, mortgage associations and so  on. 
In the outline of a general economic crisis depicted by  Engels, the 
financial crisis comes at the very height of the capitalist cycle.  The collapse of 
the market brings about the period of  stagnation. 
The capitalist economists put the shoe on the other foot.  They have been 
telling us that since there has been no economic collapse, the  economic 
fundamentals, as they put it, are still sound. Only the rate of growth  has slowed; 
therefore there cannot be an economic collapse and the Marxist  criteria don't 
apply. According to them, what happened in the market may be only  an episodic 
event and not the kind of sweeping one which entails an economic  catastrophe. 
But the stock market is an integral part of the financial  industry, and its 
crash is a forerunner of the economic situation, not the  aftermath. This is 
what the bourgeois economists are deliberately  confusing. 
Market is best indicator that capitalist cycle has  reached crisis point 
Of the many bourgeois economic analysts who have made  pronouncements since 
the crash, only one of them, Alan Sinai from Shearson  Lehman Brothers, in a 
report during congressional testimony covered on CNN, said  of the stock market 
crash that it reflects not the past performance of the  economy as much as 
"what the future holds in  store." 
How does one measure the nature of the capitalist cycle  of development in 
the current historical context? Can it be done on a national  scale where there 
is admittedly a global economy? Does one really know precisely  when 
capitalist production has reached its  pinnacle? 
Certainly there are a mass of economic indicators, like  the gross national 
product, but in the final analysis there is no way of knowing  in advance 
precisely when a collapse may begin.  
Credit, which was developed in order to facilitate  capitalist production by 
expanding purchasing power, also greatly extends its  bounds, so that it takes 
on ever-larger risks, thereby exaggerating and  aggravating capitalist 
overproduction and its concomitant - the contraction of  working class purchasing 
power. 
Slow economic growth is a relative concept, not an  absolute one. To the 
workers, to the millions of unemployed, there has been a  recession for years now. 
But the crisis becomes generalized when there are too  many sellers with few 
buyers, not just in the industrial sector but in all the  sectors of the 
capitalist economy. The stock market is the generalizer that  makes this apparent. 
It is not just a barometer but an economic summary, an  economic resum?; it 
can speak of the future rather than of the past, as Engels  showed. 
1979-82: Concrete confirmation of Marxist analysis of  crisis 
We have just seen how Engels described the development of  a capitalist 
crisis. We have a concrete example of one that happened less than a  decade ago, in 
the period of 1979-82. 
As early as 1974, a precursor of the coming downturn  could be seen in the 
collapse of the Franklin National Bank. This event of  formidable international 
dimensions was followed by a significant number of  smaller business failures 
and accompanying stock market declines. However,  before the economic crisis 
really took hold, there was a brief speculative binge  in 1978. 
The economic crisis of 1979-82 greatly accelerated the  restructuring of 
capitalist industry, which had already begun in the  seventies. 
Capitalist economists today stress that the crisis was  overcome through the 
"cooperation" of labor with capital, that productivity was  raised on the 
basis of a partnership with the official labor leadership  (bureaucracy). What 
this rise in productivity really signified was an  intensification of 
exploitation. 
This intensification of exploitation used to be called  the rationalization 
of industry; today it is called restructuring. It entails  not merely the 
introduction of labor-saving devices but a whole new concept  known as the 
scientific-technological revolution, which is a quantum jump in  development far 
surpassing all the earlier strides made by inventions and  discoveries. 
The period of the late 1970s and early 1980s saw the most  significant 
advance of the scientific-technological revolution. It caused the  mass displacement 
of millions upon millions of workers on a global scale and  their replacement 
by lower-paid workers, particularly in the so-called service  sector. This 
sector is by no means exempt from the ravages of the next economic  crisis, as 
the developing layoffs in the financial area are now  showing. 
An article in the June 4, 1987, New York Times entitled  "As Output Gains, 
Wages Lag" shows how restructuring works. One example given  (among many) is the 
refinement of a computerized machine at Goodyear Tire and  Rubber that used 
to take four hours or more to be retooled to make tires of a  different size. 
Now, the retooling takes only three  hours. 
This tendency for capitalist restructuring to make labor  "superfluous" was 
described by Engels in Socialism: Utopian and  Scientific. "It is the 
compelling force of anarchy in social production that  turns the limitless 
perfectibility of machinery under modern industry into a  compulsory law by which every 
individual industrial capitalist must perfect his  machinery more and more, 
under penalty of ruin." 
It is no accident at all that there is such a mad race  among the capitalists 
to develop ever smaller microchips, more perfect robots  and other advanced 
forms of automation. 
Engels referred to Marx's Capital: "Thus it comes  about, to quote Marx, that 
machinery becomes the most powerful weapon in the war  of capital against the 
working class; that the instruments of labor [computers,  robots, etc.] 
constantly tear the means of subsistence out of the hands of the  laborer; that the 
very product of the worker is turned into an instrument for  his 
subjugation." 
Keeping in mind the Goodyear example, we read on:   
"Machinery, the most powerful instrument for shortening  labor time, becomes 
the most unfailing means for placing every moment of the  laborer's time and 
that of his family at the disposal of the capitalist for the  purpose of 
expanding the value of his capital . . . 
"Accumulation of wealth at one pole is, therefore, at the  same time, 
accumulation of misery, agony of toil, slavery, ignorance, brutality,  mental 
degradation, at the opposite pole." 
After crisis, what brings a  revival? 
The bourgeois economists tell us that the revival period  since the last 
recession has lasted for 54 months. In this period of incredible  prosperity (for 
them), which started as a trot, became a gallop and broke into  an all-out 
steeplechase, they amassed tremendous  super-profits. 
How does capitalist production become revived? What are  the forces upon 
which it relies? 
First, it feeds on the devastating destruction wrought by  the economic 
collapse. Many firms go bankrupt, plants close, some are completely  liquidated, 
dismantled and sold at auction, and so on and so forth, The weaker  
establishments are weeded out; the larger ones swallow up the smaller, which  have barely 
been able to survive. This is the effect of the centralization of  capital, as 
Marx explained it. 
This destruction can of course be vastly magnified by the  havoc of 
imperialist wars and counter-revolutionary  interventions. 
Secondly, the work of destruction brought by the  capitalist crisis, 
especially the huge unemployment, initially weakens the  working class. The 
capitalists subject those who are employed to more  intensified exploitation in order to 
retrieve more profits and continue the  process of capitalist accumulation 
and expansion. The intensification of  exploitation is absolutely indispensable 
in the process of capitalist  revival. 
If the period from 1982 to the present had been a normal  revival phase like 
those that occurred earlier in the long evolution of  capitalist development, 
it should have resulted in a material improvement in the  condition of the 
working class, with a commensurate increase in wages. The  facts, however, 
demonstrate incontestably that this lengthy period of so-called  capitalist recovery 
was marked not by an improvement but by a drastic  deterioration in the wage 
level of the workers, in particular the oppressed  Black, Latino and 
undocumented workers, and in the general income of the mass of  the people. 
1980s 'revival' brought lower  wages 
Data on this is now voluminous. The most recent figures  appeared in the 
Business section of the Sunday, Nov. 1, New York Times: "Real  wages are now below 
1963 levels, and 80 percent of the jobs created in the 1980s  are in retail 
sales and miscellaneous services where average wages, adjusted for  inflation, 
are below the national average wage in 1949." This is an astonishing  
admission! 
A report put out on Aug. 7 by the Council on  International Public Affairs 
confirms this, as its title makes clear: "Real  Wages Drop Below 1962 Levels." 
An article in the May 1987 Scientific American by  economist Lester Thurow 
discussed a conservatively taken survey that revealed  the growing polarization 
between the very rich and the mass of the people.  "According to the U.S. 
Bureau of Census, the share of total income that went to  the top 20% of all 
families was 43% in 1985. Conversely, the income share of the  bottom 60% of the 
population declined to 32%, the lowest level ever recorded."  (!) 
We demonstrated a year and a half ago that the high-tech  revolution 
signifies lower wages [High Tech, Low Pay by Sam Marcy, WW  Publishers, 1986]. At that 
time we said that it had been accompanied by six long  years of an anti-labor 
offensive. And the assault hasn't stopped  yet! 
There continues to be a shift to lower-paid service  workers and a lowering 
of wages in general based on the restructuring of  industry on a global scale. 
This objective development is deepened by the  anti-labor offensive. The 
Reagan administration has aggravated the oppression of  the working class and 
raised it to new heights by its policies, but Reagan is no  more the cause than 
Hoover was the cause of the Depression or  Theodore Roosevelt the cause of the 
1907 panic. 
The capitalist government didn't cause the crisis, but  aggravated it. But 
crisis comes entirely independently of the will of the  capitalist class or its 
government, which is merely its executive committee, as  Marx pointed out. 
Capitalist overproduction is still the outgrowth of  capitalist production, 
notwithstanding all the research, the sophisticated data,  the computerized 
telecommunications at the disposal of the  capitalists. 
Anarchy leads to  overproduction 
And anarchy reigns in capitalist production, as Engels  explained in 
Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, because "No one knows how  much of his particular 
article is coming on the market, nor how much of it will  be wanted. No one 
knows whether his individual product will meet an actual  demand, whether he will 
be able to make good his cost of production or even to  sell his commodity at 
all." 
The deep-going causes of crises arise from the  contradictory nature of the 
capitalist system, which enshrines private ownership  of the means of 
production and yet has developed these same productive forces to  the point where they 
have far outgrown private ownership and are really social  in character. 
Bourgeois economists try to explain away this  contradiction by resorting to 
mystical expositions on the monetary phase of the  capitalist crisis or on 
interest rate swings. Some blame it all on unscrupulous  speculators, high 
rollers, common thieves in high places and, more recently, on  the existence of the 
yuppies. But they shy away entirely from the deep causes,  concentrating on 
the symptoms of the malady rather than explaining the nature of  the disease. 
What fueled the hyper  speculation 
As for these symptoms, it is necessary to explain the  significance of hyper 
speculation, which enthralled the ruling class and brought  them to dizzying 
heights of optimism in their system, only to dump them in the  doldrums. 
No really large-scale speculation in stocks, bonds and  commodities can take 
place without the banks. They are key and central to all of  it. It's the 
banks that supply the loans for the speculation, that take all  kinds of stock, 
mortgages, or whatever as collateral for their  loans. 
The banks are the fundamental agent of the speculation,  if we understand 
that we are talking today about a broader concept of banking  than what prevailed 
early in this century. Even then, the banks as the  depositories for the cash 
were not immune to loaning it out for speculation,  although their 
opportunities (and losses) were somewhat restricted under pain of  criminal prosecution. 
1930s legislation was supposed to prevent dangerous  speculation 
The high speculation before the 1929 crash and the  devastation of the 
economic collapse caused the Roosevelt administration to promote massive legislation 
of  two types. One included the well-known social reforms of the New Deal, 
like  unemployment insurance and social security, which were calculated to 
create a  cushion, or as it is now called a safety net, to soften the effects of 
the  economic debacle. 
The other type of legislation enacted was meant to  prevent such a collapse 
from occurring again. Such, for instance, was the law  that set up the 
Securities and Exchange Commission as well as the statutory  provisions that regulated 
banking, strengthened anti-trust laws and so  on. 
And this was received by many in the ruling class with  extreme bitterness. 
They regarded it as against the free enterprise system, as  being 
anti-capitalist in nature, but in reality it was devised to defend the  system against 
excesses, to curb not only speculation but fraud so as to dampen  any crash that 
might take place in the future.  
With the impact of the high-tech revolution, banking  itself has changed, as 
we said earlier. "The economic currents that began in the  1970s," says the 
authoritative Money Encyclopedia, "permanently altered our  money practices and 
ushered in a financial service industry which continues to  evolve on an 
almost daily basis. Today banking is no longer a matter of  depositing savings in a 
regular passbook account for safekeeping and a small  yield and keeping a 
no-interest checking account to pay bills. In the 1980s it  is the investment in 
instruments giving the highest possible return ? that more  closely defines 
banking." 
1970s revolution in  banking 
In fact, there has been a revolution in world  banking. 
Banks are no longer confined to a single state. They've  stretched their 
offices across the nation. Banks are no longer limited to  collecting deposits and 
making loans. Today they act as discount stockbrokers,  suppliers of credit 
cards, and as paid consultants in areas ranging from estate  and tax planning 
to investing. They no longer conduct business according to  banking hours, 10 
a.m. to 3 p.m. Instead, they provide access around the clock  through automated 
teller machines. 
Citibank, for instance, began to diversify early in the  1980s. The purpose 
was to lessen its heavy dependence on international  activities for its 
earnings, which at one point accounted for more than 80% of  the company's net 
income. Over the years they have tried to dump these loans on  other, weaker 
shoulders. It is truly a giant transnational corporation on which  the sun never sets 
and precisely because of that it absorbs all the  contradictions and 
weaknesses of the capitalist  system. 
The banks have become very high-risk adventurers. The  retirement of Walter 
Wriston, the former head of Citicorp, was undoubtedly  hastened because of his 
reputation as "an ultimate risk  taker." 
On June 21, 1984, the New York Times wrote: "Over the  long term, the 
question remains whether Wriston's new world of banking will  prove to be healthy, 
flexible and sinewy or whether it will repeat the  experience of the 1920s, when 
extraordinary risk taking by banks and exotic  financial techniques turned 
into the disaster of the Great  Depression." 
Reaganites loosen restrictions on  banks 
The bankers are no longer satisfied to keep idle funds in  checking accounts 
that by law pay no interest. In the seventies, banks couldn't  pay interest on 
deposits that matured in less than 30 days. But not now. Banks  are engaged 
in the sale of CDs, certificates of deposit. The companies that buy  them have 
the option of selling them at any time to other investors. For the  purposes 
of the companies, these are similar to short-term deposits on which  interest 
would be earned. 
The virtual revolution in banking did not automatically  grow out of the 
economic and technological developments of the earlier epoch.  Much of it has been 
helped by either new legislation, by administrative  decisions or by the 
Reagan administration. 
For instance, one of the ways the New Deal legislation  hoped to limit the 
excesses of capitalist speculation was to separate the  underwriters from the 
banks, so that only underwriters would distribute and sell  securities and act 
as advisers to corporations. Today, however, they work as  part and parcel of 
the banks. 
A great deal was made of the fact that the Roosevelt administration broke up 
the securities  industries by narrowing the field for underwriters, insurance 
companies and  commercial banks. The law compelled them to make financial 
disclosures, to make  their balance sheets more detailed so as to reveal more of 
their real situation.  Also enacted were various bank regulations that gave 
more power to the  regulators and inspectors. Brokerage houses were restricted 
from letting their  customers play the market on a minimal amount of  margin. 
Most of this massive legislation calculated to restrict  speculation, to 
force disclosure and to curb the excesses resulting from  capitalist financial 
dealings has to one way or another under the Reagan  administration been either 
abolished by statute or invalidated by administrative  decisions of the 
agencies concerned. Particularly weakened are those divisions  under the regulation 
of the Federal Trade Commission, the Securities and  Exchange Commission and 
other agencies which are the very ones supposed to act  as guardians against 
speculation and fraud. 
Moreover, the banks themselves have been given free rein  to virtually 
disregard the previous protective legislation. While once banks  could only operate 
in the states of their origin, they now have been given the  green light to 
expand interstate and to lend to excess. By enlarging their field  of 
operations, they have enlarged their risks as the lenders of  capital. 
While the banks themselves have been generating the hyper  speculation, we 
must repeat that speculation is not the cause of the crisis  itself. It is the 
effect, in the first place, of the enormous accumulation of  capital that has 
been extracted from the workers, especially during the period  of the 
capitalist recession of 1979-81. It was then driven even higher by the  high-tech 
restructuring of industry at the expense of the  workers. 
A monetary crisis usually accompanies an economic crisis.  They don't always 
go together, but certainly one of the features this time is a  monetary 
crisis, and it concerns the U.S. more than any other country at  this historical 
juncture. 
The U.S. dollar is considered a world currency reserve.  What does that mean? 
It means that other countries, and especially their  governments, have been 
obligated over the years to hold a certain amount of  dollars as their reserves 
in the same proportion as they would gold. This  special position in the 
world monetary situation arose from the favorable  position the U.S. was in 
economically and  financially after World War II. 
While the economies of Europe and Japan were battered or ground down in the  
military struggle, the U.S. merely served as a supplier  until near the end of 
the war, fortifying its military positions with the atomic  bomb. Its 
formidable economic strength in the postwar period was in sharp  contrast to what 
prevailed in Europe, Asia and even Latin America and Africa. 
Formidable though it was, however, it was not nearly  strong enough to remain 
on the gold standard. The U.S. and the  other imperialist countries had to 
abandon it after the 1929 crash, and have  never gone back. Before that, gold 
backing to support paper currency had always  been regarded as the key to 
stability in monetary  affairs. 
In the period immediately following the war, the dollar  as a reserve 
currency for all of the other capitalist countries was  unquestioned. And today, too, 
it is still a reserve currency in most of the  capitalist world. Even 
socialist countries are obliged to hold dollar reserves,  if for no other reason than 
to trade to the extent possible with the capitalist  countries. 
But the period when the stability of the dollar was  unquestioned began to 
wither - for very material reasons. In the 1950s the  U.S. gross national 
product  constituted as much as 50% of the world's gross product. But since then the 
 U.S. gross national product has been  shrinking in relation to the rest of 
the world. 
As late as the 1970s, it was estimated to be about 30%.  Now, with so much 
switchover from manufacturing to service industries, with the  introduction of 
high tech and the competition with its capitalist rivals, the  U.S. gross 
national product in relation to the world as a whole has again  significantly 
shrunk, if for no other reason than that the battered capitalist  countries have 
recuperated and in some cases, like Japan, have exceeded the U.S.  in a number 
of industrial and technological spheres.   
Moreover, the U.S. has become a debtor nation as a  result of its borrowing 
from other capitalist countries. This has been done  through the sale of bonds 
and stock, which earlier fueled its recovery. But as  the U.S. debt has kept 
mounting, the  fears of its capitalist rivals have become more and more 
pronounced.   
What are these fears worldwide with respect to the  U.S. as a world currency 
reserve?  Take this example. Suppose you as a central banker for country X 
have in your  treasury a reserve of $100 million, which is a very, very tiny 
amount of  dollars. If the U.S. devalues the dollar by 1/10th of  1 percent, you 
lose $100,000! 
Worldwide fears of U.S.  devaluation 
Now, supposing you have a billion dollars, which is also  not an enormous 
amount by any means, even for one of the countries highly  indebted to the U.S. A 
devaluation by that same 1/10th of 1% means losing $1  million, which is a 
lot of money. 
But there are those who hold many, many billions of  dollars. For countries 
like Japan, England, West Germany or even Saudi Arabia,  letting U.S. currency 
"fall," as they say, holds immeasurable  consequences. 
Hence, on the outbreak of the stock market crash, the  Wall Street Journal 
and practically all the capitalist politicians, from Reagan  on down, were 
urging a monetary conference of the Big Five (the U.S., Britain,  West Germany, 
Japan and France) or the Big Seven (those five plus Italy and  Canada) to get 
together and stabilize the dollar. They hoped this would help the  falling stock 
market and prevent an economic  debacle. 
The U.S. ruling class has been desperately trying to  reduce the value of the 
dollar so as to increase its exports and put a lid on  imports. But if 
there's an economic collapse, particularly in those imperialist  countries to which 
the U.S. wants to export, they will be unable to absorb U.S.  exports. 
Moreover, they will become more insistent that unless the U.S. opens  its markets to 
them, they won't be able to sustain their own economies, let  alone try to 
help the U.S. 
The prospects, then, are not just for a rerun of earlier  economic collapses, 
but for one that could be on a profounder and deeper level  even than 1929. 
Regardless of its dimensions, however, it will reopen the  struggle of the 
working class and change the character of the entire  international situation.
**************Need a job? Find employment help in your area. 
(http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=employment_agencies&ncid=emlcntusyelp00000005)

From J.M.P.Cloke at lboro.ac.uk  Mon Mar  2 10:51:50 2009
From: J.M.P.Cloke at lboro.ac.uk (J.M.P.Cloke at lboro.ac.uk)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 17:51:50 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops?
In-Reply-To: <992A17F214254866A093E9323B6485F7@Nautilus>
References: <1493087746-1235996847-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1780072990-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
	<992A17F214254866A093E9323B6485F7@Nautilus>
Message-ID: <web-4962576@frim.lboro.ac.uk>

So.... as a Marxist one is forced to abjure, say, Lovelock 
and his theories on Gaia, which are after all "mystic 
forces that act on whole organisms"?


Dr Jon Cloke
Project Officer EnergyCentral and Research Associate
Global and World Cities Group
Geography Department
Loughborough University
Loughborough LE11 3TU

E-mail: j.m.p.cloke at lboro.ac.uk
Tel: 00 44 07984 813681





From adambrichmond at yahoo.com  Mon Mar  2 11:17:20 2009
From: adambrichmond at yahoo.com (Adam Richmond)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 10:17:20 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan (was: Betancourt's halo [SIC] under
	spotlightm
In-Reply-To: <48EE2BB8397B48B483E5A705518A2328@office1pc>
Message-ID: <897971.20408.qm@web54604.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

Fred,

You never responded to my reply to you. You are slandering me.?? You made nonsensical assertions about me and now you heap new ones.? I didn't "totally endorse"? etc.? Your facts aren't right and it is disturbing to see you repeat your misinformed and baseless attack on me.? I suggest you step back. 

Adam Richmond
................................................................................................................

This thread, which began with Adam Richmond's totally indefensible
endorsement of the three US mercenaries' treacherous and sexist attack on
Ingrid Betancourt, has wandered a fur piece. Maybe it needs a new name.
Maybe the underlying theme is the revolutionary character of getting your
facts right. SLANDERING bourgeois individuals is worth less than nothing to
the cause.


      

From Jscotlive at aol.com  Mon Mar  2 11:21:16 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 13:21:16 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan (was: Betancourt's halo [SIC] under
	spotlightm, 
Message-ID: <ccd.5006dd6d.36dd7d9c@aol.com>

 
I dispute Fred's analysis of Afghanistan. I do  agree that the methods 
adopted by the PDPA with regard to the feudal structure  that prevailed in the 
countryside were crude. However, given what came after, I  suggest their attempt to 
drag Afghanistan into the 20th century was one that all  socialists and 
Marxists should properly describe as  progressive.
With regard to Fred's nonsensical point re  Afghanistan not having been 
returned to feudalism, perhaps he has another  name for a nation largely ruled by 
warlords complete with the power of life  and death over those living under 
their rule.  
I wrote an article on Afghanistan which appeared in Counterpunch last year,  
which I've pasted below. 
_http://www.counterpunch.org/wright08232007.html_ 
(http://www.counterpunch.org/wright08232007.html) 
The tragedy which is the history of Afghanistan was lost in the wake of  
9/11. From that moment, in the eyes of a West now baying for revenge, it was a  
country reduced to nothing more than a terrorist base and training camp run with 
 the blessing of a regime that gave new meaning to the word evil. Yet before 
9/11  those same terrorists had won the paternal affection of government 
apparatchiks  in Washington as a band of courageous liberation fighters who, with 
'our' help,  had successfully forced the Soviet Union to abandon a country it 
had invaded in  order to add to is evil empire &shy; at least according to 
Reagan and the  coterie of right wing zealots who formed his administration back  
then. 
But to understand why Afghanistan was and remains  so important to US 
strategic interests is to understand the role it has played  throughout its history 
in the global struggle for empire and hegemony waged by  the great powers. This 
mystical land, occupying a strategic location along the  ancient Silk Route 
between the Middle East, Central Asia and the Indian  subcontinent, has been 
the subject of fierce rivalry between global empires  since the 19th century, 
when the then British and Russian Empires vied for  control of the lucrative 
spoils to be found in the subcontinent of India and in  Central Asia in what came 
to be known as the 'Great Game.' The British desired  to control Afghanistan 
as a buffer against Russian influence in Persia (Iran) in  order protect its 
own interests in India, which at that time was the jewel in  the crown of an 
empire that covered a full third of the globe. Two Anglo-Afghan  wars were 
fought during this period. The first saw the complete annihilation of  a 
16,000-strong British army in 1842, the second resulted in the withdrawal of  British 
forces in 1880, though the British retained nominal control over  Afghanistan's 
foreign affairs. This control lasted through to 1919, when after a  third 
Anglo-Afghan war the British signed the Treaty of Rawalpindi, heralding  the 
beginning of complete Afghan independence from Britain. 
In terms of its development, Afghanistan remained  untouched by the 
industrialisation that swept through the subcontinent at the  time, as the British 
mercantile class set about the wholesale plunder and  exploitation of India's 
human and natural resources. By contrast, Afghanistan's  value to both the British 
and Russian Empires was solely strategic, which, along  with a paucity of 
natural resources and rough, mountainous terrain difficult to  traverse, combined 
to retard the country's economic development. A primitive  agrarian economy 
predominated in Afghanistan, supporting a feudal system of  control that has 
continued in the countryside in one form or another right up to  the present 
day, with self-styled warlords wielding power of life and death over  those who 
live under their control. 
That said, there was a point in Afghanistan's  tortured history when the 
future looked bright, when a determined effort to lift  the country and its people 
out of backward agrarian feudalism almost  succeeded. 
It began with the formation of the communist  People's Democratic Party of 
Afghanistan (PDPA) back in the sixties, which  opposed the autocratic rule of 
King Zahir Shar. The growth in popularity of the  PDPA eventually led to them 
taking control of the country in 1978, after a coup  removed the former Kings' 
cousin, Mohammed Daud, from power. 
The coup enjoyed popular support in the towns and  cities, evidenced in 
reports carried in US newspapers. The Wall Street Journal,  no friend of 
revolutionary movements, reported at the time that '150,000 persons  marched to honour 
the new flagthe participants appeared genuinely enthusiastic.'  The Washington 
Post reported that 'Afghan loyalty to the government can scarcely  be 
questioned.' 
Upon taking power, the new government introduced a  program of reforms 
designed to abolish feudal power in the countryside,  guarantee freedom of religion, 
along with equal rights for women and ethnic  minorities. Thousands of 
prisoners under the old regime were set free and police  files burned in a gesture 
designed to emphasise an end to repression. In the  poorest parts of 
Afghanistan, where life expectancy was 35 years, where infant  mortality was one in 
three, free medical care was provided. In addition, a mass  literacy campaign was 
undertaken, desperately needed in a society in which  ninety percent of the 
population could neither read nor write. 
The resulting rate of progress was staggering. By  the late 1980s half of all 
university students in Afghanistan were women, and  women made up 40 percent 
of the country's doctors, 70 percent of its teachers,  and 30 percent of its 
civil servants. In John Pilger's 'New Rulers Of The World'  (Verso, 2002), he 
relates the memory of the period through the eyes of an Afghan  woman, Saira 
Noorani, a female surgeon who escaped the Taliban in 2001. She  said: "Every 
girl could go to high school and university. We could go where we  wanted and 
wear what we liked. We used to go to cafes and the cinema to see the  latest 
Indian movies. I tall started to go wrong when the mujaheddin started  winning. 
They used to kill teachers and burn schools. It was sad to think that  these 
were the people the West had supported." 
Under the pretext that the Afghan government was a  Soviet puppet, which was 
false, the then Carter Administration authorised the  covert funding of 
opposition tribal groups, whose traditional feudal existence  had come under attack 
with these reforms. An initial $500 million 
was allocated, money used to arm and train the  rebels in the art in secret 
camps set up specifically for the task across the  border in Pakistan. This 
opposition came to be known as the mujaheddin,  and so began a campaign of murder 
and terror which, six months later, resulted  in the Afghan government in 
Kabul requesting the help of the Soviet Union,  resulting in an ill-fated 
military intervention which ended ten years later in  an ignominious retreat of 
Soviet military forces and the descent of Afghanistan  into the abyss of religious 
intolerance, abject poverty, warlordism and violence  that has plagued the 
country ever since. 
It is a point worth emphasising, however. Contrary  to the 'official' history 
of the period, the mujaheddin did not arise in  response to a hostile Soviet 
invasion of Afghanistan. The truth is that the  Soviet Union intervened at the 
request of the Afghan government in response to  the instability being 
wrought by a US funded and armed insurgency. 
To the question of why the US would arm, fund and  train an insurgency 
comprising religious fanatics in Afghanistan, the answer is  simple: namely for the 
same reason successive US administrations have armed,  funded and trained 
insurgents and death squads in any part of the world where  progressive, secular 
and left-leaning governments and movements have attempted  to institute social 
and economic justice: to halt the spread of a good  example. 
With the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991,  three years after the Soviets 
pulled out of Afghanistan, the US began a reach  for global hegemony which 
continues to this day and which lies at the root of  the occupations of both 
Iraq and Afghanistan. Of course, the entire world knows  by now that what Iraq 
has that the US needs and covets is huge, easily  accessible deposits of oil. 
With regard to Afghanistan, just like the British  and the Russians back in the 
19th century, its strategic location provides the  answer. The demise of the 
Soviet Union meant aht the huge deposits of crude oil  located in the Caspian 
Basin were now up for grabs. What US energy corporations  required was a 
pipeline to transport this crude to the nearest 'friendly' port  from where it could 
be shipped out. Iran wasn't an option, which left  Afghanistan as the only 
viable alternative; the proposed pipeline to pass  through and on into Pakistan 
to the port of Karachi, lying on the coast of the  Arabia. In 1996 a high 
level Taliban delegation flew over to meet with Unocal  executives at their 
headquarters in Houston, Texas, to discuss the laying of  this pipeline through 
Afghanistan. The Governor of Texas at the time was none  other than George W Bush. 
Despite ruling a country in which women were stoned to  death for adultery, 
in which men were tortured and had their limbs amputated for  misdemeanour 
crimes, in which music and television was banned, in which it was  illegal for 
girls to attend school, these high-ranking representatives of the  Taliban were 
given the red-carpet treatment &shy; put up in a five-star hotel  and even 
accorded a VIP visit to Disneyworld in Florida. However, after they  left it was 
felt that they could not be trusted and the plan for the pipeline  was shelved. 
With 9/11 came the opportunity the US Oilocracy  was waiting for, their 
long-held desire for a pipeline through Afghanistan  undoubtedly adding impetus to 
an invasion mounted to clear the country of former  US allies like the Taliban 
and Osama Bin Laden. Four years on and Afghanistan's  onerous distinction as 
the largest producer of heroin in the world is all that  has been achieved, 
with the remit of the beleagured and US-installed Kharzai  government running no 
further than Kabul. 
Ultimately, the swamp of hatred, obscurantism and  religious fanaticism out 
of which Osama Bin laden, Al Qaeda and the Taliban  emerged in Afghanistan was 
a US creation. The US armed, funded and trained large  numbers of men as a 
proxy army during the Cold War. The barbarity and savagery  inflicted on the 
people of Afghanistan as a result was a price worth paying,  just as the savagery 
and barbarity being inflicted on Iraq is a price worth  paying. 
The tragedy for Afghanistan, for its people, is  that the future could have 
been oh so different. 
John Wright lives in Edinburgh, Scotland. He can be reached at: 
_Jscotlive at aol.com_ (mailto:Jscotlive at aol.com) 


From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Mar  2 11:39:13 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:39:13 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Wall-E
Message-ID: <49AC27D1.2000500@panix.com>

The Disney animated feature Wall-E received many Academy Award 
nominations including one for best original screenplay. It was also 
named the best animated feature by my colleagues in NYFCO, a group that 
I obviously have much more respect for. Since the movie supposedly 
embraces environmentalist values, I finally decided to order it from 
Netflix despite my misgivings over anything associated with Walt Disney.

It turns out my misgivings were well-founded.

full: http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2009/03/02/wall-e/


From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Mar  2 11:58:03 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:58:03 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] From wikileaks: Pentagon Papers II
Message-ID: <49AC2C3B.3000008@panix.com>

WIKILEAKS NOTABLE DOCUMENT RELEASE
Mon Mar  2 17:13:31 GMT 2009

"Pentagon Papers II?"

This major November, 2008 RAND Corporation study on intelligence 
operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, conducted 300 interviews at all 
levels with US, UK and Dutch intelligence officers and diplomats.

The 318 page document could be described as part of the "Pentagon 
Papers" for Iraq and Afghanistan. It was confidentially prepared for the 
Pentagon's Joint Forces Command and focuses on intelligence and 
counterinsurgency operations.

The study's distribution was restricted to a select group of Coalition 
war partners and Israel.

It is a notable news and policy source, not for its arguments or 
conclusions, but rather for its wealth of candid and revealing interview 
quotes which are spread throughout the document, but especially in the 
200 page appendix.

The material has been verified, and we ask readers to go through the 
document to extract key quotes for their communities. There are quotes 
on almost every aspect of the wars. The authors of the quotes, ranging 
from the UK Ambassador and the former head of the Defense Intelligence 
Agency to on the ground intelligence officers, can be discovered via the 
footnote appendix.

Sample interview quotes:

     The intelligence on the military side was not tied in with the CIA 
[Central Intelligence Agency], and the CIA was not listened to. . . . I 
had my most depressing discussions with the intelligence people who 
could see what this was leading to, and could see what the pop- ulation 
thought better than [then-director of reconstruction and humanitarian 
assistance in Iraq L. Paul] Bremer could. . . . Between Bremer and [then 
secretary of state Donald H.] Rumsfeld, it had to be all talked up, 
which is the American way. . . . The discussion with Bremer was always 
on the optimistic side, while on the intelligence side it was much less 
so. And I think the same was true to an extent of [GEN John Philip 
Abizaid]. You don't succeed within the U.S. system unless you [display a 
can-do attitude].

     In the military, . . . complex, divergent thinkers, either . . . 
bite their tongue or they get out.. . . Very, very rarely they get to be 
generals.

     [A combined joint special-operations Task Force] snatched two 
brothers who were sons of a sheikh [with whom we have very good 
relations.] They did coordinate it, but did so poorly. They said, Were 
coming by to pick up this guy named whatever and used a name that was so 
common the task force couldnt know who it was. . . . Hes still in jail, 
and Im trying to deal with their father, and I havent been able to find 
[the son]. . . . These guys go in and blow down doors . . . when all 
they need to do is knock and theyll let them in. . . . They killed the 
son in a Christian family. . . . They said [that the son] was reaching 
for a gun. Yeah, okay, he shouldnt have done that, but these guys blew 
down the door, blew through the wall, and came with all their toys.

     (Afghanistan) infrastructure manning those responsible for planning 
infrastructure recoverywas only 650 strong out of 16,000 people at [U.S. 
Central Command].

     Dutch F-16s would go out and fly missions [in Afghanistan], and 
after the missions they would ask for the BDA [battle-damage 
assessments], which were classified Secret U.S. They could fly the 
mission and drop the ordnance, but they couldnt get the battle-damage 
assessment.

     The military would look and say, Its stable, so lets go someplace 
else. Well, maybe its stable because of the footprint we have there. . . 
. There is a rush to determine a snapshot of the security situation in 
order to reduce the footprint. . . . Were seeing an increase in violence 
in [this city] because they continue to decrease the number of soldiers 
there. . . . [When we started pulling out] the Iraqis themselves said, 
We are not ready yet.

     We also spent a lot of time, money, blood, and treasure on going 
after MVTs [medium- value targets] and HVTs . . . and I dont think it 
had a great deal of effect on the Taliban because they are not 
hierarchical. If we killed one guy, they just replaced him in about 
10minutes. . . . [In that regard,] they are not that different [from] us.

     I think that not interfering would be interfering with our mission. 
We dealt with training the police and then sent them out to the 
community. If they werent paid, then they were extorting money at 
roadblocks. As the police are seen as coming out of our gates, eventu- 
ally the extortion is going to reflect on us. The average Afghan citizen 
is not able to discern that it is Kabul that is at fault. . . . The 
Taliban is capitalizing on this very fact, because it is a regression to 
the situation like it was back before 1994. Police extortion is one way 
the Taliban is winning over the population.


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Mon Mar  2 12:03:09 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:03:09 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Wall-E
References: <49AC27D1.2000500@panix.com>
Message-ID: <FA80FCCED65642FB8ED01173A2B0FE6E@dmsthinkpad>

You know, Louis, the more I read, and the more movies I see, the more spot 
on your movie reviews are....
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Louis Proyect" <lnp3 at panix.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 1:39 PM
Subject: [Marxism] Wall-E




From jthorn65 at sbcglobal.net  Mon Mar  2 12:15:27 2009
From: jthorn65 at sbcglobal.net (John Thornton)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:15:27 -0600
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops?
In-Reply-To: <C9223B9E0844476F9175F5E3D7053B09@Nautilus>
References: <967270091-1235898905-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1234201991-@bxe1088.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>	<908b689f0903010126s1ce753c4y43e867a41d66df2@mail.gmail.com>
	<C9223B9E0844476F9175F5E3D7053B09@Nautilus>
Message-ID: <49AC304F.5070207@sbcglobal.net>

David Pic?n ?lvarez wrote:
> From: "Ruthless Critic of All that Exists" <ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com>
>   
>> In any case,Cuba needs to be applauded for not kow-towing to the
>> Luddite, reflexively anti-GM greenie-green bandwagon.
>>     
>
> Absolutely. A good part of this opposition seems to be rooted in 
> quasi-religious views about the goodness of nature (and the consequent 
> badness of artificiality) not too far from the conception some have of God's 
> plan. I'm aware there are some better reasons to oppose GM (mostly, 
> regulation about testing isn't stringent enough in many places, and 
> regulation about informing the consumer is certainly insufficient in the US, 
> as well as many patent-related issues) but in my experience most people who 
> manifest an opposition to GM (and here in Europe this opposition is very 
> widespread) do so from a reactionary antitechnological bias.
>
> --David.
>   

I'd be interested in some statistics on that.
Every person I know who opposes GM does so on the grounds that it is 
more about capitalisms imperative to increase productivity, even at risk 
to others, than good science.
They all agree that GM crops can be a boon to humankind if done for 
different reasons than terminator seeds and roundup ready soybeans that 
have profit seeking as their only goal.

John Thornton


From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Mar  2 12:27:33 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 14:27:33 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops?
In-Reply-To: <49AC304F.5070207@sbcglobal.net>
References: <967270091-1235898905-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1234201991-@bxe1088.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>	<908b689f0903010126s1ce753c4y43e867a41d66df2@mail.gmail.com>	<C9223B9E0844476F9175F5E3D7053B09@Nautilus>
	<49AC304F.5070207@sbcglobal.net>
Message-ID: <49AC3325.9090205@panix.com>

> They all agree that GM crops can be a boon to humankind if done for 
> different reasons than terminator seeds and roundup ready soybeans that 
> have profit seeking as their only goal.
> 
> John Thornton

The problem with Frankenfoods is not that they will kill you through 
poisoning like strawberries with ebola but they help to perpetuate a 
farming system that is unsustainable. When you resort to genetic 
modification, you are dealing with the symptom rather than the cause. 
Crops become vulnerable to pests because they are raised in a 
monoculture environment. A totally new approach has to be developed.


From Waistline2 at aol.com  Mon Mar  2 12:28:11 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:28:11 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops?
Message-ID: <c2c.538d4263.36dd8d4b@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/2/2009 12:52:07 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
J.M.P.Cloke at lboro.ac.uk writes:

So.... as a Marxist one is forced to abjure, say, Lovelock 
and his  theories on Gaia, which are after all "mystic 
forces that act on whole  organisms"?
 
 
Reply 
 
At each stage in the advance of science, the mystical (no quotes) passes a  
threshold and enters the realm of the knowable. Capital in/as agriculture, the  
relentless logic of  value production; the drive and thirst for the  ultimate 
juice: surplus value and the resulting science of "extending the market  
life/value" of agricultural produce, is the shape of applied science. 
 
Capital has juice. Squeeze the fruit/labor. 
 
"Something is wrong" with my apples and tomatoes. 
Something is wrong with my baby. 
 
Capital in agriculture is indifferent to all cycles of nature and time  
frames except the cycle and time of it circulation and reproduction. Capital  don't 
need no sun. Capital is dark and my baby is blue. 
 
"Ain't I blue?"
Ain't I blue?"
Ain't these tears in my eyes telling you?" 
 
There is something wrong with my baby, something wrong with my lemons. 
 
The thick skin and lack of juice is replaced by capital juice, in machinery  
- dead labor, as touch and artificial sensory organs, whose touch and handling 
 of vegetation requires altering the texture of my lemons.  . . .  in  the 
process of removal, packaging, shipment to distant markets, unpacking and  then 
placement on display. 
 
Capital artificial sensory organs as dead labor artificializes human  sensory 
organs. 
 
Polanyi called it the destruction of localized markets by the state.  Capital 
is not of the earth and its local markets do not harmonious flow  together as 
a law of nature. The state has to enforce a nature like law on  capital and 
markets. The world market for the proletariat will come to mean an  interactive 
web of local markets whose sum total = world system of producers  uninhibited 
by capital, in body, mind and spirit.  
 
The exploitation is unbearable. 
 
The debasement of nature at the hands of capital impacts the nature of our  
species and the species rate of exploitation. 
 
A greater magnitude of money is now required to make the same amount of  
lemonade. 
 
What four lemons would yield now requires two bags of lemons. 
Capital juice for lemon juice. 
 
No more lemonade stands because kids cannot afford the capital overhead and  
the consumer is priced out of the small market. The state enters and  demands 
everyone purchase world lemonade or drink the Kool Aid. 
 
Lemon juice was once put in warm water and used as a cleaning agent for  say 
glass and within the human organism loosens sticky food substance  allowing 
undesirable toxins to be passed from the organism. That is why  long ago we 
called it "lemon help me" - aid. 
 
Feet don't fail me now. 
 
Capital lobotomized the human brain without surgical instruments and the  
result is loss of short and long term memory of proprieties in direct proportion  
to increase of capital.  
 
Green is oxygen and red is alkalinity because colors in nature reveal their  
properties as color in nature.
An apple a day keeps the doctor away. 
 
The change in color "screams I am in decay, do not eat/consume me." 
 
Capital create natural flavor as a favor and natural colors to hide and  
disguise nature's color and then . . .turn everything money green. Who but an  
insane man conceives of green money and "greenbacks," other than one who accepts  
capital reproduction as on the back of the laws of nature? Green money = 
oxygen  of capital. Greenbacks creates wetbacks. 
 
Baby got back. 
 
Capital is a social relations of production that inverts production  
relations in slavery to capital as "the social" driving the relations.  Capital Money 
is the oxygen of capital as it reproduces  itself. Capital slowly strangles 
itself, without dying a natural  death, as it metabolizes labor . . . as this 
labor has its oxygen depleted,  in turn depleting the green of capital. The 
vicious cycle once again. The  full obese starving body that is society. Society 
decays from over eating = over  accumulation of green, while the oxygen supply 
is contaminated and depleted.  This is a crime. 
 
A Capital crime. 
 
For the love of money. 
 
The capital psychosis: I need some of that "mean green."  
 
No, Mr. Capital . . . you need oxygen to feed your starving brain and  
capital feed body. 
 
Medicine means nature properties with healing qualities. Science as medical  
science, is science because it creates properties that mimic healing  
properties in nature. Each evolution of this mimicking of nature, distance the  mimic 
from nature which now appears to each new generation as a symbolic extra  
nature relationship.  Penicillin is the mimic of a natural concoction as  nature - 
mud and mold. Penicillin and her mimic other "cillin's" constitute  
themselves on the chain of development as merchant capital, industrial  capital  . . . 
fiction capital, finance capital and then the emergence of  capital as a 
notion - imaginary, value devoid of value. 
 
The fiction capital when reflected through 100 mirror images, 
and then the buying and selling of "mirrors"becomes law
 - derivative, financial instruments, CDOOOOOOOOOOOOO's and  . .  . shit,
means
the 100th mirror image sold to the sucker
is a notional value  = super symbolic relations.  
The King has no clothes of value. 

Look with the minds eye very carefully at the 68th mirror sold. See how  the 
light bends in the mirror and the distortion appears distorted?  

The enemy within GM is the property relations, but one cannot see the  
property relations inside a pill. One cannot look at the apple and see its  property 
relations at work. Once you bite the apple, its Adam all over again.  Can't 
blame Eve for that. 
 
The fetish blinds the naked eye/I. 
 
WL. 
**************Need a job? Find employment help in your area. 
(http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=employment_agencies&ncid=emlcntusyelp00000005)


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Mon Mar  2 12:54:17 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 14:54:17 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan (was: Betancourt's halo [SIC]
	underspotlightm, 
References: <ccd.5006dd6d.36dd7d9c@aol.com>
Message-ID: <4DFEBBCB025C4788BFE7A92D3D1FCE01@dmsthinkpad>

I agree with J on this.  Hard to imagine, back then I guess, that the class 
line passed through Afghanistan and defending the PDPA from the capitalist 
assault by proxy-- but it did, and the world is so much worse off that the 
mujaheddin were victorious-- thanks to Carter and Reagan.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Jscotlive at aol.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 1:21 PM
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan (was: Betancourt's halo [SIC] 
underspotlightm,


>
> I dispute Fred's analysis of Afghanistan. I do  agree that the methods
> adopted by the PDPA with regard to the feudal structure  that prevailed in 
> the
> countryside were crude. However, given what came after, I  suggest their 
> attempt to
> drag Afghanistan into the 20th century was one that all  socialists and
> Marxists should properly describe as  progressive.
> With regard to Fred's nonsensical point re  Afghanistan not having been
> returned to feudalism, perhaps he has another  name for a nation largely 
> ruled by
> warlords complete with the power of life  and death over those living 
> under
> their rule.



From lueko.willms at t-online.de  Mon Mar  2 13:44:02 2009
From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (=?iso-8859-1?q?L=FCko_Willms?=)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 21:44:02 +0100 (MEZ)
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
In-Reply-To: <ccd.5006dd6d.36dd7d9c@aol.com>
References: <ccd.5006dd6d.36dd7d9c@aol.com>
Message-ID: <000.a8cc03001245ac49.008@lws-media.de>

On Mon, 2 Mar 2009 13:21:16 EST, Jscotlive at aol.com wrote:

> I dispute Fred's analysis of Afghanistan. I do  agree that the methods 
> adopted by the PDPA with regard to the feudal structure  that prevailed 
> in the countryside were crude. 

  They were counterproductive. As this famous saying from this 
I-never-can-recall-his-name general or politician goes: "It was worse than a 
crime. It was an error." 

> However, given what came after, I  suggest their attempt to 
> drag Afghanistan into the 20th century was one that all  socialists and 
> Marxists should properly describe as  progressive.

  It may have been their intention, but as the other saying goes: "the way to 
hell is paved with good intentions."  

  If you want to look for even more radical ways to "drag" (think about what 
that word means) a country "into the 20th century", you might have a look at 
Kambodia under the regime of the "Khmer Rouge". 

> With regard to Fred's nonsensical point re  Afghanistan not having been 
> returned to feudalism, 

  you missed his main point: Fred Feldman said that Afghanistan "had never 
emerged from it." This is quite different from claiming that the country had 
emerged from feudalism and then fallen back. 

  Just reread Fred's contribution, and try to lower your blood pressure first. 
Fred continued after the last quoted sentence: "NO country which has 
escaped feudalism has ever gone back to it." 

> perhaps he has another  name for a nation largely ruled by 
> warlords complete with the power of life  and death over those living under 
> their rule.  

  Well, that is no reason to underwrite everything anybody in Afghanistan 
ever does or says against this or that as having my full approval. 


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

From johnedmundson at paradise.net.nz  Mon Mar  2 13:45:57 2009
From: johnedmundson at paradise.net.nz (John)
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:45:57 +1300
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops?
In-Reply-To: <49AC3325.9090205@panix.com>
References: <967270091-1235898905-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1234201991-@bxe1088.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
	<908b689f0903010126s1ce753c4y43e867a41d66df2@mail.gmail.com>
	<C9223B9E0844476F9175F5E3D7053B09@Nautilus>
	<49AC304F.5070207@sbcglobal.net> <49AC3325.9090205@panix.com>
Message-ID: <1236026757.6083.8.camel@john-desktop>

On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 14:27 -0500, Louis Proyect wrote:

> The problem with Frankenfoods is not that they will kill you through 
> poisoning like strawberries with ebola but they help to perpetuate a 
> farming system that is unsustainable. When you resort to genetic 
> modification, you are dealing with the symptom rather than the cause. 
> Crops become vulnerable to pests because they are raised in a 
> monoculture environment. A totally new approach has to be developed.

Is that a valid criticism when applied to Cuban research of GM foods?
Cuba, after some pretty horrible experience with monoculture farming
itself, has made a lot of moves away from this typically capitalist
style of farming, with urban gardens, a lot of organic farming etc, so
GM research takes place in a different context in Cuba. If the real
problem with GM farming (Frankenfood if you want to call it that) is the
capitalist nature of its development and of the farming techniques
themselves, maybe the blanket opposition to GM held by a lot of Marxists
should be revised/qualified when the research is conducted outside the
capitalist context.
Cheers,
John



From lnp3 at panix.com  Mon Mar  2 13:46:02 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 15:46:02 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] The D-Word
Message-ID: <49AC458A.50003@panix.com>

March 2, 2009
The D-Word: Will Recession Become Something Worse?
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 3:33 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A Depression doesn't have to be Great -- bread lines, 
rampant unemployment, a wipeout in the stock market. The economy can 
sink into a milder depression, the kind spelled with a lowercase ''d.''

And it may be happening now.

The trouble is, unlike recessions, which are easy to define, there are 
no firm rules for what makes a depression. Everyone at least seems to 
agree there hasn't been one since the epic hardship of the 1930s.

But with each new hard-times headline, most recently an alarming 
economic contraction of 6.2 percent in the fourth quarter, it seems more 
likely that the next depression is on its way.

''We're probably in a depression now. But it's not going to be 
acknowledged until years go by. Because you have to see it behind you,'' 
said Peter Morici, a business professor at the University of Maryland.

No one disputes that the current economic downturn qualifies as a 
recession. Recessions have two handy definitions, both in effect now -- 
two straight quarters of economic contraction, or when the National 
Bureau of Economic Research makes the call.

Declaring a depression is much trickier.

By one definition, it's a downturn of three years or more with a 10 
percent drop in economic output and unemployment above 10 percent. The 
current downturn doesn't qualify yet: 15 months old, that 6.2 percent 
drop in output and 7.6 percent unemployment.

Another definition says a depression is a sustained recession during 
which the populace has to dispose of tangible assets to pay for everyday 
living. For some families, that's happening now.

Morici says a depression is a recession that ''does not self-correct'' 
because of fundamental structural problems in the economy, such as 
broken banks or a huge trade deficit.

Or maybe a depression is whatever corporate America says it is. Tony 
James, president of private equity firm Blackstone, called this downturn 
a depression during an earnings conference call last week.

The Great Depression retains the heavyweight crown. Unemployment peaked 
at more than 25 percent. From 1929 to 1933, the economy shrank 27 
percent. The stock market lost 90 percent of its value from boom to bust.

And while last year in the stock market was the worst since 1931, the 
Dow Jones industrials would have to fall about 5,000 more points to 
approach what happened in the Depression.

Few economists expect this downturn will be the sequel. But nobody knows 
for sure, and nobody can say when or whether the downturn may deepen 
from a recession to a depression.

In his prime-time address to Congress last week, President Barack Obama 
acknowledged ''difficult and trying times'' but sought to rally the 
nation with an upbeat vow that ''we will rebuild, we will recover.''

The next day, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told the House 
Financial Services Committee that the ''recession is serious, financial 
conditions remain difficult.'' He held out a best-case hope that it 
might end later this year, with ''full recovery'' in two to three years.

Despite the tempered optimism, the economic outlook remains grim. 
Consumer confidence has fallen off the table, stocks are at 12-year 
lows, layoffs come by the tens of thousands, and credit remains tight.

The current downturn has many of the 1930s characteristics, including 
being primed by big stock market and real estate booms that turned to 
busts, said Allen Sinai, founder of Boston-area consulting firm Decision 
Economics.

Policymakers and economists note there are safeguards in place that 
weren't there in the 1930s: deposit insurance, unemployment insurance 
and an ability by the government to hurl trillions of dollars at the 
problem, even if it means printing money.

Before the 1930s, any serious economic downturn was called a depression. 
The term ''recession'' didn't come into common use until ''depression'' 
became burdened by memories of the 1930s, said Robert McElvaine, a 
history professor at Millsaps College in Jackson, Miss.

''When the economy collapsed again in 1937, they didn't want to call 
that a new depression, and that's when recession was first used,'' he 
said. ''People also use 'downward blip.' Alan Greenspan once called it a 
'sideways waffle.'''

Most postwar U.S. recessions have come after the Fed has increased 
interest rates to cool down rapid economic growth and inflation. Later, 
the Fed lowers rates and helps restart the economy, with the housing and 
auto sectors -- both sensitive to interest rates -- leading the way.

This time is different: As Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd, 
D-Conn., said, ''Our housing and auto sectors are leading us not out of 
recession, but into it.''

What's more, the Fed no longer has the ability to kick-start recovery by 
lowering interest rates. The central bank has already effectively 
lowered the short-term rates it controls to zero.

And there are no guarantees the massive economic stimulus package and 
series of bank bailouts will stave off a nightmare recession, or worse.

''It is certainly plausible that the kinds of policy measures that have 
been good enough to tame the business cycle are no longer adequate in a 
fast-moving, highly leveraged, highly networked economy,'' said Anirvan 
Banerji of the Economic Cycle Research Institute.

Today's economic indicators don't project a depression. But Banerji is 
cautious. Economic data in 1929 didn't show that the stock market crash 
was about to lead to years of economic misery, either.

''It did not look like the kind of plunge that would be a depression 
until after the recession began,'' Banerji said. ''The Great Depression 
didn't start out as a depression. It started out as a recession.''

The depression that consumed most of the 1870s and followed something 
called the Panic of 1873 makes a better comparison to what's happening 
now, said Scott Nelson, a history professor at the College of William 
and Mary.

Financial markets had become centrally located by the 1870s, notably in 
London. And nations had not yet enacted the protectionist trade policies 
that were in place by the 1930s.

The results were not exactly promising. Gangs of orphans roamed city 
streets as men moved west to pursue cattle industry jobs. Widows 
struggled to make money by serving unlicensed liquor. Thousands of 
workers, many Civil War veterans, became transients.

The downturn lasted more than five years, according to the economic 
research bureau -- four times as long as what the United States has 
endured so far in this downturn.

Today's recession is already longer than all but two of the downturns 
since World War II. But for now, public officials are being extremely 
cautious about the D-word. Alfred Kahn, a top economic adviser to 
President Carter, learned that lesson in 1978 when he warned that 
rampaging inflation might lead to a recession or even ''deep depression.''

When presidential aides asked him to use another term, Kahn promised 
he'd come up with something completely different.

''We're in danger,'' he said, ''of having the worst banana in 45 years.''




From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Mon Mar  2 14:20:32 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:20:32 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops?
Message-ID: <49AC4DA0.6070301@gmail.com>

First, a question, IS Cuba in fact "turning" to GM crops or are they 
only doing some R&D on it? I'd be curious to know the facts.

I don't have anything against GM crops, per se. I'd like to know how it 
can be done safely. Obviously we all agree that one of the issues of GM 
crops is 'terminator' "Franken Food" developments that rope farmers and 
peasants into buying, to having to buy, seeds from there "Terminator 
Agribusinesses". They should be outlawed as far as I can see.

But that is a 'policy' issue that is more or less easily resolved by 
politics, not science. It is the science aspect of GM foods that I've 
read about that has done some detrimental damage through pollen 
pollution others have alluded to. As many know corn originates in 
Central America but really got domesticated for human consumption in 
Mexico. Mexico, in it's bid to become a cash-crop neo-colony for 
globalization, has gone full-bore with GM.

When I was in Mexico early last year, this was a big issue. Several 
"accidents-on-purpose" seems to have occurred by US owned agribusinesses 
where the pollen from their GM corn polluted...and wiped out...some 
strains of native Mexican corn that have been cultivated there for 
several thousands years. Gone. Never to return. This is what scares me 
the most. And, since the agribusinesses in question have set up the 
world trade organizations to enforce 'ownership' over  "polluted" crops, 
if they can germinate at all, became the property of the agribusiness.

David



From sabocat59 at mac.com  Mon Mar  2 14:20:37 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 21:20:37 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Is Cuba really turning to GM crops?
Message-ID: <561274083-1236028930-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-880935829-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

Cuba's interest in GM crops seemed to begin as a spin off of their vaccination biotech program. 

But now they're manipulating genetic material to increase the protein and mineral content of various staples such as potatos, corn and rice. Not a bad idea really.   

Within the context of their overall approach, which stresses organic cultivation, they'll probably end up with a hybrid organic/GM approach.  

So I think John makes a good point. 

Greg McD  
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Mon Mar  2 14:23:41 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 16:23:41 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis
References: <55868ddf0903011127l5107f182x94f5ba62a6c8267b@mail.gmail.com>
	<B528EBBCF2C7437D92EA83D9BFBBFED2@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <C9804B7E51E24B3890C13D4B6EC8DF50@dmsthinkpad>

Brad,

Regarding the "peak" in profits-- and I want to say here that I do not 
consider the FROP to be simply, exclusively a long term structural tendency, 
but in fact, short-term, with immediate disruptive impact, to be in fact 
exactly the most thorough and profound manifestation of overproduction--  
anyway looking back at some notes:  S&P 500 per share earnings peaked in 
2006 at $88/per share-- of course this include the financial sector share 
earnings-- which I think [don't recall exactly] topped out in the same year 
at about 31% of the S&P total.

Think manufacturing earnings topped out also in 2006-- or maybe first half 
2007-- trying to locate the data in my notes. 



From rfls12802 at blueyonder.co.uk  Mon Mar  2 14:57:11 2009
From: rfls12802 at blueyonder.co.uk (Paul Flewers)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 21:57:11 -0000
Subject: [Marxism] Wall-E
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1.1236020402.16924.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
References: <mailman.1.1236020402.16924.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <003701c99b81$d6e41c90$84ac55b0$@co.uk>

For an interesting piece on Disney's politics, see 'Leni, Walt and Walter:
Deutsch-Amerikanische Freundschaften',
http://www.militantesthetix.co.uk/opticsyn/floridani.html, at Esther
Leslie's website.





From cbcox at ilstu.edu  Mon Mar  2 15:05:41 2009
From: cbcox at ilstu.edu (Carrol Cox)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 16:05:41 -0600
Subject: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis
References: <55868ddf0903011127l5107f182x94f5ba62a6c8267b@mail.gmail.com>
	<B528EBBCF2C7437D92EA83D9BFBBFED2@dmsthinkpad>
	<C9804B7E51E24B3890C13D4B6EC8DF50@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <49AC5835.E6E58579@ilstu.edu>



"S. Artesian" wrote:
> 
> Brad,
> 
> Regarding the "peak" in profits-- and I want to say here that I do not
> consider the FROP to be simply, exclusively a long term structural tendency,
> but in fact, short-term, with immediate disruptive impact, 

FROP is discussed only in C3, which (a) is the least 'finished' and
thought through of the three volumes and (b) cncerns the _appearance_ or
manifestation of capitalis dynamics, not the inner reality. It helps in
grasping the the importance of relative surplus value and the drive for
ever higher levels of productivity in capitalism -- that is, the drive
for the shortening of the necessary part of the labor day through the
cheapening of commodities. It is by no means a fundamental principle of
"economics."

Carrol



From sartesian at earthlink.net  Mon Mar  2 16:33:37 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 18:33:37 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis
References: <55868ddf0903011127l5107f182x94f5ba62a6c8267b@mail.gmail.com><B528EBBCF2C7437D92EA83D9BFBBFED2@dmsthinkpad><C9804B7E51E24B3890C13D4B6EC8DF50@dmsthinkpad>
	<49AC5835.E6E58579@ilstu.edu>
Message-ID: <9F3392BA418F43CE86096D2E2B78EA34@dmsthinkpad>

Well, it's a bit more than "discussed," and Marx refers to it as defining 
the historical limits to capitalism, meaning that it expresses the conflict 
between means and relations in a form that matches precisely the content of 
the contradiction between capital and wage-labor.

Certainly, Marx's work is unfinished, but so what?  The importance of the 
FROP, and  identification of that as the meaning of overproduction, of the 
overproduction of capital, exists separate and apart from the status of 
Marx's investigations.

There is nothing  "least thought through" in Marx's discussion of this 
facet.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Carrol Cox" <cbcox at ilstu.edu>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 5:05 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis




From Waistline2 at aol.com  Mon Mar  2 17:04:21 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 19:04:21 EST
Subject: [Marxism] (no subject)
Message-ID: <cab.406e3b7a.36ddce05@aol.com>



Marxism list 3/02/09 index. Decoded. 2nd level. 
 
At each stage in the advance of science, the mystical passes a threshold  and 
enters the realm of the knowable. Nature becomes symbolized as a spontaneous  
impulse of the mind seeking expression as words. Symbolic expressions are  
fundamental to man as woman as the fundamental conduit for all human impulses  
and interactions seeking articulation and the sharing of experience. In 
Biblical  parlance first comes the word seeking to articulate the experience of 
genesis. 
 
Generations build upon existing symbols used to articulate and define  
reality. Society as the unity of productive forces and social relations can  be 
tracked and earmarked on the basis of the every spiraling development and  
evolution of symbolic relations originating in nature. The bookmark is always a  
certain stage or configuration of the means of production. 
 
Capital in/as agricultural production discards use-value as the reason for  
production, and replaces the nature/human/use relations with the relentless  
logic of exchange value production; the drive and thirst for the ultimate  fruit 
 . . . juice: surplus value and the resulting science of "extending  the 
market life/value" of agricultural produce; applied bourgeois science or  science 
in the hands of the metaphysical bourgeoisie.  Specifically, this  science 
approach of the bourgeoisie is classified as "the metaphysics of  properties" in 
the history of evolution of conscious dialectics. 
 
Juice is a material and symbolic thing. Extraction and concentration  becomes 
concentration and extraction of the world of social processes. 
 
Capital has juice. Squeeze the fruit/labor. 
 
"Something is wrong" with my apples and tomatoes.

Something is  wrong with my baby, something is wrong with me. 
 
Capital in agriculture is indifferent to all cycles of nature and time  
frames except the cycle and time of it circulation and reproduction. All time  
frames, including the previously existing industrial conception of time, as  
mechanical motion, become so many barriers to capital reproduction. Agrarian  time 
frames as the meaning of pastoral life, strivings and longings become  
replaced by machine time measured in increments of seconds. Then capital reaches  its 
zenith as 24/7. 
 
Who invented the second as a time frame or rather the first second? 
 
Where did it come from or on what material basis does it arise? 
 
Time arises as the self aware man - person, who records passing sequences  on 
the basis of the beating heart. The biology inherent and inbred spontaneous  
nature of our species is its own index and measure of reality. The "second" is 
 only a name, but the name - word, is a concept and the concept is a measure 
of  the space between each beat of the heart 
 
 . . . . . and baby my heart beats only for you. 
 
Capital don't need no sun although it contains its own self index of time -  
sequential passing's, measured by its realization as surplus value. The  
American Indians historically weep over the destruction of time by capital,  
because it means the destruction of the earth, as it had existed forever.  Sunshine 
becomes indexed as and meaningless to capital as an index of  circulation, as 
it seeks to further commodify daylight savings time as a daytime  profit 
index. 
 
Spring forward, - one hour and shop, fall backwards. 
 
Capital is dark and my baby is blue. 
 
Death is blue because we turn blue at death. Blue skies are the foreboding  
that ushers in death of the body and the failure - death, of love. 
 
"Ain't I blue?"
Ain't I blue?"
Ain't these tears in my eyes telling  you?" 
 
There is something wrong with my baby, something wrong with my lemons. 
 
The thick skin and lack of juice of my lemons produced as exchange value,  
occurs because the object purpose of lemons becomes the reproduction of capital  
juice, in machinery - dead labor, and advanced robotics with touch and  
artificial sensory organs; the machine?s sensory organs call forth a produce not  
spoiled and degraded by the machines sensory organs.  touch and handling  
of vegetation requires altering the texture of my lemons. . . . To survive  
the 
process of removal, packaging, shipment to distant markets, unpacking  and 
then 
placement on display. 
 
Capital as circulation and a circuit. 
 
Capital artificial sensory organs as dead labor artificializes human  sensory 
organs, because labor is fused to capital as the nexus, giving life  to 
production. . 
 
Polanyi called it the destruction and recreation of localized markets by  the 
state. Capital is not of the earth, nor extraterrestrial.  its local  markets 
do not harmonious flow together as a law of osmosis - nature. Here there  is 
no spontaneous and harmonious penetration of the cells membrane and  
metaphomopisis. The most violent and forceful rape is involved. The state  intervenes 
to enforce a nature like law on capital markets. This is so because  the earth 
and humanity has to be torn from 40 centuries of pastoral time frames  and 
indexes giving meaning to life, and reconstituted upon what is in polite  company 
called the industrial revolution; industrial time = indust-reality. The  
natural economy is torn from nature as the precondition for the rise and  
consolidation of capital. 
 
The natural economy is superseded by and replaced with the money  economy.  
 
The world market for the proletariat will come to mean an interactive web  of 
local markets whose sum total = world system of associated producers  
uninhibited by capital, in body, mind and spirit. Tine itself shifts in the  gigantic 
hands of the proletariat. Reality is cast anew. The world turns green  not 
capital. 
 
Your exploitation is unbearable. 
 
The debasement of nature at the hands of capital impacts and distorts the  
nature of our species and increases the species rate of exploitation. 
 
A greater magnitude of money/capital is now required to make the same  amount 
of lemonade. 
 
What four lemons would yield now requires two bags of lemons and 50% of the  
labor to harvest the lemons.  
 
Capital juice for lemon juice. 
 
No more lemonade stands because kids cannot afford the capital overhead and  
the consumer is priced out of the small market. The state enters and demands  
everyone purchase world lemonade or drink the Kool Aid. 
 
The science - radical and then revolutionary material, has not been lost  but 
preserved to be passed to the next generation. The key is the material  
conception of all and the most high. The most High is high because it is  creation 
itself . . .herself, and ?I love her.? 
 
Lemon juice was once put in warm water and used as a cleaning agent for say  
glass and within the nature that is species - human organism, to loosen  
sticky food substance allowing undesirable toxins to be passed from the  organism. 
That is why long ago we called it "lemon help me" - aid . . .  Lemonade. The 
symbol is materialisms made into the words shaped by sound. 
 
Feet don't fail me now. 
 
Capital administers shock therapy on the economy and man while lobotomizing  
the human brain without surgical instruments. The result is loss of short and  
long term memory of proprieties and their symbolic expressions in direct  
proportion to increase of capital. Not because science is bad, but because the  
barriers to capital, defining its historical limitation, that first appear as a 
 metabolic breach in production and circulation, are also made manifest as 
the  barriers between man and nature. The social act of production for exchange 
value  separates the actors from nature and positions them as antagonists to 
the  spontaneous metabolic cycle and circuits of earth life. One can prove this 
to  themselves by working the third shift for say ten years. 
 
Color in nature is the proof of dialectics. Green defines itself because it  
is the definitive definition my which all things that are green is to be 
forever  defined. 
 
Green is oxygen. In its symbolic expression green means ?yes? or ?go? or  
affirmative.  and red is alkalinity because colors in nature reveal their  
properties as color in nature. 
 
An apple a day keeps the doctor away. Before our bourgeoisie wiped out  
history and historical memory and recast it again, the third time, everyone was  
taught the miracle and society role of Johnny Apple seed; the boy who planted  
apple trees throughout this landmass, so the society could heal itself from  
nature. The market did not like Johnny Appleseed; put him on trail and executed  
him.  
 
Green means ?go? and red means ?stop and have a relationship with me,? or  
stop digest me so that other pathways can flow properly.  
 
?Stop in the name of Love.
. . .before you break my heart
Think  it over. 
Haven?t I been good to you.? 
 
The change in a natural color screams ?I am in decay, do not eat/consume  
me." 
 
He was steaming with ?red,? is a point of measure of the pH balance or  
alkalinity. 
 
I swear.  
 
Capital create ?natural flavor? as a favor neighbor. and natural colors to  
hide and 
disguise nature's color and then . . .turn everything money green .  . . 
 
?The Color of Money? . . . Tom Cruise, was the debasement of ?fast Eddie?. 
 
Gleason was brilliant: ?Fast Eddie I can?t beat You.? 
 
Mans inhumanity and insanity to man is of course the insanity in man. Man  
has lost his mind. 
 
(Level three: where does the mind go when it is lost?) 
 
Who but an insane man conceives of green money and "greenbacks," other than  
one who accepts capital reproduction as a law of nature, on the back of nature 
 and the nature in man?  
 
Green money = 
oxygen as capital.  
 
Greenbacks creates wetbacks. 
 
Baby got back. Over accumulation localized in the butt. 
 
Really. 
 
(don't tell the "sisters" I said that or I'm in big trouble.) 
 
Symbolic language cannot hide itself. One has to grab possession of the  Key, 
buried in King Solomon Temple. Materialism opens the first door in the  
castle of a thousand rooms. 
 
Marx saw through the symbolic language. Hegel became Faygo, of which Marx  
drank.  
 
Capital as a social relations of production, inverts production  
relations: slavery to capital as "the social" driving the relations. 
 
Capital Money is the oxygen of capital as it reproduces itself. Capital  
slowly strangles itself, without dying a natural death, because Capital is not  
like a natural man. Strangulation as it metabolizes labor . . . as this  
labor has its oxygen depleted, in turn depleting the green of capital. The  
falling rate of oxygen. 
 
The vicious cycle once again. 
 
The overfull obese starving body dieting from lack of nutrients. Why do we  
die-it, when we can Michael Jackson 1983 . . . . And just Beat It? 
 
Society decays  . . . Die it  . . . from over eating = over  accumulation of g
reenback capital, while the oxygen supply is contaminated and  depleted. This 
is a crime. It is not a misdemeanor. 
 
A Capital crime. The price will be paid. The jury is being assembled. 
 
For the love of money. 
 
The capital psychosis: I need some of that "mean green." 
 
I need some air . . . .
 
Medicine means nature properties with healing qualities. 
 
Science as medical science, is science because it creates properties that  
mimic healing properties in nature. Each evolution of this mimicking of nature,  
distance the mimic from nature, which now appears to each new generation as a 
 symbolic extra nature relationship. Someone must tell everyone why humanity, 
our  humanity put the aid in lemonade, or the next degeneration will not  . . 
.  NO! 
 
Penicillin is the mimic of a natural concoction as nature - mud and mold.  
Penicillin and her mimic other "cillin's"  . . . be chillin, and constitute  
themselves on the chain of development, not unlike the external form of the law  
that drives merchant capital, industrial capital . . . fiction capital, 
finance  capital and then the emergence of capital as a notion - imaginary, value 
devoid  of value. Everything set into a cycle of reproduction - motion as a self 
 sustaining cycle, contains laws whose external expression cannot Not mimic 
laws  of nature. 
 
The fiction capital is an expression - mirror, of real capital. The mirror  
can be sold as a promissory note. The promise is based in value that can be  
touched. 
when capital is reflected through 100 mirror images, 
and the  buying and selling of "mirrors" becomes the supreme law of high  
finance,

- derivative, financial instruments, CDOOOOOOOOOOOOO's and  . . . shit,
 
the 100th mirror image sold to the sucker
is a notional value = super  symbolic relations.

The King has no clothes of value. 
 
Look with the minds eye very carefully at the 68th mirror sold. See how the  
light bends in the mirror and the distortion appears distorted? 
 
The enemy within GM is the property relations, and ignorance of the laws of  
nature, but one cannot see the property relations inside a pill. One cannot 
look  at the apple and see its property relations at work. 
 
Once you bite the apple, its Adam all over again. 
 
Can't blame Eve for that. 
 
The fetish blinds the naked eye/I. 
 
?Man?s reflections on the forms of social life, and consequently, also, his  
scientific analysis of those forms, take a course directly opposite to that 
of  their actual historical development. He begins, post festum, with the 
results of  the process of development ready to hand before him. The characters 
that stamp  products as commodities, and whose establishment is a necessary 
preliminary to  the circulation of commodities, have already acquired the stability 
of natural,  self-understood forms of social life, before man seeks to 
decipher, not their  historical character, for in his eyes they are immutable, but 
their meaning.? 
 
Some one else, from a preceding generation, had to tell me. 
 
Ask somebody. 
 

WL. 
 


**************Need a job? Find employment help in your area. 
(http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=employment_agencies&ncid=emlcntusyelp00000005)


From jeremy at infowells.com  Mon Mar  2 20:54:25 2009
From: jeremy at infowells.com (Jerry Wells)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 19:54:25 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] From Global Research: America's Fiscal Collapse
Message-ID: <1236052466.4373.12.camel@pool-96-251-15-146.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net>

N.B.:This well documented article sheds light upon the dire consequences 
of Obama budget priorities.

America's Fiscal Collapse 
by Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, March 2, 2009


At first sight, the budget proposal has all the appearances of an
expansionary program, a demand oriented "Second New Deal" geared towards
creating employment, rebuilding shattered social programs and reviving
the real economy. 

Obama's promise is based on a mammoth austerity program. The entire
fiscal structure is shattered, turned upside down. 

To reach these stated objectives, a significant hike in public spending
on social programs (health, education, housing, social security) would
be required as well as the implementation of a large scale public
investment program. Major shifts in the composition of public
expenditure would also be required: i.e. a move out of a war economy,
requiring a movement out of military related spending in favour of
civilian programs. 

In actuality, what we are dealing with is the most drastic curtailment
in public spending in American history, leading to social havoc and the
potential impoverishment of millions of people. 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=12517







From jayroth6 at cox.net  Mon Mar  2 21:51:03 2009
From: jayroth6 at cox.net (J Rothermel)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 23:51:03 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] UAW at the Crossroads
Message-ID: <49ACB737.6070204@cox.net>

http://www.workers.org/2009/us/uaw_0305/

UAW at the crossroads

By Martha Grevatt

Published Feb 28, 2009 8:45 AM

Last year the U.S. Treasury Department ordered Chrysler and General 
Motors to reopen their contracts with the United Auto Workers. In order 
for them to receive $25 billion in government loans, the two companies 
would have to show by Feb. 17 that they could get the union to agree to 
a ?competitive? wage and benefit structure. With only hours to spare 
before the deadline, they submitted their plans for ?viability,? along 
with requests for additional funding.

For workers, the entire scenario raises more questions than it answers. 
Union workers are being told they must lower their compensation to that 
of nonunion workers at Honda, Toyota and Nissan plants in the U.S. 
Doesn?t that deny the union a basic legal right, for which many workers 
gave their lives, which is the right to bargain for a bigger share of 
the wealth they create?

Nevertheless, the UAW last week reached a tentative agreement on new 
wage and benefit concessions. If news reports are correct, workers will 
be asked to give up cost-of-living-allowance raises and annual bonuses, 
work more than eight hours a day for straight time, and lose all income 
security after two years of layoff. This is a precedent-setting rollback 
of 70 years? worth of hard-fought gains.

The fact is that concessions have never saved jobs. As early as 1954, 
workers at Studebaker were pressured by the company and the UAW 
leadership to take a pay cut so their company could compete with the Big 
Three. On the first vote they rejected the cut, but it was narrowly 
approved in a second vote. What happened? Studebaker merged with Packard 
in 1954 and ceased producing vehicles altogether in 1966.

Now GM?s ?viability? plan includes cutting 47,000 jobs worldwide and 
closing 14 plants. Chrysler called attention to its having eliminated 
32,000 positions since 2007, with 3,000 more hourly and 10,000 more 
salaried jobs on the chopping block. This may or may not satisfy the 
government?s Auto Task Force, led by Treasury secretary Timothy Geithner 
and National Economic Council chair Lawrence Summers, whose goal is 
fundamental restructuring.

Meanwhile, union retirees are worried about losing their health care 
coverage if there are changes in the way the Voluntary Employee 
Beneficiary Association is funded. Under the 2007 contract the three 
automakers were to make a one-time lump sum payment, after which they 
would be relieved of future obligations for retiree health benefits. The 
terms of the government loan, through the Troubled Assets Recovery 
Program, call for half of the payment to be made in company stock. An 
agreement along those lines was reached Feb. 23 between Ford and the 
UAW, with the expectation that Chrysler and GM will follow that pattern.

David Tyler, a Ford retiree in Ypsilanti, Mich., told the Detroit Free 
Press, ?It?s not good to tie the stock market in the VEBA plan. The 
volatility of the stock market is not in anybody?s control.?

Right now the Treasury?s guidelines are mathematically impossible. 
Initially, GM was to pay $24.1 billion into the plan, Ford $13.2 billion 
and Chrysler $8.8 billion. Half of GM?s obligations would be $12.05 
billion. Yet the company is not even worth one-tenth of that, based on 
current stock prices which on Feb. 20 hit a 74-year low of $1.55 a 
share. How would the stock value of Chrysler, owned by a private equity 
firm, even be determined?

GM wanted the union to go along with a deal even worse than what the 
loan terms called for, by not only reducing the VEBA contributions 
further but also spreading them out over 20 years. No wonder the UAW 
walked out on negotiations on Feb. 13.

This should dispel all illusions that there can be a united front of the 
UAW and the automakers to ?save the industry.?

UAW bargainers charged Chrysler and GM with trying to shortchange 
workers while favoring bondholders, with whom the companies are supposed 
to negotiate debt for equity. The bondholders were refusing to work out 
an agreement with the automakers until concessions from the UAW are 
finalized.

These moneylenders remain nameless and faceless, represented only by ?a 
person familiar with the committee representing the bondholders? that is 
?questioning whether the company?s viability plan goes far enough.? 
(Detroit Free Press, Feb. 19) Any number of high-stakes financial 
players could be part of this amalgam. Among them might be JPMorgan 
Chase, Citibank, Goldman Sachs or some other big bank?or perhaps private 
equity firms such as Cerberus. Jobs, pensions and health benefits are 
being held hostage by an anonymous ?committee.?

Union-haters clamor for bankruptcy
While the terms of the bailout represent a major attack on organized 
labor, many in the ruling class want to dispense with such democratic 
niceties as letting workers vote on taking concessions. Their preference 
is for the automakers to declare Chapter 11 bankruptcy, where a 
bankruptcy court judge would have the power to scrap union contracts and 
set terms favorable to the companies. Some even call for a consolidation 
or liquidation that would reduce the number of Detroit automakers to two.

Those pushing bankruptcy and/or mergers have included Sens. Mitch 
McConnell of Kentucky, Richard Shelby of Alabama and Bob Corker of 
Tennessee, as well as Thomas Donahue, president and CEO of the U.S. 
Chamber of Commerce. These sworn enemies of labor have had no trouble 
getting air time.

The Democratic ?friends of labor,? however, aren?t rushing to denounce 
the union-busting-by-bankruptcy scheme. Sen. Christopher Dodd and 
Congressman Barney Frank, on the Senate and House Banking Committees 
respectively, have both been friendly to the idea of a GM or Chrysler 
bankruptcy. The Feb. 23 Wall St. Journal reports that ?people involved 
in talks with senior Obama administration officials said that the 
administration believes that the option of Chapter 11 filings by the two 
automakers needs to be seriously considered.? Treasury officials are 
reportedly seeking out private lenders should debtor in possession 
financing be needed.

Can workers tip the scales in their favor?
To autoworkers on the shop floor the situation has reached a most 
critical point. Everything and everybody?the company, the government, 
the media, union leaders, even public opinion?seem poised against them. 
If they reject concessions the government will not loan out any more 
money and could call up the loans. The company will declare bankruptcy 
and possibly go out of business. Then again, bankruptcy could be 
imminent regardless.

Nothing is certain?except that GM, Ford, Chrysler and the elusive 
bondholders care only for profit. Out of fear, many autoworkers will go 
along with more givebacks while others reject them as a form of protest.

This was the case at New Process Gear in Syracuse, N.Y. Although workers 
had taken pay cuts averaging nine dollars an hour, they were told more 
reductions were necessary to keep the plant open. But with no guarantee 
that the plant would not close, UAW members voted the concessions down 
three to one.

UAW rank-and-filers picketed the Detroit Auto Show in January to oppose 
more concessions. On Feb. 16 Canadian Auto Workers members did likewise 
at the Toronto Auto Show.

The primary issue for workers is this: can they stop the restructuring 
in its tracks? Can they keep their plants open and halt the mass 
layoffs? How can the militants move their unions from protest to 
resistance? What can shift the balance of power? A strike now could 
actually help automakers reduce inventory. Yet not fighting back will 
only allow business as usual to continue.

There are examples for workers in fighting back, not only from the UAW?s 
proud past, but also the recent occupations of Republic Windows and 
Doors in Chicago, Waterford Crystal in Ireland and in 2007 the auto 
supplier Collins and Aikman in Ontario, Canada. Actually seizing company 
property can, even with a sluggish economy, give the workers leverage 
against the bosses.

As Sam Marcy wrote in ?High Tech, Low Pay,? such action ?can change the 
form of the struggle, take it out of its narrow confines and impart to 
it a broader perspective. In truth, it brings to the surface a new 
working-class perspective on the struggle between the workers and the 
bosses. It says in so many words that we are not tied to a 
one-dimensional type of struggle with the bosses at a time when they 
have the levers of political authority in their hands.?

Martha Grevatt is a 21-year member of UAW Local 122 in Twinsburg, Ohio. 
E-mail: mgrevatt at workers.org.

Articles copyright 1995-2009 Workers World. Verbatim copying and 
distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without 
royalty provided this notice is preserved.

http://www.workers.org/2009/us/uaw_0305/
-- 
*j a y r o t h e r m e l
*
jayroth6 at cox.net








From marvgandall at videotron.ca  Mon Mar  2 22:06:43 2009
From: marvgandall at videotron.ca (Marv Gandall)
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 00:06:43 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Now James Baker comes out in favour of pruning financial
	system
Message-ID: <F9EF030DF3E644758ED570205A8E2D4B@MARV>

How Washington can prevent ?zombie banks?
By James Baker
Financial Post
Published: March 1 2009

Beginning in 1990, Japan suffered a collapse in real estate and stock market
prices that pushed major banks into insolvency. Rather than follow America?s
tough recommendation ? and close or recapitalise these banks ? Japan took an
easier approach. It kept banks marginally functional through explicit or
implicit guarantees and piecemeal government bail-outs. The resulting
?zombie banks? ? neither alive nor dead ? could not support economic growth.

A period of feeble economic performance called Japan?s ?lost decade?
resulted.

Unfortunately, the US may be repeating Japan?s mistake by viewing our
current banking crisis as one of liquidity and not solvency. Most proposals
advanced thus far assume that, once confidence in financial markets is
restored, banks will recover.

But if their assumption is wrong, we risk perpetuating US zombie banks and
suffering a lost American decade.

Evidence ? a mountain of toxic assets, housing market declines, a sharp
economic recession, rising unemployment and increasing taxpayer exposure
through guarantees, loans, and infusion of capital ? strongly suggests that
some American banks face a solvency problem and not merely a liquidity one.

We should act decisively. First, we need to understand the scope of the
problem. The Treasury department ? working with the Federal Reserve ? must
swiftly analyse the solvency of big US banks. Treasury secretary Timothy
Geithner?s proposed ?stress tests? may work. Any analyses, however, should
include worst-case scenarios. We can hope for the best but should be
prepared for the worst.

Next, we should divide the banks into three groups: the healthy, the
hopeless and the needy. Leave the healthy alone and quickly close the
hopeless. The needy should be reorganised and recapitalised, preferably
through private investment or debt-to-equity swaps but, if necessary,
through public funds. It is time for triage.

To prevent a bank run, all depositors of recapitalised banks should be fully
guaranteed, even if their deposit exceeds the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation maximum of $250,000 (?197,000, ?175,000). But bank boards of
directors and senior management should be replaced and, unfortunately,
shareholders will lose their investment. Optimally, bondholders would be
wiped out, too. But the risk of a crash in the bond market means that
bondholders may receive only a haircut. All of this is harsh, but required
if we are ultimately to return market discipline to our financial sector.

This is not a call for nationalisation but rather for a temporary injection
of public funds to clean up problem banks and return them to private
ownership as soon as possible. As president Ronald Reagan?s secretary of the
Treasury, I abhor the idea of government ownership ? either partial or
full ? even if only temporary. Unfortunately, we may have no choice. But we
must be very careful. The government should hold equity no longer than
necessary to restructure the banks, resume normal lending and recoup at
least a portion of taxpayer investment.

After replacing bank management with new private managers, the government
should have no say in banks? day-to-day operations.

The FDIC can assist. Just this year, it has placed more than a dozen
American banks ? admittedly all small ? into receivership. We might also
consider setting up something akin to the Resolution Trust Corporation,
created in 1989 to liquidate the assets of failed savings and loans. The RTC
eventually disposed of almost $400bn in assets of more than 700 insolvent
thrifts.

To avoid bank runs and contain market disruption, the Treasury should
announce its decisions at one time. Washington will also need to co-ordinate
its actions with other major capitals, especially in western Europe and east
Asia. At best, this will encourage other countries to take similar steps
with their own banking systems. At a minimum, other governments can prepare
for the financial turmoil associated with the announcement.

This approach is not pretty or easy. It will cost a lot of money, with the
lion?s share coming from US taxpayers, at least in the short to medium term.
But the alternative ? a piecemeal pumping of more public money into
insolvent banks in the vague hope that things will improve down the road ?
could truly be historic folly.

Eventually our banks and economy will start to recover. When they do, we
would be wise to avoid another Japanese mistake ? raising taxes. To counter
mounting debt created by government stimulus packages, Japan increased taxes
in 1997. Consumption dropped and the country?s economy collapsed.

Our ad hoc approach to the banking crisis has helped financial institutions
conceal losses, favoured shareholders over taxpayers, and protected senior
bank managers from the consequences of their mistakes. Worst of all, it has
crippled our credit system just at a time when the US and the world need to
see it healthy.

Many are to blame for the current situation. But we have no time for
finger-pointing or partisan posturing. This crisis demands a pragmatic,
comprehensive plan. We simply cannot continue to muddle through it with a
Band-Aid approach.

During the 1990s, American officials routinely urged their Japanese
counterparts to kill their zombie banks before they could do more damage to
Japan?s economy. Today, it would be irresponsible if we did not heed our own
advice.

The writer was chief of staff and Treasury secretary for President Ronald
Reagan and secretary of state for President George H.W. Bush




From mlebowit at sfu.ca  Mon Mar  2 22:47:42 2009
From: mlebowit at sfu.ca (michael a. lebowitz)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 21:47:42 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] China's holdings of US Debt
Message-ID: <49ACC47E.10005@sfu.ca>

S. Artesian wrote:
>
> As for the Chinese holding's of US debt instruments-- these are not
> government reserves, unless the government decides to seize them. These
> are dollar instruments held on deposit for various clients, not the 
> least of
> which are multinational corporations. That China has such vast quantities
> of reserves as an index to its inability to create a domestic market.
>
> Keep in mind that none of the $587 billion Chinese stimulus plan involves
> liquidation of the the US debt instruments. China's economic power over
> the US is zero-- just like Japan's was zero despite its accumulated 
> dollar
> reserves.
    I haven't been able to follow this discussion closely. Have the  
holders of US Debt in China been identified? Do we know what portion was 
purchased by Chinese state banks as part of state policy, what portion 
is held  for them by capitalist exporters and, of the latter, what 
portion belongs to non-Chinese multinationals? This seems to be rather 
important information, and I haven't seen anything to date suggesting 
that a sigtnificant portion is held by multinationals. Your sources?
          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 mlebowit at sfu.ca  Mon Mar  2 22:59:13 2009
From: mlebowit at sfu.ca (michael a. lebowitz)
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 21:59:13 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] FROP and all that
Message-ID: <49ACC731.3020609@sfu.ca>

S. Artesian wrote:
> Certainly, Marx's work is unfinished, but so what? The importance of the
> FROP, and identification of that as the meaning of overproduction, of the
> overproduction of capital, exists separate and apart from the status of
> Marx's investigations.
If, by this, you mean that FROP may be valid and may explain 
developments in the period even though Marx himself might have thought 
otherwise, this is certainly a defensible position. It's important to 
recognise, though, that Marx's own discussion/critique of political 
economy's 'law' offers an inner explanation of the tendency based upon 
the assumption of uneven productivity increase--- a point that he 
consistently noted in the Grundrisse, the 1861-63 Economic Manuscripts 
and Vol. 3 of Capital.
          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 ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Mon Mar  2 23:05:31 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 01:05:31 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] China's holdings of US Debt
In-Reply-To: <49ACC47E.10005@sfu.ca>
References: <49ACC47E.10005@sfu.ca>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903022205s14183adek5342600ecafc3938@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 12:47 AM, michael a. lebowitz <mlebowit at sfu.ca> wrote:

>    I haven't been able to follow this discussion closely. Have the
> holders of US Debt in China been identified? Do we know what portion was
> purchased by Chinese state banks as part of state policy, what portion
> is held  for them by capitalist exporters and, of the latter, what
> portion belongs to non-Chinese multinationals?

Bank of China may hold huge US debt
(China Daily/Agencies)
Updated: 2008-07-17 09:20
Comments(0) PrintMail

Bank of China Ltd may own about $20 billion of debt issued by Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac, representing two-thirds of total holdings among
the six largest Chinese banks, according to CLSA Ltd.

The Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae investments would amount to about 2.6
percent of total assets at Bank of China, the nation's third-biggest,
CLSA analysts said yesterday in a note to clients. That compares with
0.09 percent at larger Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Ltd
(ICBC), they said.

Full: <http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/2008-07/17/content_6854442.htm>


From abuhartal at hotmail.com  Mon Mar  2 23:11:41 2009
From: abuhartal at hotmail.com (abu hartal)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 06:11:41 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] what way out
Message-ID: <COL101-W3CAB89256D284CBC26F48BBA60@phx.gbl>



my concern is that the anticipated profitability from new investments is so weak that whatever demand support government spending provides in hopes of encouraging new investment will be neutralized by the discouragement of investment due to expectations of future higher tax rates cutting into profits. In other words, the problem of extant overcapacity can't be solved without a new source of "Malthusian" demand, i.e. demand that does not create new supply and compound the problem of overcapacity; but such a new source of demand cannot be generated without compounding the supply problem, that is underinvestment. 
There does not seem to be any way out of the crisis by means of Keynesian macro-management. The question is how private investment will be revived. Fixing the banks will not be the solution;and the fixation on fixing the banks only speaks to the objective illusion that the interruption of circulation seems to be caused by a shortage of money. The resumption of private investmentwill depend on raising profitability by cutting capital costs (perhaps through a wave of employment destroying mergers and acquisitions) and raising the rate of exploitation (as a result of renegotiating wage contracts in a weak labor market). 
_________________________________________________________________
Show them the way! Add maps and directions to your party invites. 
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/products/events.aspx

From gary.maclennan1 at gmail.com  Tue Mar  3 01:39:34 2009
From: gary.maclennan1 at gmail.com (Gary MacLennan)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 00:39:34 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Crisis in Catholic Church continues
Message-ID: <b77157fa0903030039u179c4e9dlceaed982d542eea8@mail.gmail.com>

We seem to have reached something of a stale mate, in the crisis.  Kennedy
remains sacked and he is still ensconced in his church.

Behind the scenes and calling all the shots is the ultra-right head of the
Australian Catholic Church - Cardinal Pell. Pell was the numbers man for
Ratsinger in the recent papal elections.  So he is quite powerful. However
he is located in Sydney and that is perhaps why he has misjudged the mood in
Queensland.  Brisbane remains solidly behind the sacked priest Father
Kennedy and his congregation.

Pell has garnered support in the Sydney press from two leading far right
commentators -Miranda Divine and Christopher Pearson.  The latter is an
interesting case.  He has worked for the former conservative Prime Minister
of Australia - John Howard.  However he is also an avowed homosexual, I will
not call him gay, because that implies some commitment to emancipatory
politics. Having recently converted to Catholicism, Pearson now defends the
pope for including the racist Bishop Williamson within the church.  He has
also now denounced Kennedy on mainly theological grounds.  So we have the
illuminating spectacle of a homsexual man attacking a priest who supports
gays.  Roy Cohn would thoroughly approve.

Interestingly both Pearson and Divine attack the head of the church in
Brisbane Bishop Battersby for not acting against Kennedy sooner.

Battersby has in all probability been pushed into sacking Kennedy by the far
right - possibly the work of Opus Dei. This is a clip from the leaflet I
wrote on the crisis:


To grasp the significance of the attack on Kennedy we need to understand
that he and his congregation belong to the church of the
intellectuals.  Kennedy
is actively trying to fashion a faith which will transcend the antinomies of
capitalist modernity. He wants to confront capitalist values with ethical
norms that have been taken from the Sermon on the Mount ? Blessed are the
destitute? for they shall see God.  In Kennedy?s faith Jesus is the
outsider, the revolutionary, who opposes Empire and suffers a horrible death
because of that. But for Kennedy Christ?s sacrifice calls on all of us to
make a similar commitment in our search for the Kingdom of God on earth.

The church of the intellectuals is of course the church that the clerical
core fears the most.  This is the church-within which contains the seeds of
an alternative to the church of the Curia.  Ironically what Kennedy and his
community are doing, whether they realize it or not, is struggling to ensure
the survival of a church that is dying in front of our very eyes. Only
through the ordination of women, the abolition of celibacy and the adaption
of a sincere ?option for the poor? can the Roman Catholic Church hope to
survive. But the Church authorities will consider none of these things.

Go to http://stmaryssouthbrisbane.com/father-peter-sings for clip of Kennedy
singing at a recent  church concert. It gives some indication of the man's
charisma.

regards

Gary

From sartesian at earthlink.net  Tue Mar  3 03:20:35 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 05:20:35 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] China's holdings of US Debt
References: <49ACC47E.10005@sfu.ca>
Message-ID: <3671AA918A1747D6B73349F3DF840509@dmsthinkpad>

Michael,

Short note on this---  got no circadian rhythm these days.   I have not been 
able to identify the "holders,"  nor can I prove this-- US BEA, Economic 
Census, etc. do not release information on US corporate cash holdings 
abroad.  Trying to work my way through the Eurostat data to see if there's 
some info there.  And obviously, I have not found the info in China's 
statistical offerings.

I'm attempting to get a measure of the size of US corporate cash held abroad 
based on comparisons of total assets held abroad by US multinationals and 
their majority owned subsidiaries, net PPE, inventory valuations in relation 
to amounts held in the US

The basis of my contention is trade volumes between US-China, EU-China, 
Japan-China, and that the size of the reserves are too large to be 
exclusively "official" govt revenues, i.e. taxes, fees, licenses, 
import/export duties.

In addition, there is a "back door" bit of evidence that gives me a bit of 
confidence-- and that is Malaysia's response to the 1997-1998  crisis-- when 
to protect its reserves against capital flight, it strictly limited 
international capital movement by corporations and individuals.

So.... I think I'm right, and I'll argue as if I know I'm right, but... I 
cannot prove I'm right.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "michael a. lebowitz" <mlebowit at sfu.ca>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 12:47 AM
Subject: [Marxism] China's holdings of US Debt


> S. Artesian wrote:
>>
>    I haven't been able to follow this discussion closely. Have the
> holders of US Debt in China been identified? Do we know what portion was
> purchased by Chinese state banks as part of state policy, what portion
> is held  for them by capitalist exporters and, of the latter, what
> portion belongs to non-Chinese multinationals? This seems to be rather
> important information, and I haven't seen anything to date suggesting
> that a sigtnificant portion is held by multinationals. Your sources?
>          michael
>
> -- 
> Michael A. Lebowitz
> Professor Emeritus
> Economics Department
> Simon Fraser University
> Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5A 1S6



From sabocat59 at mac.com  Tue Mar  3 04:32:08 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 11:32:08 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] From Global Research: America's Fiscal Collapse
Message-ID: <2108698992-1236080024-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1804658081-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

I think this is a more representative quotation than that proffered by J. Wells:

(This is a "War Budget". The austerity measures hit all major federal spending programs with the exception of: ?1. Defence and the Middle East War: 2. the Wall Street bank bailout,??3. Interest payments on a staggering public debt.? The budget diverts tax revenues into financing the war. It? legitimizes the fraudulent transfers of tax dollars to the financial elites under the "bank bailouts".? The pattern of deficit spending is not expansionary. We are not dealing with a Keynesian style deficit, which stimulates investment and consumer demand, leading to an expansion of production and employment.? The "bank bailouts" (involving several initiatives financed by tax dollars) constitute a component? of government expenditure. Both the Bush and Obama bank bailouts are hand outs to major financial institutions. They do not not constitute a positive spending injection into the real economy.?Quite the opposite. The bailouts contribute to financing the restructuring of the banking system leading to a massive concentration of wealth and centralization of banking power.? A large part of the bailout money granted by the Us government will be transferred electronically to various affiliated accounts including the hedge funds.? The largest banks in the US will also use this windfall cash to buy out their weaker competitors, thereby consolidating their position. The tendency, therefore, is towards a new wave of corporate buyouts, mergers and acquisitions in the financial services industry.? In turn, the financial elites will use these large amounts of liquid assets (paper wealth), together with the hundreds of billions acquired through speculative trade, will be used to buy out real economy corporations (airlines, the automobile industry, Telecoms, media, etc ), whose quoted value on the stock markets has tumbled.? In essence, a budget deficit ( combined with massive cuts in social programs) is required to fund the handouts to the banks as well as finance defence spending and the military surge in the Middle East war. ) 

Looks like Chossudovsky and David Harvey are in agreement on the continuity of neoliberal economic policy.  We're facing a restructuring with increased consolidation and concentration of capital in fewer hands at the top. 

And the democrats are providing cover for this. I wonder what percentage of left liberals who voted for Obama still believe we are in for a new new deal?

Greg McDonald
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

From rfls12802 at blueyonder.co.uk  Tue Mar  3 05:03:10 2009
From: rfls12802 at blueyonder.co.uk (Paul Flewers)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 12:03:10 -0000
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
In-Reply-To: <mailman.12652.1236059268.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
References: <mailman.12652.1236059268.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <000901c99bf8$05c8cc10$115a6430$@co.uk>

'I suggest their attempt to drag Afghanistan into the 20th century was one
that all socialists and Marxists should properly describe as progressive.'

My late friend Al Richardson once said to me that he supported the Soviet
invasion of Afghanistan on the grounds that Moscow was trying to drag
Afghanistan into the feudal period.

Paul F






From sabocat59 at mac.com  Tue Mar  3 05:13:02 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 12:13:02 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Greek Union calls for 24 hour general strike
Message-ID: <1526502866-1236082477-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1188463300-@bxe1252.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>


   Greece's main labour body said Thursday it is calling a 24-hour general strike to protest more than 4,000 lay-offs that have swept the country in February.     Workers should not "pay the price of the financial crisis," the General Confederation of Greek Workers (GSEE) said in a statement. GSEE - which did not specify the date for the strike - said February's figure followed significant job losses between November and January when nearly 8,000 people lost their jobs.The body, representing around 600,000 workers, urged a general strike to demand job security, as well as improved union and salary rights for workers. Wednesday, a thousand demonstrators marched in central Athens after a smaller union collective, Adedy, called a strike in protest of the country's conservative government.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T


From christopher.hutch at gmail.com  Tue Mar  3 06:56:22 2009
From: christopher.hutch at gmail.com (Christopher Hutchinson)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 08:56:22 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] General Strike Comics: Fun in the Sun
Message-ID: <c81bf1a60903030556y40887ed1we7d080d2b2ac532f@mail.gmail.com>

Today's adventure takes us to the island of Guadeloupe...

www.GeneralStrikeComics.com <http://www.generalstrikecomics.com/>

keep Well,

christopher

From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Tue Mar  3 07:05:05 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 09:05:05 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Leftists Poised to Win Presidency in El Salvador
Message-ID: <908b689f0903030605x13a61af1j7703c2f3005e408@mail.gmail.com>

Leftists Poised to Win Presidency in El Salvador

After 17 years since the end of El Salvador's civil war, the leftist
Farabundo Mart? National Liberation Front (FMLN) is poised to
accomplish what its guerrilla predecessors never did: take over the
national government.  Reliable polls unanimously project that FMLN
candidate Mauricio Funes will win the March 15 presidential elections.
 What all this means for El Salvador -- and Latin America -- is the
subject of the new, in-depth report, "The 2009 El Salvador Elections:
Between Crisis and Change."

Full: <http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/sv020309.html>


From lueko.willms at t-online.de  Tue Mar  3 06:47:41 2009
From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (=?iso-8859-1?q?L=FCko_Willms?=)
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 14:47:41 +0100 (MEZ)
Subject: [Marxism] China's holdings of US Debt
In-Reply-To: <3671AA918A1747D6B73349F3DF840509@dmsthinkpad>
References: <49ACC47E.10005@sfu.ca>
	<3671AA918A1747D6B73349F3DF840509@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <000.60e40100fd34ad49.010@lws-media.de>

On Tue, 3 Mar 2009 05:20:35 -0500, S. Artesian wrote:

> The basis of my contention is trade volumes between US-China, EU-China, 
> Japan-China, and that the size of the reserves are too large to be 
> exclusively "official" govt revenues, i.e. taxes, fees, licenses, 
> import/export duties.

   The reserves held by the central bank are not just based on government 
revenues, on the contrary. What before was gold, is now the USD, mainly in 
the form of US government bonds. 

  You yourself quoted: 

On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 01:00:47 +0100, S. Artesian wrote:

> Luo Ping, a director-general at the China Banking Regulatory Commission, 
said after a speech in New York on Wednesday that China would continue to 
buy Treasuries in spite of its misgivings about US finances.
> 
> "Except for US Treasuries, what can you hold?" he asked. "Gold? You don't 
hold Japanese government bonds or UK bonds. US Treasuries are the safe 
haven. For everyone, including China, it is the only option."
> 
> Mr Luo, whose English tends toward the colloquial, added: "We hate you 
guys. Once you start issuing $1 trillion-$2 trillion [$1,000bn-$2,000bn] . . .we 
know the dollar is going to depreciate, so we hate you guys but there is 
nothing much we can do."


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

From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Tue Mar  3 07:10:49 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 09:10:49 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
In-Reply-To: <000901c99bf8$05c8cc10$115a6430$@co.uk>
References: <mailman.12652.1236059268.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
	<000901c99bf8$05c8cc10$115a6430$@co.uk>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903030610r73262fdfg821c29a264087ff0@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 7:03 AM, Paul Flewers <rfls12802 at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

> 'I suggest their attempt to drag Afghanistan into the 20th century was one
> that all socialists and Marxists should properly describe as progressive.'

NY Times reports today:

Idea of Afghan Women?s Rights Starts Taking Hold
By KIRK SEMPLE
Published: March 2, 2009

[...]

Until only a few years ago, the Afghan police would probably have
rewarded Mariam for her courage by throwing her in jail ? traditional
mores forbid women to be alone on the street ? or returning her to her
husband.

Instead, the police delivered her to a plain, two-story building in a
residential neighborhood: a women?s shelter, something that was
unknown here before 2003.

[...]

The problems they are confronting are deeply ingrained in a culture
that has been mainly governed by tribal law. But they are changing the
lives of young women like Mariam, now 17. Still wary of social stigma,
she did not want her full name used.

?Simply put, this is a patriarchal society,? said Manizha Naderi,
director of Women for Afghan Women, one of four organizations that run
shelters in Afghanistan. ?Women are the property of men. This is
tradition.?

Women?s shelters have been criticized as a foreign intrusion in Afghan
society, where familial and community problems have traditionally been
resolved through the mediation of tribal leaders and councils. But
women?s advocates insist that those outcomes almost always favor the
men.

[...]

Until the advent of the shelters, a woman in an abusive marriage
usually had nowhere to turn. If she tried to seek refuge with her own
family, her brothers or father might return her to her husband, to
protect the family?s honor. Women who eloped might be cast out of the
family altogether.

Many women resort to suicide, some by self-immolation, to escape their
misery, according to Afghan and international human rights advocates.

?There is a culture of silence,? said Mary Akrami, director of the
Afghan Women Skills Development Center, which opened the first women?s
shelter in Afghanistan six years ago. The majority of abuse victims,
she said, are too ashamed to report their problems.

As recently as 2005, some Afghan social organizations did not publicly
acknowledge that they were working in support of women?s rights, said
Nabila Wafez, project manager in Afghanistan for the women?s rights
division of Medica Mondiale, a German nongovernmental organization
that supports women and children in conflict zones.

?Women?s rights was a very new word for them,? Ms. Wafez said. ?But
now we?re openly saying it.? [...]

Full: <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/03/world/asia/03shelter.html?ref=asia>


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Tue Mar  3 07:28:50 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 09:28:50 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] China's holdings of US Debt
References: <49ACC47E.10005@sfu.ca><3671AA918A1747D6B73349F3DF840509@dmsthinkpad>
	<000.60e40100fd34ad49.010@lws-media.de>
Message-ID: <78B7FB807D254809A47AFF3C831DC2B0@dmsthinkpad>

Exactly.  But the reserves held by a central bank are reserves held by a 
bank that functions essentially as a bank, as THE bank to and of OTHER 
bankers.

So what are the origins of the reserves held by China's central bank?  What 
are the origins of the reserves that are used by all the banks to purchase 
US debt instruments?   What are the origins of the dollars that are used in 
the purchases?

Profits and cash reserves deposited by trading companies, manufacturers, 
subsidiaries of multinationals make up some portion of those reserves in 
those banks,  and the bankers, if the central bank in China functions as 
most central banks do, are obligated to assign a portion of all deposits to 
the central bank as a sort of minimum capital requirement.  Both the member 
and the central banks need to maintain a high degree of liquidity with these 
deposits in order to meet depositor demands for access to the currency for 
international transactions, trading, purchasing, tax payments etc.

I believe it is a mistake to simply, and immediately, identify these "demand 
deposits" as somehow "belonging"  to the Chinese govt.

No doubt,  no doubt whatsoever, that if the US for example had not stepped 
in to guarantee the GSE debt of FNMA and FMAC, the Chinese banks would have 
howled to the central bank, the central bank would have howled to its own 
government and directly AT the US govt., but I do not believe that the 
potential for howling gives China economic leverage over the US.  I think if 
the US hadn't stepped in... well, looked what happened after Lehman Bros was 
allowed to sink......

My point is NOT that the US is in great shape, just as it has never been 
that China will replace the US-- but rather that the shape the US is in is 
indicative, more than indicative, determining, of the shape of the whole 
network of international capitalism, and if the money is the universal 
equivalent, then the US and its monetary instruments represent the black 
hole in this universe, quite capable of sucking everything and everyone into 
its deadstar gravity.

The international framework of exchanges may fray-- more than may--  
absolutely will fray, with protectionism etc. growing; alliance will 
collapse-- I don't things look particularly good for the EU, but these 
things, all of them will occur to capitalism as a system and not because an 
imbalance in one sector is going to shove aside an old player to make way 
for a new player.

Anyway, I really am compelled to induce part of this analysis as I can't get 
hold of any sold numbers of cash assets held by multinationals in China--  
but I think it makes sense.  Of course, I would say that, wouldn't I?


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "L?ko Willms" <lueko.willms at t-online.de>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 8:47 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] China's holdings of US Debt


On Tue, 3 Mar 2009 05:20:35 -0500, S. Artesian wrote:

> The basis of my contention is trade volumes between US-China, EU-China,
> Japan-China, and that the size of the reserves are too large to be
> exclusively "official" govt revenues, i.e. taxes, fees, licenses,
> import/export duties.

   The reserves held by the central bank are not just based on government
revenues, on the contrary. What before was gold, is now the USD, mainly in
the form of US government bonds.




From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Mar  3 07:55:59 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:55:59 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] The strange tale of Iran and Israel
Message-ID: <49AD44FF.4010005@panix.com>

http://mondediplo.com/2009/02/05iran
Imagined affinities, imagined enmities
The strange tale of Iran and Israel

The early Zionists never believed they would be accepted in the Arab 
world and pinned their hopes on the non-Arab periphery instead, 
particularly Iran. Israel reversed that policy by opening talks with a 
weakened Arafat in the early 1990s. But peace with the Palestinians did 
not happen and the ?radicals? grew more radical
by Alastair Crooke

?We had very deep relations with Iran, cutting deep into the fabric of 
the two peoples,? said a high-ranking official at the Israeli foreign 
ministry just after the Iranian Revolution in 1979. Israeli (and US) 
officials then saw it as madness to view Iran as anything other than a 
natural interlocutor. Thirty years later, western policy-makers, and 
particularly Israelis, see Iran as a growing threat. Could this fear be 
based on a misreading of Iran?s revolution?

David Ben-Gurion, Israel?s first prime minister, did not see Israel as 
part of the Middle East, but as part of Europe. From 1952, Ben-Gurion 
repeated that although Israelis were sitting in the Middle East, this 
was a geographical accident, for they were a European people. ?We have 
no connection with the Arabs,? he said. ?Our regime, our culture, our 
relations, is not the fruit of this region. There is no political 
affinity between us, or international solidarity? (1).

Ben-Gurion called for a concerted effort to persuade the United States 
that Israel could be a strategic asset in the Middle East. But President 
Dwight Eisenhower (1953-61) repeatedly declined Israel?s entreaties, 
believing that the US was better placed to manage US interests 
independently of Israeli assistance.

As a result of these rebuffs, Ben-Gurion evolved the concept of the 
?alliance of the periphery? which aimed to balance the vicinity of 
hostile Arab states by forming alliances with Iran, Turkey and Ethiopia. 
It was an attempt to strengthen Israeli deterrence, reduce Israel?s 
isolation and add to its appeal as an ?asset? to the US.

In parallel, Ben-Gurion developed another idea: the ?alliance of the 
minorities?. He argued that the majority of the inhabitants of the 
Middle East were not Arab, referring not only to the Persians and the 
Turks, but also to religious minorities such as the Jews, Kurds, Druze 
and (Christian) Maronites of Lebanon. The aim was to foster nationalist 
aspirations among minorities in order to create islands of allies in the 
ocean of Arab nationalism.

Iran emerged against this background in the late 1950s as a ?natural 
ally? of Israel. In Treacherous Alliance  (2) Trita Parsi has traced the 
cooperation with the Shah, such as the joint training and arming of 
Kurdish insurgents between 1970 and 1975 that was intended to weaken 
Iraq. Parsi also notes the empathy between Israel and Iran on account of 
the cultural superiority felt by the two peoples towards the Arabs ? 
even though the supposed affinity had its limits. Israelis were puzzled 
and irked at the Shah?s insistence on keeping the relationship quiet; 
Israel wanted it publicly acknowledged.

The sense of close affinity persisted beyond the Iranian Revolution, and 
prompted even hard-headed Israeli politicians of the right ? including 
prime minister Menachem Begin ? to reach out to the new Iranian 
leadership. Ayatollah Khomeini?s pragmatism in foreign policy was read 
by Israelis as evidence that the revolution had been an aberration. 
Iran, surrounded by Arab hostility, understood only too well its need 
for Israeli friendship ? and the technological advantages it could 
bestow on its friends. Yossi Alpher, a former Mossad official, noted 
that the periphery doctrine was so ?thoroughly ingrained? in the Israeli 
mindset that it had become ?instinctive? (3). It was out of this 
conviction that Israel inveigled the US to sell weapons to Iran in the 
mid-1980s, a prelude to the Iran-Contra scandal (4).

Begin?s electoral victory in 1977 entrenched a more radical vision than 
that of the Labour Party, that of the Revisionist Zionist leader, 
Vladimir Jabotinsky. The latter had argued in his seminal ?Iron Wall? 
article in 1923 that there could never be agreement with the Arabs. 
Begin shared Jabotinsky?s view that ?only when there is no longer any 
hope of getting rid of us... will they drop their extremist leaders,? 
and moderates would emerge who would ?agree to mutual concessions? and 
could then benefit from the Zionist ?five hundred year cultural advance? 
on them.
Relations with the periphery declined

The right tried to put the strategy of the ?alliance of the minorities? 
into practice. In 1982, Ariel Sharon invaded Lebanon with the aim of 
ousting the Palestine Liberation Organisation and establishing a 
friendly Christian Maronite hegemony in Beirut ? so inflicting a 
devastating defeat on Syria, a major pillar of Arabism. It proved a 
miscalculation, for it precipitated the decline of the Maronites and 
encouraged Shia mobilisation in the south and in the Bekaa valley, from 
which a formidable new enemy, Hizbullah, emerged.

At the same time as this failure in Lebanon, Israel?s relations with the 
periphery declined ? at least with Iran (which made a strategic alliance 
with Syria, a key Arab enemy). This was because of a misperception by 
Israel, shared by the US: the Iranian Revolution was seen in the West as 
no more than a discontinuity in the western narrative of a historical 
progression from backwardness to western-style secular modernity. It was 
an aberration, a reaction against modernity that would be corrected over 
time. The ideological basis to the revolution was seen as ?hollow?; 
?pragmatists? would soon pull it back on to the path of western material 
progress, the only course that made sense in the western optic. This is 
why both Israel and the US have been so preoccupied by signs of 
pragmatism and an obsessive hunt for ?moderates?. And whenever Iran?s 
revolutionary leadership has shown any signs of pragmatism in its 
foreign policy, it reinforced the US and Israeli view that this would 
lead eventually to an alliance 
with Israel.

In reality, it was the West?s materialist ?modernity?, on which Israel?s 
doctrine was justified, which repelled Iranian leaders the most. But 
though they were at odds with the US and Israel over their vision of 
society and their efforts to spread a culture of secular, materialist 
and free-market society across the region (which many Iranians saw in 
turn as archaic, and even colonialist), they did not want to defeat 
Israel militarily. The revolution was not conceived with an aggressive 
regional ambition; it did not threaten Israel or the US in conventional 
military terms.

In 1988, after a messy, debilitating war lasting eight years, Iran 
reached a ceasefire with Iraq. But the years 1990-2 saw two events that 
changed the outlook for the whole region: the Soviet Union imploded and 
Saddam Hussein was defeated in the first Gulf war (1990-1). These events 
removed both the Russian threat to Iran and Iraq?s threat to Israel. It 
left Iran and Israel as unchallenged rivals for leadership and 
pre-eminence in the region, and it saw the US emerge as a unipolar, 
unchecked power.

Israel?s main fear was to be seen as a liability by the US during the 
Gulf war, rather than a friend. At the same time the prospect of Iran 
emerging as a pre-eminent regional power threatened Israel?s hegemony by 
opening the possibility of a US-Iranian rapprochement that risked 
eclipsing Israel?s relationship with the US. More seriously, Israel 
risked its military deterrence: its survival depended on its military 
supremacy, which a resurgent Iran might remove.

When the Labour government under Yitzhak Rabin, elected in 1992, decided 
to drop the strategy of wooing the periphery and instead opted to make 
peace with the Arabs, this was a radical reverse of strategy. This shift 
placed Israel and Iran on opposite sides in the new equation, and the 
change was as intense as it was unexpected: ?Iran has to be identified 
as Enemy No 1,? Yossi Alpher, at the time an adviser to Rabin, told the 
New York Times four days after Bill Clinton?s election victory. And 
Shimon Peres, the other most senior Labour figure, warned the 
international community in an interview in 1993 that Iran would be armed 
with a nuclear bomb by 1999 (5).
Exaggerated nuclear threat?

But many inside the Clinton administration felt the Iranian threat was 
exaggerated, as did many within the Israeli establishment. Shlomo Brom, 
a senior member of the Israeli intelligence apparatus, told Parsi 
mockingly: ?Remember, the Iranians are always five to seven years from 
the bomb. Time passes, but they are always five to seven years from the 
bomb.? In 2009, the Iranians are, according to US intelligence 
estimates, still ?five to seven years away from the bomb? (6).

Israel, therefore, began to cut a deal with Yasser Arafat, greatly 
weakened by the Gulf war. Rabin and Peres then used the demonisation of 
Iran as a lever with which to divert the US Jewish Lobby: the Lobby 
could focus on the existential threat from Iran rather than turn their 
anger on Israel?s leaders for betraying Jabotinsky by supping with the 
enemy ? Arafat and the Arabs.

The US was devising a parallel strategy too: a realignment of 
pro-western Arab states against enemies lying beyond the periphery ? 
barbarians bearing down on the values, institutions and liberties of 
western civilisation, led by Iran. US power had become the instrument 
that would ?spell the death knell for the Iranian revolution? as William 
Kristol, a leading US conservative, wrote in May 2003. The defeat of 
Iran had become the means to deliver a double blow to the Arab and 
Muslim psyche as well as to the Islamist resistance. The Arabs would 
become docile, and the Middle East would succumb, like so many dominoes.

Not surprisingly, despite Iran?s cooperation with Washington during the 
war in Afghanistan (2002) and Iraq (2003), its attempts to reach a 
so-called ?grand bargain? with the US were all rebuffed or undercut by 
senior members of the Bush administration. The 2003 proposal to open 
talks with the US that appeared to acknowledge US security concerns ? 
including the demand for an end to Iran?s support for Hizbullah and 
Hamas and to its nuclear programme, and recognition of Israel ? has 
become a part of legend. But to assume that pressure caused Iran to 
offer to sever its links to the resistance and come to terms with Israel 
is to misread Iran?s intent. Iran?s offer was a nuanced reformulation of 
an earlier proposal for partnership and a discussion of all issues in 
contention. To interpret the 2003 episode as a signal that ?pressure 
works?, and that more pressure on Iran will yield these and further 
concessions, may lead to a catastrophic error of policy.

The US swing towards a Manichaean vision of pro-western moderation 
versus Islamist extremism has taken regional polarisation well beyond 
Ben-Gurion?s more modest objective of creating a balance of forces and 
deterrence. In their aim to break the resistance throughout the Muslim 
world to a secular, liberal vision for the future, the US and its 
European allies have instead provoked mass mobilisation against their 
own project, as well as radicalisation and hostility to the West.


From Jscotlive at aol.com  Tue Mar  3 07:59:42 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 09:59:42 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
Message-ID: <d49.3eb9af36.36de9fde@aol.com>

 
Ruthless:
 
NY Times reports today:

Idea of Afghan Women?s Rights Starts Taking  Hold
By KIRK SEMPLE
Published: March 2, 2009

Until only a few years  ago, the Afghan police would probably have
rewarded Mariam for her courage by  throwing her in jail ? traditional
mores forbid women to be alone on the  street ? or returning her to her
husband.

Reply:
 
So what are we saying now - that the invasion of Afghanistan in  service to 
US imperialism is bearing fruit?
 
 


From Jscotlive at aol.com  Tue Mar  3 08:02:14 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 10:02:14 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
Message-ID: <d65.33309cee.36dea076@aol.com>

 
Paul F:
 
My late friend Al Richardson once said to me that he supported the  Soviet
invasion of Afghanistan on the grounds that Moscow was trying to  drag
Afghanistan into the feudal period.

Reply:
 
Moscow wasn't trying to drag Afghanistan anywhere. It was an attempt to aid  
the existing Afghan govt fight off a US-backed insurgency in the countryside, 
an  insurgency made up of religious obscurantists intent on taking Afghan  
society back to the 7th century.
 
The record shows that the Afghan govt had to request the help of the  Soviets 
11 times before they finally intervened.
 
The record also shows the tragic consequences of the failure of  this 
invervention and the success of the insurgency.
 
As I wrote in my original article:
 
 
Upon taking power, the new government introduced a program of reforms  
designed to abolish feudal power in the countryside, guarantee freedom of  
religion, 
along with equal rights for women and ethnic minorities. Thousands  of 
prisoners under the old regime were set free and police files burned in a  gesture 
designed to emphasise an end to repression. In the poorest parts  of  
Afghanistan, where life expectancy was 35 years, where infant mortality  was one in 
three, free medical care was provided. In addition, a mass literacy  campaign was 
undertaken, desperately needed in a society in which ninety percent  of the 
population could neither read nor write. 

The resulting rate of progress was staggering. By the late 1980s half of  all 
university students in Afghanistan were women, and women made up 40  percent 
of the country's doctors, 70 percent of its teachers, and 30 percent  of its 
civil servants. In John Pilger's 'New Rulers Of The World' (Verso,  2002), he 
relates the memory of the period through the eyes of an Afghan  woman, Saira 
Noorani, a female surgeon who escaped the Taliban in 2001. She  said: "Every 
girl could go to high school and university. We could go where  we wanted and 
wear what we liked. We used to go to cafes and the cinema to  see the latest 
Indian movies. I tall started to go wrong when the mujaheddin  started 
winning. 
They used to kill teachers and burn schools. It was sad to  think that these 
were the people the West had supported."  




From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Tue Mar  3 08:07:39 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 10:07:39 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
In-Reply-To: <d49.3eb9af36.36de9fde@aol.com>
References: <d49.3eb9af36.36de9fde@aol.com>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903030707v6ee64ea9m89f05692601c4b75@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 9:59 AM,  <Jscotlive at aol.com> wrote:
>
> Ruthless:
>
> NY Times reports today:
>
> Idea of Afghan Women?s Rights Starts Taking ?Hold
> By KIRK SEMPLE
> Published: March 2, 2009
>
> Until only a few years ?ago, the Afghan police would probably have
> rewarded Mariam for her courage by ?throwing her in jail ? traditional
> mores forbid women to be alone on the ?street ? or returning her to her
> husband.
>
> Reply:
>
> So what are we saying now - that the invasion of Afghanistan in ?service to
> US imperialism is bearing fruit?

Unless the report contains lies, it seems that the lot of women in
Afghanistan is improving (somewhat) compared to their situation a few
years ago.

I said nothing more, and nothing less, than the above sentence.

Do you have any evidence that the lot of Afghan women, by and large,
is deteriorating?

Marxists need to begin with empirical reality as a starting point.


From Jscotlive at aol.com  Tue Mar  3 08:19:12 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 10:19:12 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
Message-ID: <d01.4c8b2dae.36dea470@aol.com>

Ruthless:
 
Unless the report contains lies, it seems that the lot of women  in
Afghanistan is improving (somewhat) compared to their situation a  few
years ago.

Reply:
 
Yes, it seems they now have shelters they can go to in order to escape  being 
murdered. At this rate they'll soon they'll be in miniskirts driving  
Porsches.
 
Ruthless:

Do you have any evidence that the lot of Afghan women, by  and large,
is deteriorating?
 
Reply:
 
I have plenty of evidence that Afghanistan has been bombed and invaded in  
order to get a pipeline through the country from the Caspian Sea, part of a US  
objective to attain global hegemony in service to a mode of production  
predicated on profit regardless of the human, social, or environmental  cost.
 
Women's rights in the half of the country controlled by  warlords are of 
course of minor importance.  
 
Ruthless:

Marxists need to begin with empirical reality as a  starting point.

Reply:
 
Marxists need to begin with a concrete analysis of concrete situations and  
how that concrete situation fits in with the objective of achieving the  
socialist transformation of any given society. Bush advanced the bombing and  
invasion of Afghanistan largely on the basis of liberating women. It would  appear 
that you hold the same view.

From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Mar  3 08:40:30 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:40:30 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Canada schools blasted for ban on anti-Israel 'apartheid'
	poster
Message-ID: <49AD4F6E.7040306@panix.com>

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1067277.html
Canada schools blasted for ban on anti-Israel 'apartheid' poster
By Cnaan Liphshiz, Haaretz Correspondent

Two Canadian universities came under criticism this week for banning a 
poster which is seen to be depicting Israelis as child-killers and 
accusing Israel of apartheid. Brazilian politicians and scholars, 
meanwhile, lambasted a recent student exchange accord between Tel Aviv 
University and a Catholic academy from Sao Paulo.

The posters from Canada, which were banned from Ottawa University and 
Carleton University, are advertisements for an annual series of events 
labeled as "Israeli Apartheid Week," due to begin on Monday, March 1. 
The "Israeli Apartheid Week" tradition began in 2005 in Toronto, 
spreading since to other campuses and cities.

The poster, circulated by pro-Palestinian activists, depicts a gunship 
with the word "Israel" on it firing a missile at a boy wearing a 
kaffiyeh and holding a teddy bear. In explaining the ban, Ottawa 
University said: "All posters approved must promote a campus culture 
where all members of the community can play a part in a declaration of 
human rights."

The poster has roused controversy in Canadian and international press 
and on campuses, where supporters of Israel said it was unacceptably 
portraying Israelis as child-killers - an old anti-Semitic theme.

One student from the Ottawa university, who preferred their names be 
withheld from this article, told Haaretz that the decision to ban the 
posters was "a blatant violation of free expression for students 
speaking out on human rights."

Activists also circulated letters and emails with phone numbers for the 
universities' directors, urging students to call and protest. 
Pro-Palestinian activist Jessica Carpinone argued that Carleton 
officials have given "no valid reason for banning the poster other than 
that it's a controversial issue."

B'nai Brith Canada executive vice-president Frank Dimant praised the 
universities' action but said the colleges should ban the week's entire 
"hate fest."

"Israel should be treated as an apartheid state"

Commenting on the student exchange agreement between the Brazilian 
university and Tel Aviv University, Valter Pomar, foreign relations 
secretary for Brazil's ruling party, the PT, told Haaretz that "now is 
not the time for such accords."

The accord was the first signing of a cooperation initiative between a 
Brazilian and an Israeli university since Israel's operation in Gaza.

Pomar added: "It would be proper to apply to the Israeli government the 
same treatment that the apartheid government of South Africa had 
received," said Pomer, who stressed he was speaking in his private 
capacity and not for the party.

Last month, Pomar cosigned an official announcement by the party 
accusing Israel of "state terrorism" and comparing its actions in Gaza 
to Nazi blitzes.

Brazilian priest Jos? Oscar Beozzo, a prominent theologian from Sao 
Paulo, also indicated his reservations about the exchange deal, citing 
"Israel's condemnable massacre in Gaza."


From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Tue Mar  3 08:44:43 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 10:44:43 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
In-Reply-To: <d01.4c8b2dae.36dea470@aol.com>
References: <d01.4c8b2dae.36dea470@aol.com>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903030744r76c2f897nead171815279c800@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:19 AM,  <Jscotlive at aol.com> wrote:

> Bush advanced the bombing and
> invasion of Afghanistan largely on the basis of liberating women. It would ?appear
> that you hold the same view.

No, I do not approve of bombing.

However, if women can escape being murdered by going to a shelter, I
don't see how any Marxist can possibly think that's not a good thing.


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Tue Mar  3 08:54:08 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 10:54:08 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
References: <d01.4c8b2dae.36dea470@aol.com>
	<908b689f0903030744r76c2f897nead171815279c800@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <929217EF98F6412E877A43438B2DF895@dmsthinkpad>

Everytime Ruthless starts down this road, we all know where it's going--  
right into the lap of liberalism, a philosophy of moral abstaction that 
capitulates to the world of the concrete, so... women can now go into 
shelters, or rather--- SOME women can go into SOME shelters to escape the 
attacks of the ultra-orthodox, while else where  NONE of the women can go 
ANYWHERE to escape the attacks of the US.

No one is arguing that women should be attacked, but the presence of the US 
has everything to do with restoring the conditions that allowed the attacks 
to resume; the presence of the US has everything to do with attacking women 
and men indiscriminately with military power; the presence of the US has 
everything to do with preventing the advance of a society that will prevent 
ALL attacks on women.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ruthless Critic of All that Exists" <ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 10:44 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Afghanistan


On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:19 AM,  <Jscotlive at aol.com> wrote:




From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Tue Mar  3 09:10:42 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 11:10:42 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
In-Reply-To: <d01.4c8b2dae.36dea470@aol.com>
References: <d01.4c8b2dae.36dea470@aol.com>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903030810h667ffda6hbf8e3032413346f4@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 10:19 AM,  <Jscotlive at aol.com> wrote:

> I have plenty of evidence that Afghanistan has been bombed and invaded in
> order to get a pipeline through the country from the Caspian Sea

Out of curiosity: you were saying earlier that the Soviets weren't
imperialists and didn't stand to gain from invading Afghanistan, were
there just to help, etc.

Why do you think that the same strategic objective ("getting a
pipeline through the country from the Caspian Sea") was not a factor
in Soviet strategic thinking and a reason for their interest in
Afghanistan?


From borhyaenid at yahoo.com  Tue Mar  3 09:55:18 2009
From: borhyaenid at yahoo.com (Suresh)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 08:55:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Shuffling the deck chairs in Cuba
Message-ID: <764880.60489.qm@web62103.mail.re1.yahoo.com>


Raul continues his consolidation of power. Carlos Lage and Felipe Perez Roque have been demoted from their positions in the council of ministers and foreign affairs, respectively. This follows the decline in influence of Ricardo Alarcon. As with Deng's out-maneuvering of Hua Guofeng, whatever reforms occur or don't occur in the coming years, we'll be able to refer back to incidents of political machination such as this.

Links:
<http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2009/march/lun2/10cambio-i.html>
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7920047.stm>



      


From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Mar  3 10:13:00 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 12:13:00 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Max Blumenthal at CPAC
Message-ID: <49AD651C.2060506@panix.com>

Funny stuff...

http://www3.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-03-02/the-wildest-moments-from-cpac/


From Dbachmozart at aol.com  Tue Mar  3 10:21:15 2009
From: Dbachmozart at aol.com (Dbachmozart at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 12:21:15 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Choosing Atrocity: Israel,
	America and the Strangling of Gaza
Message-ID: <cfa.51541ded.36dec10b@aol.com>



 
Empire Burlesque - Chris Floyd
 
 
_Choosing Atrocity: Israel, America and the Strangling of Gaza_ 
(http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/empire_burlesque/~3/jiVAn5PGLQ0/1713-choosing-atrocity-israe
l-america-and-the-strangling-of-gaza.html)   
Posted:  03 Mar 2009 04:58 AM PST 

Although Professor Juan Cole is lamentably jejune in _his abiding trust in 
Barack Obama's good intentions in Iraq_ 
(http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/03/02/obama_iraq/index.html) ,  he has been doing yeoman service _in 
covering the ongoing atrocity in Gaza_ 
(http://www.juancole.com/2009/03/cairo-donor-conference-net-5-bn-for.html) . The inhuman  conditions in the world's largest 
open-air concentration camp have slipped  almost entirely from notice in the 
Western press.

At most one sees a few  comforting headlines or crawl-lines about "pledges of 
aid" from the world  community for poor Gaza, which seems to have suffered 
some sort of unavoidable  natural disaster, like a flood or earthquake. 
Forgotten is the fact that Gaza  was ravaged in a relentless, murderous military 
assault that deliberately  targeted heavily populated areas and numbered hundreds 
of children among its  many innocent victims. Forgotten is that the attack. 
fueled with American  money and American weapons, was a clear act of "collective 
punishment," one of  the most heinous of the war crimes perpetrated by the 
Nazis against Jews and  non-Jews alike. Indeed, the Israeli government was quite 
candid that the attack  was designed as a collective punishment; they were 
admirably honest about  adopting this policy of the Nazis as their own. 

After many days of  horror, many children and other non-combatants 
slaughtered, the attack finally  came to an end -- apparently as a gesture toward Barack 
Obama, to spare him the  embarrassment of finally having to comment on the 
massacre being committed by a  staunch U.S. ally: something he had adroitly 
avoided throughout his  president-electship, preferring instead to hide behind the 
specious nostrum of  "one president at a time in foreign policy" -- a 
"principle" which, oddly  enough, did not prevent him from commenting at length on 
any number of other  foreign policy issues. But the end of military operations 
was by no means the  end of the collective punishment atrocity -- which, 
indeed, began before the  attack itself, with the barbaric, Warsaw Ghetto-like 
blockade of essential goods  and services imposed by Israel on its captives in 
Gaza. 

Not only did  these sanctions leave ordinary Gazans even more stricken and 
weakened -- and  vulnerable -- than usual, it also prevented civilians from 
fleeing the carnage.  With the American-backed dictatorship in Egypt giving its 
silent collusion, the  borders of the Gaza cauldron were completely sealed. 
There was literally nowhere  for civilians to go in the midst of the invasion; 
they could not even flee to a  desperate, hellish exile in a foreign land, as 
more than two million Iraqis did  to escape the similar American invasion of 
their country. This enclosure in  Gaza was also a deliberate strategy, designed to 
heighten the terror against  civilians and "break" the Palestinians 
psychologically. 

Now, as Cole --  nearly alone among commentators with a mainstream audience 
-- has frequently  noted, the Israelis are continuing their economic 
stranglehold on Gaza, refusing  to let in some of the most basic materials needed to 
rebuild the shattered  region and sustain even the barest modicum of a decent 
human life for the  captives there. While Saudi Arabia -- yet another savagely 
repressive  dictatorship supported by American guns and money -- joins the 
United States and  other countries in making a great show of pledging billions in 
aid to Gaza, the  Israeli government -- soon to be in even more virulently 
rightwing hands --  throws up roadblocks to staunch the flow.

But of course, it is not just  Israel who is holding up the distribution of 
aid. It is also one of the great  showy donors themselves: the United 
Progressive Liberal Humane States of  America. As Cole notes:





[Hillary] Clinton arrives in Israel from a donors  conference in Cairo that 
raised $5 bn. Unfortunately, Israel won't let most of  it in, since it is 
trying to half-starve the Palestinians into submission. And  the only realistic 
conduit for that amount of money is the Palestinian  Authority bureaucracy in 
Gaza, which was taken over by Hamas when it won the  January, 2006 elections. But 
the US and Israel refuse to deal with Hamas and  won't let the money go 
through bureaucracies it controls (all the relevant  ones). Washington and Tel Aviv 
will probably try to use the money to bolster  Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah faction 
within the Palestinian authority. What they  can't understand is that 
Palestinians have excellent BS meters, and don't  support people they view as corrupt 
collaborators. The frantic search for the  'good Palestinian' only creates 
unpopular failures over  time.


Cole  also points to _a revealing  article by Helena Cobban_ 
(http://justworldnews.org/archives/003420.html) . Although he provides a useful link, the 
piece is  worth quoting more fully. In her piece, Cobban talks to Professor Efraim 
Inbar,  a key adviser of incoming Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu, 
and learns  that the post-attack strangling of Gaza is indeed a deliberate act 
of collective  punishment. Cobban writes:



In a telling op-ed published in The Jerusalem Post in  early February, Prof. 
Efraim Inbar, an adviser to Likud leader Binyamin  Netanyahu, argued that, 
"The developing international campaign to reconstruct  Gaza is strategic folly. 
It is also unlikely to be effective. And, under  current circumstances, it is 
also immoral."

The article strongly supported a policy of punishing all  the people of Gaza 
for the actions of Hamas.

I interviewed Inbar here in Jerusalem yesterday.  Referring to his article 
and to today's donors' conference, he admitted that  the international community 
might (misguidedly) insist on rebuilding Gaza--  "but we can always slow the 
process down."

Indeed until now Israel, which is the "occupying power"  in the Gaza Strip, 
has complete control over the passage of all freight into  or out of the Strip. 
Since the Gaza war it has used that power to prevent the  entry of just about 
all the basic materials required for physical rebuilding:  cement, rebar, 
glass, piping, etc. So it seems that the outgoing Olmert  government has already 
been working hard to prevent or slow down the  rebuilding of Gaza.


The  Independent, _in another piece linked by Cole_ 
(http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/the-pasta-paper-and-hearing-aids-that-could-threate
n-israeli-security-1635143.html) , details some of the sand that  Israel is 
pouring into the gears of the aid machine:



The total number of products blacklisted by Israel  remains a mystery for UN 
officials and the relief agencies which face long  delays in bringing in 
supplies. For security reasons such items as cement and  steel rods are banned as 
they could be used by Hamas to build bunkers or the  rockets used to target 
Israeli civilians. Hearing aids have been banned in  case the mercury in their 
batteries could be used to produce chemical  weapons.

Yet since the end of the  war in January, according to non-government 
organisations, five truckloads of  school notebooks were turned back at the crossing 
at Kerem Shalom where goods  are subject to a $1,000 (?700) per truck 
"handling fee".

Paper to print new textbooks for Palestinian schools was  stopped, as were 
freezer appliances, generators and water pumps, cooking gas  and chickpeas. And 
the French government was incensed when an entire water  purification system 
was denied entry. Christopher Gunness, the spokesman for  the UN agency UNRWA 
responsible for Palestinian refugees, said: "One of the  big problems is that 
the 'banned list' is a moving target so we discover  things are banned on a 
'case by case', 'day by day'  basis."

Human Rights Watch executive  director Kenneth Roth said: "Israel's blockade 
policy can be summed up in one  word and it is punishment, not security." 


Again,  the Israelis are not being coy about their intentions. They are 
seeking, says  Inbar, not only to punish the Palestinians but also to "train" them 
-- to break  them to the yoke, like oxen or mules, in other words. As Cobban  
reports:



Inbar is the Director of the Begin-Sadat Center for  Strategic Studies at 
Bar-Ilan University. In another part of yesterday's  interview he talked about 
the need to maintain the extensive series of  roadblocks and other 
movement-control mechanisms deep inside the West Bank  with which Israel controls its 2.3 
million Palestinians. Those roadblocks  currently number more than 600, and 
have completely paralyzed the ability of  West Bankers to build anything like a 
functioning economy.

Inbar described the West Bank roadblocks as another part  of the effort to 
punish, or "train", the Palestinians. The US and other  governments have urged 
Israel to reduce their number. But Inbar told me, "The  Americans may push us 
on this, and we may remove one or two roadblocks.. We'll  just play with the 
Americans!"


They  will "play with the Americans" indeed. And the Americans are happy to 
be played  with. It's all a game for the elites in both countries, as they 
serve each  other's mutual interests for their agendas of domination. As Cobban  
notes:



In some cases, like that of the US, this intention of  giving reconstruction 
aid now seems bizarre and hypocritical, given that  Washington could have 
stopped Israel's assault on Gaza in its very first  hours, and thereby prevented 
just about all of the horrendous damage  Gazans have suffered....


Yes.  The attack certainly could have been stopped -- before it started, or 
at any  time thereafter -- with a word from the Bush Administration. Even a 
critical  word from the incoming president, riding a wave of worldwide popularity 
-- and  making clear that there would be serious consequences when he took 
office if the  atrocity did not halt immediately -- would probably have been 
equally effective.  But of course the Bush Administration did not want the attack 
to stop; and  neither did the president-to-be. 

Here again, I will pay Barack Obama  much more respect than many of his 
followers do. I don't believe that he looked  at the attack on Gaza, felt to his 
very soul that it was an horrific atrocity,  but then refused to denounce it out 
of some sort of cynical political  calculation. (Which is the usual 
explanation offered by his acolytes when he  does something unseemly.) I believe that, 
like most good, decent, honorable,  upright, serious members of the American 
Empire's power elite, he did  not think the attack on Gaza was an atrocity at 
all. It was simply a grim  necessity, the kind of thing that essentially good 
and altruistic nations like  the United States and Israel have to do sometimes, 
even if, unfortunately, it  does produce some "collateral damage" here and 
there. But just like the last  great Democratic secretary of state said about 
the 500,000 children killed by  America's Gaza-like blockade of Iraq for years 
on end, these grimly necessary  unfortunate actions are "worth it.." 

Just as Bush could have ended the  attack with a word, so too could Obama end 
the deliberate degradation and  destruction of the Palestinians in Gaza. He 
could force the Israelis to lift the  blockade tomorrow -- today -- this very 
hour -- simply by threatening  to cut off the massive flow of American aid that 
Israel is dependent on. The  fact that he will not do that -- or anything 
like that -- is, like the Israeli  infliction of Nazi-like collective punishment 
on Gaza, a very deliberate  choice.
 
<_http://www.chris-floyd.com/component/content/article/1713-choosing-atrocity-
israel-america-and-the-strangling-of-gaza.html_ 
(http://www.chris-floyd.com/component/content/article/1713-choosing-atrocity-israel-america-and-the-strangli
ng-of-gaza.html) >
 
 
 
**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1219957551x1201325337/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID
%3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62)

From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Mar  3 12:05:31 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 14:05:31 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] In response to Mick Armstrong
Message-ID: <49AD7F7B.702@panix.com>

Tom O?Lincoln, a member of Socialist Alternative in Australia, 
graciously invited me to submit a critique to their magazine Marxist 
Interventions of SA leader Mick Armstrong?s book From little things big 
things grow: strategies for building revolutionary socialist 
organizations. As many of you know, I regard groups such as Socialist 
Alternative claiming to be based on ?Leninist? principles fundamentally 
mistaken on organizational questions. While I find little to differ with 
the comrades on programmatically (except for the ?Russian questions?), I 
think that they are going about building a revolutionary party in the 
wrong way. While most of my efforts over the years have been devoted to 
reorienting their rivals on the Australian left, the Democratic 
Socialist Perspective, I welcomed the chance to get a hearing in their 
magazine, something the DSP has been averse to despite the polemic 
against me in its own pages some years ago.

full: 
http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2009/03/03/in-response-to-mick-armstrong/




From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Mar  3 13:20:00 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 15:20:00 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Just received from the war preacher
Message-ID: <49AD90F0.8070106@panix.com>

This statement was recently drafted by the president of Bard College in 
order to answer inquiries in regard to Joel Kovel. Since my professional 
role in the evaluation prevents me from referring to its specifics, a 
fact that Joel Kovel knew when he defamed me, I use it to reply to 
inquiries, as well.

Professor Kovel was not fired, and most certainly not for his political 
views, which do not strike us at Bard as novel. In consultation with 
faculty, Bard elected not to renew Professor Kovel?s contract because, 
like all colleges, it faces severe fiscal constraints and is doing 
everything it can to preserve the employment of its full-time faculty. 
After fifteen years of serving as the full-time occupant of a 
non-tenured endowed chair, he voluntarily assumed part-time status in 
2004. At that time he received a five-year contract, with the 
understanding that after those five years the college reserved the right 
to renew his position on a year-to-year basis. He knew it was possible 
that his position might not be renewed after the 2008-2009 academic 
year. Professor Kovel enjoyed a fine and productive career at Bard for 
more than twenty years. We are sorry for and astonished at his 
allegations, which have no basis in fact.

Bard recently became the first American institution of higher education 
to collaborate in a dual-degree program with a Palestinian university. 
If you would like to read about our partnership with Al-Quds in Abu Dis, 
please see: 
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/world/middleeast/15quds.html. Our goal 
is to improve the Palestinian education system.

?

Bruce Chilton
Bernard Iddings Bell Professor of Religion
Bard College
Annandale, New York 12504
telephone: 845 758 7335
fax: 845 758 7628


From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Tue Mar  3 14:03:36 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:03:36 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Max Blumenthal at CPAC: an even batter MB interview at
 CPAC
Message-ID: <49AD9B28.8060001@gmail.com>

http://www3.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-03-02/the-wildest-moments-from-cpac/

Interview with Christian zionist.


From bbauerly at gmail.com  Tue Mar  3 14:25:33 2009
From: bbauerly at gmail.com (brad bauerly)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 16:25:33 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis
Message-ID: <55868ddf0903031325w257e3264y5d60f01e8a513d6e@mail.gmail.com>

Sorry, I sort of started this string and then alot fell on my plate and I
have been unable to keep up.  I will try and get some more detailed
responses out this evening.

S. Artesian (and everyone else)- I agree about the problems of long term
FROP analysis (Brenner, Foster and Magdoff) on both empirical and
theoretical grounds.  Moseley claims mid-2006 was not only the peak rate of
profit for the recent era but also for the whole last century.  If that is
true then a couple of questions follow:  First, can this really be claimed
to be the cause of the crisis and not a symptom.  Second, what role did the
commodities bubble play in both causing the FROP and/or how did the FROP in
manufacturing cause the bubble. Third, how is it related to what you said
about the resolution of the 2001 almost crisis.  Lastly, is there a way to
stitch together an analysis that would include the changes in finance
to FROP theory.  How did the developments of finance alter the possible
options of capital going forward from the mid-1990's (or earlier) to feed
into the crisis potential which ultimately led to the situation we are in
now (for surely this is not just another FROP crisis but is much bigger in
breadth and depth).

TTFN,

Brad


-- 
Brad A. Bauerly
PhD Candidate,
Political Science
York University
Toronto, Canada
647-345-2072
bauerly at yorku.ca

From sartesian at earthlink.net  Tue Mar  3 14:27:19 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 16:27:19 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] China's holdings of US Debt
References: <49ACC47E.10005@sfu.ca><3671AA918A1747D6B73349F3DF840509@dmsthinkpad><000.60e40100fd34ad49.010@lws-media.de>
	<78B7FB807D254809A47AFF3C831DC2B0@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <7D2DDB5D3C174178AF1BCB6D45189B1E@dmsthinkpad>


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Tue Mar  3 14:43:55 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 16:43:55 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis
References: <55868ddf0903031325w257e3264y5d60f01e8a513d6e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <DC97D8B173854F8199C95BD3CC2D5A77@dmsthinkpad>

Holy smoke, Batman,  how much time do I get to answer all those questions? 
Don't you think if I knew the answer to all that  I'd be rich and 
good-looking instead of just good-looking?

Seriously,  this is going to take some time.  I don't know about 2004-2006 
being the time of their, the bourgeoisie's, life, but I certainly think we 
have to look at what the tremendous price inflation in oil did to the rest 
of the economy, the function it played in "steering" profit to the oil 
majors, and I think that price inflation was the sort of culmination to 
overproduction,  an attempt to offset the decline in rate of return.

Can I link all these facets to one "unified force theory of the capitalist 
universe"?   Geez, I don't know.  I can't even find out how much cash IBM 
has socked away in Europe and Asia.

Michaels L &P,  D OC, Matt Russo, John, Imani, Waistline, Paul Flewers, 
Steve Palmer,  Shane, Jim Farmelant.. anybody care to take a crack at this?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "brad bauerly" <bbauerly at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 4:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis




From lueko.willms at t-online.de  Tue Mar  3 12:39:37 2009
From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (=?iso-8859-1?q?L=FCko_Willms?=)
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 20:39:37 +0100 (MEZ)
Subject: [Marxism] China's holdings of US Debt
In-Reply-To: <78B7FB807D254809A47AFF3C831DC2B0@dmsthinkpad>
References: <49ACC47E.10005@sfu.ca>
	<3671AA918A1747D6B73349F3DF840509@dmsthinkpad>
	<000.60e40100fd34ad49.010@lws-media.de>
	<78B7FB807D254809A47AFF3C831DC2B0@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <000.40480e007987ad49.015@lws-media.de>

On Tue, 3 Mar 2009 09:28:50 -0500, S. Artesian wrote:

> but I do not believe that the 
> potential for howling gives China economic leverage over the US. 

  well, the big danger is if China would try and sell as much US government 
bonds as they can -- but since that would result in a fall of the value of the 
USD in relationship to other currencies, it would hurt the Chinese themselves. 
The USA are the only state which can really create money by printing it, and 
thus force the whole world to back up her debts. 

> My point is NOT that the US is in great shape, just as it has never been 
> that China will replace the US-- but rather that the shape the US is in is 
> indicative, more than indicative, determining, of the shape of the whole 
> network of international capitalism, and if the money is the universal 
> equivalent, then the US and its monetary instruments represent the black 
> hole in this universe, quite capable of sucking everything and everyone 
> into its deadstar gravity. 

  That's empire. The fall of the exchange rate of USD per Euro from around 
1.50 USD/EUR last summer to now around 1.26 USD/EUR is an indication of 
the capital flows. "Investors" prefer to buy US government bonds instead of 
German ones or even Latvian...

  And that happens not only in the relationships of the USA to the 
semi-colonial nations, like e.g. Argentina, but also between the various 
countries of the European Union. Just the other day there was a EU 
conference in Brussels called by the Czech EU president. The richer nations 
again rejected any common plan and even to raise funds by a common EU 
bond; no each and everyone by itself. Especially the German government is 
said to have opposed a common EU approach. This makes life quite miserable 
for especially the East European countries, who find it much more difficult to 
raise funds to bail out their economy. And this hits not only the former 
"socialist" countries, but also Austria which with its proclaimed neutrality had 
traditionally been the bridge into the Comecon countries, and whose banks 
have lent heavily into East Europe. 


Comradely yours, 


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

From marvgandall at videotron.ca  Tue Mar  3 15:12:55 2009
From: marvgandall at videotron.ca (Marv Gandall)
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 17:12:55 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] China's holdings of US Debt
References: <49ACC47E.10005@sfu.ca>
	<3671AA918A1747D6B73349F3DF840509@dmsthinkpad>
	<000.60e40100fd34ad49.010@lws-media.de>
	<78B7FB807D254809A47AFF3C831DC2B0@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <A1C6FA796D8A42A5831A85B8A76EDF01@MARV>

Artesian asks:

So what are the origins of the reserves held by China's central bank?

MG: The central bank purchases USD's from Chinese commercial banks with
Chinese yuan. The central bank then (1) buys US bonds and other securities
with these USD's to maintain a favourable exchange rate with the USD to
support it's exporters and (2) To guard against inflation induced by the
"excess" yuan it injects into the system, the central bank simultaneously
"sterilizes" it's USD purchases by withdrawing the excess yuan from the
system through the issuance and sale of Chinese government bonds to the
banks.

Art: What are the origins of the reserves that are used by all the banks to
purchase US debt instruments?

MG: The commercial banks are not permitted to buy US debt instruments or
other USD-denominated investment purposes on their own because of Chinese
currency controls.  The State Administration for Foreign Exchange (SAFE) has
gradually relaxed controls to allow importers to accumulate dollars, euros,
and yen to pay foreign suppliers for goods and services. But the use of FX
for the private purchase of US government debt or other investments remains
tightly regulated, as does the repatriation of profits.

The currency controls force the banks, in effect, to buy Chinese rather than
US government debt, as described above. Because of the currency controls,
the Chinese, as you know, have never been burnt by hot money flows in and
out of the country of the sort which brought other East Asian nations,
Russia, Argentina, etc. to their knees a decade ago.

Art: What are the origins of the dollars that are used in the purchases?

MG: Chinese and foreign exporters deposit their foreign earnings into the
commercial banks which, as indicated above, are then mostly passed on to the
central bank.

Art: I believe it is a mistake to simply, and immediately, identify these
"demand deposits" as somehow "belonging"  to the Chinese govt.

MG: Since the central bank effectively appropriates the USD's from the banks
in exchange for yuan and controls the disposition of these USD's into global
capital markets, it would not a mistake to identify these private bank
deposits as "somehow 'belonging' to the Chinese government."

Art: No doubt,  no doubt whatsoever, that if the US for example had not
stepped in to guarantee the GSE debt of FNMA and FMAC, the Chinese banks
would have howled to the central bank, the central bank would have howled to
its own government and directly AT the US govt., but I do not believe that
the potential for howling gives China economic leverage over the US.  I
think if the US hadn't stepped in... well, looked what happened after Lehman
Bros was allowed to sink...

MG: There was, in fact, much reported "howling" behind the scenes from China
to the Bush admin when there were suggestions circulating in the US that the
"implicit" guarantee of these bonds might not be honoured. The USG
reportedly guaranteed Freddie and Fannie debt primariily under heavy
pressure from the Chinese government. Since then, the Chinese have lightened
up on both agency debt and long Treasuries. They have actually increased
their purchases of USD securities, but have switched to much shorter
maturities because they feel too exposed to a crash at the long end.

We can disagree over whether China's USD holdings give it any economic
leverage over the US. I believe they're are in a much more advantageous
position as a creditor nation than countries which have been in hock to the
US - as China once was before its revolution.

[...]

Art: Anyway, I really am compelled to induce part of this analysis as I
can't get hold of any sold numbers of cash assets held by multinationals in
China-- but I think it makes sense.  Of course, I would say that, wouldn't
I?

MG: Like M. Lebowitz and L. Willms, I have never seen anything anywhere to
support your hunch that a portion of the multinationals' FX earnings are
held "on account" by the Chinese central bank.

As indicated above, my clear understanding is that these earnings are held
on account by the Chinese commercial banks until they are exchanged for yuan
up by the PBC which then converts the USD's into US debt. The balance of
USD's on deposit in the commercial banks are converted into yuan by the
multinationals to pay their domestic suppliers and workers. A portion
probably sits on their books as "retained earnings".  Chinese government
estrictions aside, the US mulitnationals are reluctant to repatriate their
export earnings for tax reasons, and suggestions by the Obama administration
that it may close this profitable tax loophole are being strongly resisted
by the corporations, for whom an increasing percentage of their profits have
been earned by their subsidiaries overseas.

Also worth noting is that until the recent crisis collapsed trade everywhere
multinationals in China were selling more into the expanding Chinese home
market than they were abroad. As exporters, they have been very happy to see
an undervalued yuan which makes their products more competitively priced in
Europe, NA, and Japan. They have consequently been strong supporters of
Chinese government purchases of USD's in order to keep down the value of the
yuan. They would have no self-interest in sequestering USD's from the
central bank which are otherwise being used in defence of a cheaper yuan.

Walmart is perhaps the most notable example of a company supporting the
PBC's use of dollars earned by the country's exporters. It has led the
opposition to calls - mainly from congressional Democrats - to label China a
"currency manipulator" and to otherwise pressure the Chinese government to
revalue the yuan upwards.





From Waistline2 at aol.com  Tue Mar  3 15:13:36 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 17:13:36 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis
Message-ID: <c76.41477662.36df0590@aol.com>

I am not scared, having read the "Eight Theses." The theoretical problem  for 
me was "displacement."  I know what the word means and its context  which 
roughly = "return to profitability." 
 
Here's the problem: each cycle of return to profitability is done on the  
basis of sinking another layer of the proletariat lower and lower. Here is where  
I get pissed and lose it. Now the temporary workforces hovers between 30 and 
40  million and the crisis has not been "displaced" at all, but placed, 
shifted onto  the backs of the proletariat as is the case in every breach in 
circulation. Then  there is always the open and hidden destruction of productive 
forces or "over  capacity." 
 
So as I regain my posture and quiet the little gray matter that is still  
preserved, I think about the fact that two people have to work today to realize  
the economic standard of living I attained working in the plants as a  young 
man in the 1970's. Why is that? Here displacement means increase in the  
density of dead labor, revolutionizing the machinery of society and the  cheapening 
of all commodities including the commodity labor, brought and sold as  labor 
power. 
 
"But Mr. communists that is the big picture and should not be used to  
describe this crisis?" 
 
"What! Big picture  . . . if events accelerate any faster 50% of the  country 
will be out of work before the year is over." 
 
Now I'm pissed again because overaccumulation of capital does not mean "to  
much" but rather capital fleeing from low to high areas of return. In the 80  
year language of Marxism "seeking maximum profit." It is the seeking of maximum 
 profit that is the impulse for the emergence and creation of the new  
non-banking international financial infrastructure. This structure does not  come 
into existence as just a "good idea" or a preferred policy of capital  but is a 
natural outgrown of the revolution in the mode of production . . .  . 
directly. 
 
The unified force theory of Marxism was already stated as residing in the  
mode of production; the progress of industry which Marx writes about from a  
thousand and one directions; the conflict between productive forces and social  
relations. 
 
How does this unified theory explains crisis, this crisis? 
 
Wrong Question! 
 
The question is "how is this crisis to be explained in the context of the  
unified theory!" 
 
Now I am pissed again . . . not at this thread but all this social  
democratic crap in the ideological sphere. Real social democracy would not be  trying 
to save a bunch of damn assets, but rather would seek price controls and  
raising wages, as the way to stabilize the bottom, rather than see the bottom in  
temporal crap like housing. 
 
I am so pissed and could bite a brick in half. 
 
Raise the consuming capacity of the masses? Great . . . then raise it.  Raise 
wages. Establish the bottom Mr. Social Democrat! 
 
Nationalize Banks . . .? OK, I get mad again. 
 
Those are not banks but decidedly non-banking institutions! 
 
Want to know what a bank is. Look on the window outside and if it has an  
FDIC sticker on it is a bank. 
 
Sorry, I am not in a good mood. 
 
The bourgeoisie messed up my lemonade, with those thick skinned lemons. You  
have to squeeze a thousand of them to get a good pitcher of lemonade. 
 
WL. 


In a message dated 3/3/2009 4:44:20 P.M. Eastern Standard  Time, 
sartesian at earthlink.net writes:

Can I link all these facets to one  "unified force theory of the capitalist 
universe"?   Geez, I don't  know.  I can't even find out how much cash IBM 
has socked away in  Europe and Asia.

Michaels L &P,  D OC, Matt Russo, John, Imani,  Waistline, Paul Flewers, 
Steve Palmer,  Shane, Jim Farmelant.. anybody  care to take a crack at this?
 
**************Need a job? Find employment help in your area. 
(http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=employment_agencies&ncid=emlcntusyelp00000005)


From bob.morris at gmail.com  Tue Mar  3 16:04:28 2009
From: bob.morris at gmail.com (Bob Morris)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 15:04:28 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Shuffling the deck chairs in Cuba
In-Reply-To: <764880.60489.qm@web62103.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
References: <764880.60489.qm@web62103.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <275dee160903031504v6c359c5ob5b685e1274ddfc9@mail.gmail.com>

The Havana Note has more on the changes (they are friendly towards Cuba and
have long called for an end to the embargo.)

CUBA: Big Changes in Castro's Guard
http://thehavananote.com/2009/03/cuba_big_changes_in_castros_gu.html

What has happened is that Raul Castro, now President of Cuba, has sacked his
brother's closest followers and advisers in government.

Both Vice President Carlos Lage and Foreign Minister Felipe Perez Roque have
been given pink slips. These were Fidel's most obvious heir apparents and
his chief ideological spear carriers in the next generation of Cuban
political leadership.

This is one of those historical pivot points in normally opaque (often
Communist) regimes that will be remembered for generations.

Raul Castro seems fully in control now -- and he's done with ideology.

On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Suresh <borhyaenid at yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> Raul continues his consolidation of power.

From cbcox at ilstu.edu  Tue Mar  3 16:11:02 2009
From: cbcox at ilstu.edu (Carrol Cox)
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 17:11:02 -0600
Subject: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis
References: <55868ddf0903011127l5107f182x94f5ba62a6c8267b@mail.gmail.com>
	<B528EBBCF2C7437D92EA83D9BFBBFED2@dmsthinkpad>
	<C9804B7E51E24B3890C13D4B6EC8DF50@dmsthinkpad>
	<49AC5835.E6E58579@ilstu.edu>
	<9F3392BA418F43CE86096D2E2B78EA34@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <49ADB906.A706ACCE@ilstu.edu>



"S. Artesian" wrote:
> 
> There is nothing  "least thought through" in Marx's discussion of this
> facet.

Socialists waste an awful lot of time worrying the FROP, and I'm not
going to try to decide it here. But I will add a couple points about the
context in which it appears.

C3 is the "least thought through" because the mss. was the oldest (first
written) of the three volumes of Capital, and never revised and
rethought as was the case with Vols. 1 & 2. Moreover, as Engels himself
mentions those mss. were a mess. Finally, it's not wholly clear how much
is Marx and how much is Engels trying to make something coherent out of
a seriously unfinished set of documents. See

http://www.oekonomiekritik.de/303Engels%20Edition%20Engl.htm

Here is the abstract:

Abstract: Since Engels published the third volume of Capital out of
Marx's bequest, it was asked how strongly he had intervened into Marx's
text. Marx's original manuscript, firstly published in 1993, shows that
Engels made nearly on each page textual modifications, which he did not
indicate. A considerable number of these modifications concerns not only
stylistical aspects. Especially, the meaning of crisis theory and the
theoretical status of credit theory were shifted. The text published by
Engels is not a mere edition of Marx's manuscript, but a far-reaching
adaptation, which can no longer be considered as volume III of Marx's
Capital. Any future discussion will have to refer to Marx's original
text.

"Engels' Edition of the Third Volume of Capital and Marx's Original
Manuscript," by Michael Heinrich 
[Science and Society vol. 60, no.4, Winter 1996/97, pp. 452-466]

Aside from the shaky theoretical basis of FROP, I'm a bit disturbed by
what seems to be this list's obsessive concern with proving over and
over again that the world economy is in deep shit at the present time.
What is gained by all that? One interpretation of all these fwds from
NYT & FT 7 other sources is that no one on the list has the least
fucking idea of how to go out and organize against capitalism so they
content themselves with proving to each other that bad thikngs are
happening.

Carrolk



From pieinsky at igc.org  Tue Mar  3 16:21:52 2009
From: pieinsky at igc.org (Jay Moore)
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 18:21:52 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Shuffling the deck chairs in Cuba
In-Reply-To: <764880.60489.qm@web62103.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
References: <764880.60489.qm@web62103.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <49ADBB90.8070907@igc.org>

Let's hope not.  So what do people know about the replacements?  Perez 
Roque was the person always pointed to as the main man in the next 
generation of Cuban revolutionaries when the issue was brought up about 
who would succeed Fidel et al.  This is where Walter might actually be 
helpful if we were still on the useful (and had a modicum of critical 
distancing from the official Cuban line).
jay

Suresh wrote:
> Raul continues his consolidation of power. Carlos Lage and Felipe Perez Roque have been demoted from their positions in the council of ministers and foreign affairs, respectively. This follows the decline in influence of Ricardo Alarcon. As with Deng's out-maneuvering of Hua Guofeng, whatever reforms occur or don't occur in the coming years, we'll be able to refer back to incidents of political machination such as this.
>
> Links:
> <http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2009/march/lun2/10cambio-i.html>
> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7920047.stm>
>
>
>
>   


From lnp3 at panix.com  Tue Mar  3 16:33:56 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 18:33:56 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Shuffling the deck chairs in Cuba
In-Reply-To: <49ADBB90.8070907@igc.org>
References: <764880.60489.qm@web62103.mail.re1.yahoo.com>
	<49ADBB90.8070907@igc.org>
Message-ID: <49ADBE64.3030305@panix.com>

Jay Moore wrote:
> Let's hope not.  So what do people know about the replacements?  Perez 
> Roque was the person always pointed to as the main man in the next 
> generation of Cuban revolutionaries when the issue was brought up about 
> who would succeed Fidel et al.  This is where Walter might actually be 
> helpful if we were still on the useful (and had a modicum of critical 
> distancing from the official Cuban line).
> jay
>

A reminder. Cuba News has all the stuff that Walter would have posted 
here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/messages


From pieinsky at igc.org  Tue Mar  3 16:48:31 2009
From: pieinsky at igc.org (Jay Moore)
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 18:48:31 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Shuffling the deck chairs in Cuba
In-Reply-To: <49ADBE64.3030305@panix.com>
References: <764880.60489.qm@web62103.mail.re1.yahoo.com>	<49ADBB90.8070907@igc.org>
	<49ADBE64.3030305@panix.com>
Message-ID: <49ADC1CF.3000208@igc.org>

Looks from this newly posted "Al Jazeera" article the two removed 
official are being accused of backsliding on the values of the 
Revolution, not necessarily for not being "pragmatic" enough as that 
article from the Havana Note was drumbeating for: 
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2009/03/200933201657408489.html 
jay


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Tue Mar  3 17:03:51 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 19:03:51 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] China's holdings of US Debt
References: <49ACC47E.10005@sfu.ca><3671AA918A1747D6B73349F3DF840509@dmsthinkpad><000.60e40100fd34ad49.010@lws-media.de><78B7FB807D254809A47AFF3C831DC2B0@dmsthinkpad>
	<A1C6FA796D8A42A5831A85B8A76EDF01@MARV>
Message-ID: <EF630AA8F14949BD87A8C183A6E02C2E@dmsthinkpad>


I  don't think China is a bit different from Brazil, or Russia, in this 
regard-- qualitatively; quantitatively, it has more rigorous capital 
controls then Russia, but I think the "inability" of the Brazilian Central 
Bank to deploy its "foreign reserves" without having recourse to the 
uncapped currency swap line provided by the Fed tells us much about how 
unready that bank was/is  to go "all in" and decide that the US is a burden 
rather than a support.

As I said, I have no doubt that China howled about the GSE's-- you know 
what?  So did the US banks,  the US mutual funds, etc, and the US banks even 
howled afterwards, so much so that the Fed had to amend its requirements 
about tangible capital, since the GSE stock,  if I can remember that far 
back, was a certified asset of bank tangible capital... but I think this 
attributing the actions of the US to the leverage of China is a little bit 
like those stories of Ohlmert pulling Bush off the podium to rein in Rice--  
supermarket tabloid political economy-- which is the highest expression of 
political economy, by the way.

Yes, that is exactly how the central bank in China gets its reserves--  
purchasing the dollars from the commercial banks which are deposited there 
by trading firms, manufacturers, shippers, etc. etc.  And if profit 
repatriation is also tightly controlled, as it is, then in essence those 
deposits can only be regarded as the property of either the CB or the 
government if they are expropriated.   So talk about howling-- you'll see 
plenty of it, and from right inside China, if the central bank decides to 
liquidate its dollar holdings.  Again, that is a possibility, but it is a 
possibility only if, and as, the entire network of capitalism disintegrates.

Yes, China has never been burnt by money flows, and it is that-- that 
"market" in currency that the US would love to have to use against China. 
If the US debt instruments give China any leverage, it is the leverage to 
resist just that demand from the US.

Yes, for Wal-Mart, establishing a domestic market, an expanding domestic 
market in China is critical.  Problem is, China can't do that-- not with 700 
million people tied to agriculture; with the average land-holding less than 
.5 acres.  It can't convert that into a domestic market without triggering a 
revolution.

China will find out, or perhaps already knows, that its holdings of US debt 
instruments give it about as much leverage over the US economy as Japan's 
did the day before the Plaza Accords.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Marv Gandall" <marvgandall at videotron.ca>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 5:12 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] China's holdings of US Debt


> 



From elishastephens at hotmail.com  Tue Mar  3 17:04:59 2009
From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 16:04:59 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Changes in Cuba
Message-ID: <COL112-W2045F1C838D42E6AC23E6BD7A70@phx.gbl>


Not in English yet that I can find, but here's what Fidel had to say in Spanish:

 http://www.juventudrebelde.cu/cuba/2009-03-03/cambios-sanos-en-el-consejo-de-ministros/

I changed the title of the thread because of the pejorative connotation of "Shuffling the Deck Chairs." Cuba is not the Titanic, and as far as I can tell its economy is suffering less from the current crisis than the economies of the capitalist powers.


Reflexiones del compa?ero Fidel

Cambios sanos en el Consejo de Ministros



El l?der de la Revoluci?n afirma que los nuevos
ministros que acaban de nombrarse fueron consultados con ?l, a pesar de
que ninguna norma obligaba a los que los propusieron, a esa conducta,
ya que ?l renunci? hace rato a las prerrogativas del poder. Actuaron
sencillamente como revolucionarios aut?nticos que llevan en s? mismos
la lealtad a los principios



03 de marzo de 2009 14:55:43 GMT





Con motivo de los cambios en el seno del Ejecutivo, algunas agencias cablegr?ficas se rasgan las vestiduras.
Varias de ellas hablan o se hacen eco de rumores "populares" sobre
la sustituci?n de los "hombres de Fidel" por los "hombres de Ra?l".

La mayor?a de los que fueron reemplazados nunca los propuse yo. Casi
sin excepci?n llegaron a sus cargos propuestos por otros compa?eros de
la direcci?n del Partido o del Estado. No me dediqu? nunca a ese oficio.

Jam?s subestim? la inteligencia humana, ni la vanidad de los hombres.

Los nuevos ministros que acaban de nombrarse fueron consultados
conmigo, a pesar de que ninguna norma obligaba a los que los
propusieron, a esa conducta, ya que renunci? hace rato a las
prerrogativas del poder. Actuaron sencillamente como revolucionarios
aut?nticos que llevan en s? mismos la lealtad a los principios.

No se ha cometido injusticia alguna con determinados cuadros.

Ninguno de los dos mencionados por los cables como m?s afectados,
pronunci? una palabra para expresar inconformidad alguna. No era en
absoluto ausencia de valor personal. La raz?n era otra. La miel del
poder por el cual no conocieron sacrificio alguno, despert? en ellos
ambiciones que los condujeron a un papel indigno. El enemigo externo se
llen? de ilusiones con ellos.

No acepto que se mezcle ahora la chismograf?a con el Cl?sico de
Pelota que est? pr?ximo a comenzar. Dije bien claro que nuestros
atletas de b?isbol eran j?venes de primera l?nea y hombres de patria o
muerte.

Como ya expres? otras veces regresaremos con el escudo o sobre el escudo.

Venceremos porque sabemos y podemos combinar algo que solo pueden
hacer hombres libres, y sin due?os, no los jugadores profesionales.

Leonel Fern?ndez me contaba ayer por la tarde que los excelentes
peloteros profesionales dominicanos no deseaban participar en esas
competencias, estar?an ausentes con dolor para el pueblo que los vio
nacer.

Ch?vez, ignora todav?a por qu? sus magn?ficos pitchers y bateadores ser?n derrotados por nuestros atletas.

El equipo cubano que este a?o medir? sus fuerzas con los mejores
profesionales de Estados Unidos y Jap?n en las Grandes ligas, es mucho
m?s fuerte y est? mejor entrenado que el de hace tres a?os.

Muchos de ellos son ya veteranos a pesar de su juventud. Ninguno de
los hombres que hicieron el equipo qued? en casa, excepto por razones
de salud.

Asumo la total responsabilidad por el ?xito o el rev?s. Las victorias ser?n de todos; la derrota no ser? jam?s hu?rfana.

i Patria o Muerte! iVenceremos!

Fidel Castro Ruz



 Marzo 3 de 2009

11 y 32 a.m.



_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live?: Life without walls.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_allup_1a_explore_032009

From elishastephens at hotmail.com  Tue Mar  3 17:06:20 2009
From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 16:06:20 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Changes in Cuba
Message-ID: <COL112-W6FB04ED93CC439BB89370D7A70@phx.gbl>


Found it in English:
 http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2009/march/mar3/10reflex-i.html


							
							
							Reflections of Fidel

							Healthy 
							changes within the Council of Ministers
							(Taken from 
							CubaDebate)
							
							IN response to changes made within the executive, 
							certain news agencies are throwing up their hands in 
							horror.

							
							Several 
							of them are saying or echoing "popular" rumors about 
							the substitution of "Fidel?s men" for "Ra?l?s men."

							The majority of those who have been replaced were 
							never proposed by me. Almost without exception, they 
							were proposed for their posts by other comrades 
							within the leadership of the Party or the state. I 
							never devoted myself to that task. 

							I have never underestimated human intelligence or 
							the vanity of men. 

							I was consulted about the new ministers who have 
							just been appointed even though there was no rule 
							obliging those who proposed them to consult me, 
							given that I renounced the prerogatives of power 
							some time ago. They acted simply as genuine 
							revolutionaries who carry within them loyalty to 
							principles. 

							There has been no injustice committed against 
							certain cadres. 

							Neither of the two individuals mentioned by news 
							reports as the most affected have uttered a word to 
							express any disagreement with the decision. It had 
							nothing to do with an absence of personal value. It 
							was another reason. The sweetness of power for which 
							they had made no sacrifice awoke in them ambitions 
							that led them to an unworthy role. The external 
							enemy was filled with illusions about them. 

							I don?t accept the gossip being mixed in with the 
							Baseball Classic that is about to commence. I stated 
							very clearly that our baseball players were 
							first-rate young men, men who believe in "Patria o 
							Muerte" (Homeland or Death).

							As I have stated on other occasions, we will 
							return with the shield or on the shield. 

							We will win because we know how to and we can 
							combine something that only free men can, those who 
							have no owners, not professional players. 

							Leonel Fern?ndez was telling me yesterday 
							afternoon that some of the excellent professional 
							Dominican ballplayers didn?t want to take part in 
							this competition; they would be absent, which would 
							be sad for their people, who watched them grow. 

							Ch?vez still doesn?t know why his magnificent 
							pitchers and hitters will be defeated by our 
							athletes. 

							The Cuban national team that will measure its 
							strength this year against the best professional 
							players from the Major Leagues in the United States 
							and Japan is much stronger and better prepared than 
							the one of three years ago. 

							Many of them are already veterans despite their 
							youthful age. None of the players who made the team 
							stayed behind, except for health reasons. 

							I assume full responsibility for success or the 
							opposite. The victories will be for all of us; 
							defeat will never be bereft. 

							Patria o Muerte! Venceremos!

							
							

							Fidel Castro Ruz

							March 3, 2009

							11:32 a.m.


_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail? is up to 70% faster. Now good news travels really fast. 
http://windowslive.com/online/hotmail?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_70faster_032009

From Paula_cerni at msn.com  Tue Mar  3 18:05:14 2009
From: Paula_cerni at msn.com (Paula)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 17:05:14 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Nicaragua
Message-ID: <BAY122-DS75819DC0F1692CA87F9AE80A70@phx.gbl>

'Et Tu Daniel? The Sandinista Revolution Betrayed', by Roger Burbach.
http://globalalternatives.org/node/102

Paula

From michael at ecst.csuchico.edu  Tue Mar  3 19:30:55 2009
From: michael at ecst.csuchico.edu (Michael Perelman)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 18:30:55 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] China's holdings of US Debt
In-Reply-To: <908b689f0903022205s14183adek5342600ecafc3938@mail.gmail.com>
References: <49ACC47E.10005@sfu.ca>
	<908b689f0903022205s14183adek5342600ecafc3938@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20090304023055.GA3886@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu>

Does anybody recall Hank Paulson saying that China dumping too many US 
securities would be an equivalent of an act of war?
-- 
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 gdunkel at mindspring.com  Tue Mar  3 19:45:46 2009
From: gdunkel at mindspring.com (Greg Dunkel)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 21:45:46 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
Message-ID: <30589334.1236134746955.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Ruthless should look at a map and read what he comments on a little more closely.

For oil extracted around the Caspian Sea, the U.S. would need the route from the Sea thru Kazakhstan (or
Turkmenistan) into Afghanistan and then on thru Pakistan to the sea and the clutches of US 
oil companies.  The major industrial areas of Russia (or previously the SU) lies directly north
of the Caspian Sea.

Sending the oil thru Afghanistan would be sending it out of the way.

/greg

-----Original Message-----
>From: Ruthless Critic of All that Exists <ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com>
>Sent: Mar 3, 2009 11:10 AM
...
>
>Why do you think that the same strategic objective ("getting a
>pipeline through the country from the Caspian Sea") was not a factor
>in Soviet strategic thinking and a reason for their interest in
>Afghanistan?




From Dbachmozart at aol.com  Tue Mar  3 20:05:03 2009
From: Dbachmozart at aol.com (Dbachmozart at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 22:05:03 EST
Subject: [Marxism] NYC forum on the economic collapse - this Friday night
Message-ID: <d6a.452e8968.36df49df@aol.com>



The Nation Institute, Nation  Books, and Alternet are co-hosting a panel 
discussion, "Meltdown: The Economic  Collapse and a People's Plan for Recovery," 
with an all-star cast that includes  Katrina vanden Heuvel, Joseph Stiglitz, 
Barbara Ehrenreich, Jeff Madrick, Bill  Fletcher, Jr., and Christopher Hayes. 
Admission is free at 8 pm this  Friday at 2 West 64th Street in New York City. 
Doors open at 7:15, first come,  first served
**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 
steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1219957551x1201325337/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID
%3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62)

From sabocat59 at mac.com  Tue Mar  3 20:04:35 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 03:04:35 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Mindful Economics
Message-ID: <976467383-1236135969-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1621492804-@bxe1205.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>


Any economist who makes reference to buddhist principles certainly has my 'mindful' attention:
 

 Mindful Economics March 1, 2009

Suggested reading for Climate and Capitalism readers.? We hope to review Mindful Economics at some point. In the meantime, here are some excerpts from the publisher?s description. For more infomation, see

?http://www.mindfuleconomics.com/

 Mindful Economics breaks away from traditional economic theory and provides a fresh, critical perspective on capitalism in America. The book will be particularly useful for citizens, activists, students or others who seek positive social change. The author, Joel Magnuson,??is currently a professor of economics in Portland, Oregon and a visiting fellow at the Ashcroft International Business School at Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, England.

 The first several chapters guide the readers through an exploration of real-world institutions such as corporations, government, market systems, financial and other institutions that make up the U.S. economy. Embedded in these stories is the consistent theme that the need to maximize profits for a relatively small section of the U.S. population has shaped the development of America?s most powerful institutions.? 

The second part of the book demonstrates how the need for higher profits and endless growth has intensified environmental destruction, resource depletion, instability, social and political inequality, and even global warming. These problems have become systemic and solutions therefore require long-term systemic change.? 

The path toward systemic change is laid out in the third part of Mindful Economics. Such change can be brought about by developing alternative institutions. Such alternatives are not only viable, they can be found all across the United States. Through a network of alternative institutions, people can begin to build alternatives to capitalism and provide hope for future generations. ? 
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

From gary.maclennan1 at gmail.com  Tue Mar  3 22:21:03 2009
From: gary.maclennan1 at gmail.com (Gary MacLennan)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 21:21:03 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] beyond the boundary
Message-ID: <b77157fa0903032121g1f518f39u1725522b8c261220@mail.gmail.com>

Not since the death of the great CLR James have Marxists paid much attention
to cricket. However the recent terror attack on the Sri Lankan team has
called the game once more into focus.  The terrorists targeted the Sri
Lankan team who had agreed to fill in when Indian declined to tour Pakistan.
I think it is worth bearing that fact in mind when one tries to figure out
the purpose of this attack.  At one level this atrocity can be understood as
motivated by the fact that "they" could not strike a blow against India so
they took aim at their proxies - the Sril Lankan teams.

That at least seems a plausible hypothesis to me.

The attack on the Sri Lankan cricketers has in all likelihood put paid to
international sporting tours and visits to Pakistan.  Tourism has also
probably been dealt a death blow. There may also be a flow on effect to
sport in India.  Suddenly the whole sub-continent looks very unstable.

However what I really want to draw attention to is that the CIA seems to
continue to believe that it can massacre civilians in the north of Pakistan
and there will be no response. Likewise the Indian government feels free to
crush Kashmiri separatists and seemingly does not believe there is a price
to pay.

Sadly recent events on a whole range of fronts have shown that the elites
who command this world are truly stupid.

regards

Gary

From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Tue Mar  3 22:40:21 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 00:40:21 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
In-Reply-To: <30589334.1236134746955.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <30589334.1236134746955.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903032140h3b11c8e7i75dc03f4487075e0@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 9:45 PM, Greg Dunkel <gdunkel at mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> For oil extracted around the Caspian Sea, the U.S. would need the route from the Sea thru Kazakhstan (or
> Turkmenistan) into Afghanistan and then on thru Pakistan to the sea and the clutches of US
> oil companies. ?The major industrial areas of Russia (or previously the SU) lies directly north
> of the Caspian Sea.
>
> Sending the oil thru Afghanistan would be sending it out of the way.

You mean the USSR had no interest in *exporting* oil, only in domestic
consumption?

While there is no water port for Afghanistan, with a strong foothold
in Afghanistan the Soviets might have been able to invade  Pakistan
next, to get a warm water port in a very strategic area.


From bhaskar.sunkara at gmail.com  Tue Mar  3 23:00:58 2009
From: bhaskar.sunkara at gmail.com (Bhaskar Sunkara)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 01:00:58 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] beyond the boundary
In-Reply-To: <b77157fa0903032121g1f518f39u1725522b8c261220@mail.gmail.com>
References: <b77157fa0903032121g1f518f39u1725522b8c261220@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <bee7ff780903032200w5d4776b7w8b3eec58e2a45ae1@mail.gmail.com>

Ignoring most of your message, I appreciate that you James' claim to fame
among many of those who couldn't be bothered with history or political
economy.  I saw of Beyond a Boundary in mine and the households of my
Indo-Trinidadian relatives long before I ever touched a copy of The Black
Jacobins.  His writings on race, class and the "negro" question in America
were also very advanced for their time and are often overlooked as well.
Back to your topic.

From Jscotlive at aol.com  Wed Mar  4 01:21:25 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 03:21:25 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Israelis furious at British boycott call
Message-ID: <c54.453cef49.36df9405@aol.com>

 
Israeli scientists and officials reacted angrily yesterday to calls by more  
than 400 British academics for the Science Museum to cancel educational  
workshops planned to promote Israeli science tomorrow. 
The cancellation call and claims that Israeli universities are "complicit" in 
 the occupation of Palestinian territories and this year's "disastrous" 
offensive  in Gaza, reported in The Independent yesterday, were condemned as 
"absurd" by  the Israeli Foreign Ministry. Its spokesman, Yigal Palmor, said: "These 
calls  cannot but be motivated by extreme blindness and silly ideology. This 
of course  does not promote the good causes which the boycotters are presumed 
to promote ?  not peace, understanding, nor compromise."  
Full: 
_http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/israelis-react-with-fury-to-british-boycott-call-1636842.html_ 
(http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/israelis-react-with-fury-to-british-boycott-call-1636842.html)  


From johnedmundson at paradise.net.nz  Wed Mar  4 02:33:06 2009
From: johnedmundson at paradise.net.nz (John)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 22:33:06 +1300
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
In-Reply-To: <908b689f0903032140h3b11c8e7i75dc03f4487075e0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <30589334.1236134746955.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<908b689f0903032140h3b11c8e7i75dc03f4487075e0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1236159186.11416.43.camel@john-desktop>

On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 00:40 -0500, Ruthless Critic of All that Exists
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 9:45 PM, Greg Dunkel <gdunkel at mindspring.com> wrote:
> >
> > For oil extracted around the Caspian Sea, the U.S. would need the route from the Sea thru Kazakhstan (or
> > Turkmenistan) into Afghanistan and then on thru Pakistan to the sea and the clutches of US
> > oil companies.  The major industrial areas of Russia (or previously the SU) lies directly north
> > of the Caspian Sea.
> >
> > Sending the oil thru Afghanistan would be sending it out of the way.
> 
> You mean the USSR had no interest in *exporting* oil, only in domestic
> consumption?
> 
> While there is no water port for Afghanistan, with a strong foothold
> in Afghanistan the Soviets might have been able to invade  Pakistan
> next, to get a warm water port in a very strategic area.

Come on Ruthless; what evidence do you have that the Soviet Union had
any intention of invading Pakistan? Because if you don't have any, then
comments like that would be more useful on alternatehistory.com rather
than here. And what do you mean "invade Pakistan next"? That suggests
that it would follow a previous invasion whereas, whatever we think of
them, the Soviets did not invade Afghanistan, they came in at the
request of the then government.
Cheers,
John



From donaloc at hotmail.com  Wed Mar  4 03:52:47 2009
From: donaloc at hotmail.com (D OC)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 10:52:47 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis
Message-ID: <BLU138-W4F47286BEE97BEBDA8938ABA70@phx.gbl>


 

> First, can this really be claimed to be the cause of the crisis and not a symptom. 

 

IMO, this is not a crisis caused by the tendency of the rate of profit to fall - the tendency is true but it is limited in impact by the fact that the world economy is not in 'perfect' competition. The evidence is that production will remain very profitable for the foreseeable future - the problem is that cash has just dried up due to deleveraging in the credit market. I believe that the current crisis was rooted in the disjunction between the amount of money being paid/recycled to imperialist nation consumers and the overall cost of produce that they were consuming.

 

> Second, what role did the commodities bubble play in both causing the FROP and/or how did the FROP in
manufacturing cause the bubble. 

 

I don't necessarily believe that the problem has been a fall in the rate of profit so much as a collapse in consumption. This would cause accumulation to stop irrespective of the rate of profit. The non-productive asset bubble enabled further consumption to occur beyond the natural tipping point and facilitated a further over extension of credit markets. Now the debt will have to be paid. The only way that will happen is to lower living standards in real terms (both through slash and burn policies and currency devaluation) and to thereby redress the production-consumption disjunction. The option of expansionary pump-priming is on the table but it is unclear how well this will work against such an imbalance in productive trade.

 

> Third, how is it related to what you said about the resolution of the 2001 almost crisis. Lastly, is there a way to
stitch together an analysis that would include the changes in finance to FROP theory. How did the developments of finance alter the possible options of capital going forward from the mid-1990's (or earlier) to feed into the crisis potential which ultimately led to the situation we are in now (for surely this is not just another FROP crisis but is much bigger in
breadth and depth).

 

I believe that we must assess to what extent modern day finance reflects underlying value and to what extent it is mere vapour. Similarly with monetarist theories of the supply of money affecting prices. This is all hogwash from a materialist perspective - particularly since the gold standard went belly up. All the same it has massive implications for the capitalist superstructure and can impact hugely but not in the way that monetarists conceive it. As yet, I have seen nothing which sets out a materialist analysis of modern finance. Perhaps someone will be able to direct me to something??

 

This from Capital 1 is good stuff which is somewhat relevant.

 

> We see thus: In the first case, it is not the diminished rate either of the absolute, or of the proportional, increase in labour-power, or labouring population, which causes capital to be in excess, but conversely the excess of capital that makes exploitable labour-power insufficient. In the second case, it is not the increased rate either of the absolute, or of the proportional, increase in labour-power, or labouring population, that makes capital insufficient; but, conversely, the relative diminution of capital that causes the exploitable labour-power, or rather its price, to be in excess. It is these absolute movements of the accumulation of capital which are reflected as relative movements of the mass of exploitable labour-power, and therefore seem produced by the latter?s own independent movement. To put it mathematically: the rate of accumulation is the independent, not the dependent, variable; the rate of wages, the dependent, not the independent, variable. Thus, when the industrial cycle is in the phase of crisis, a general fall in the price of commodities is expressed as a rise in the value of money, and, in the phase of prosperity, a general rise in the price of commodities, as a fall in the value of money. The so-called currency school concludes from this that with high prices too much, with low prices too little [8] money is in circulation. Their ignorance and complete misunderstanding of facts [9] are worthily paralleled by the economists, who interpret the above phenomena of accumulation by saying that there are now too few, now too many wage-labourers. 

 

Two things of relevance to issues being discussed:

 

(i) commodity prices naturally rise just before a crash - I read something even more explicit by Marx on this recently perhaps someone else can find the exact quote - and I noted similarities with the oil/commodity spike of last Autumn/Winter. I think that this is a natural trend reflecting (a) rising cost of labour power being eaten up by price inflation (b) lower relative consumption growth at tipping point diverting capital to perceived 'growth' sectors (c) concern as to market volatility leading to capital being concentrated in raw materials e.g. oil/gold/copper etc. Obviously this creates a further inflation in commodity costs.

 

(ii) The criticism of monetarist (currency school) theory at the end.

 

I would be interested to find out whether there was any increase in the cost of labour power in China or other third world centres of production. I doubt it, as the supply of labour is such that demand would be insufficient to create any rise. That being the case would likely indicate that this crisis is long-term and that it is unlikely that any stimulus package would pull imperialist economies out of the doldroms for anything but a few years. 'Leakage' is too high to allow multiplier growth in Keynesian terms. In the meantime, the cost of such stimulus will further negatively impact the economy and standards of living.

_________________________________________________________________
Twice the fun?Share photos while you chat with Windows Live Messenger.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/products/messenger.aspx

From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 03:55:10 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 05:55:10 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
In-Reply-To: <1236159186.11416.43.camel@john-desktop>
References: <30589334.1236134746955.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<908b689f0903032140h3b11c8e7i75dc03f4487075e0@mail.gmail.com>
	<1236159186.11416.43.camel@john-desktop>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903040255n3f1db2a3h9c749ef4c316734@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 4:33 AM, John <johnedmundson at paradise.net.nz> wrote:

> what evidence do you have that the Soviet Union had
> any intention of invading Pakistan? Because if you don't have any,

We are talking about "motive" here.

> comments like that would be more useful on alternatehistory.com rather
> than here. And what do you mean "invade Pakistan next"? That suggests
> that it would follow a previous invasion whereas, whatever we think of
> them, the Soviets did not invade Afghanistan, they came in at the
> request of the then government.

By this wonderful logic, one could say that the US didn't invade
Vietnam either -- but came in at "the request of the South Vietnamese
government"! Spare us, please.


From donaloc at hotmail.com  Wed Mar  4 04:11:25 2009
From: donaloc at hotmail.com (D OC)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 11:11:25 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Video links for Dublin Campaigns
Message-ID: <BLU138-W49EC84680225043C4688FFABA70@phx.gbl>


 

Here's some two videos on youtube around struggles in Dublin. We hope to expand coverage to other community struggles across the island.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xs4DiHkRCk8

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imDa3u2gEzc

 

_________________________________________________________________
Get 30 Free Emoticons for your Windows Live Messenger
http://www.livemessenger-emoticons.com/funfamily/en-ie/

From rfls12802 at blueyonder.co.uk  Wed Mar  4 04:39:03 2009
From: rfls12802 at blueyonder.co.uk (Paul Flewers)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 11:39:03 -0000
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
In-Reply-To: <mailman.12852.1236159163.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
References: <mailman.12852.1236159163.2556.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <000001c99cbd$d1eb98c0$75c2ca40$@co.uk>

I agree with John E's criticism of Ruthless Critic. The question of
Afghanistan arose when I looked at differing analyses of Soviet foreign
policy a few years back. I wrote:

'Over the ensuing years, the adherents of the Cold War analysis continued to
promote the idea that the Soviet Union represented a totalitarian threat to
Western civilisation, with the Soviet leadership remaining committed to
messianic world-revolutionary ambitions. Four years after Khrushchev's
'Secret Speech', Seton-Watson reiterated the familiar refrain: 'The aim of
Soviet foreign policy ever since 1917 has been world socialist revolution.'
During the subsequent decades, each and every move outwith Soviet borders by
Moscow's armed forces or successes scored by political movements associated
with Moscow in various continents led to alarmist statements being broadcast
by anti-communists. 

'When Soviet forces crossed into Afghanistan at the end of 1979 to prop up a
tottering allied regime, the usually sober Economist gravely warned of 'the
steady accumulation... of Soviet military power and therefore of Soviet
assertiveness: the expansion into Afghanistan (and Angola, Ethiopia, Yemen
before it, and no doubt others yet to come)', and informed its readers in
all seriousness that the world was 'now approximately where it was with
Hitler's Germany in late 1936'. Moscow had paralleled Hitler's seizing of
the Rhineland; Munich and beyond were presumably to follow. That such
sensationalist warnings of the threat posed by Moscow were by no means
uncommon in the British press into the 1980s, during a time when the Soviet
Union was visibly in a state of deepening political, economic and cultural
decay, demonstrates how deeply-seated Cold War anti-communism remained
within the mainstream of British political commentary.'

I guess that those who saw the Soviet Union as state capitalist might also
have seen it as imperialist, with similar expansionist aims to the USA or
other imperialist states. Hence, perhaps Ruthless Critic's idea of Moscow
pressing on through Afghanistan into Pakistan and the warm-water port.

Paul F

   




From sabocat59 at mac.com  Wed Mar  4 04:39:33 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 11:39:33 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Italy on the Verge?
Message-ID: <293347523-1236166881-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-953872324-@bxe1036.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>



Tottering Steps Along The Rim Of 
Fascism And Revolution
By Gaither Stewart

http://www.countercurrents.org/stewart040309.htm

Italy seems to have regained its post-World War II and Cold War position of the weak underbelly of Europe. The terrorists of the Red Brigades of the 1970s and 80s emerged too early. Of all European countries, the atmosphere in Italy, despite the strength of the Right, seems to be pre-revolutionary. Another million lost jobs and it could explode


Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T


From dazza1970 at tiscali.co.uk  Wed Mar  4 04:54:57 2009
From: dazza1970 at tiscali.co.uk (dazza1970 at tiscali.co.uk)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 12:54:57 +0100 (GMT+01:00)
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
Message-ID: <11866171.1236167697777.JavaMail.root@ps33.mc.tiscali.sys>

Paul Flewers wrote:

'... the adherents of the Cold War analysis continued to promote the 
idea that the Soviet Union represented a totalitarian threat to Western 
civilisation, with the Soviet leadership remaining committed to 
messianic world-revolutionary ambitions. ...

'When Soviet forces crossed into Afghanistan at the end of 1979 to 
prop up a  tottering allied regime, the usually sober Economist gravely 
warned of 'the steady accumulation... of Soviet military power and 
therefore of Soviet assertiveness: the expansion into Afghanistan (and 
Angola, Ethiopia, Yemen before it, and no doubt others yet to 
come)'...'

Fred Halliday (when he was still a Marxist) did a good job of 
deflating Cold War scaremongering about Soviet expansionism in his 1981 
book, 'Threat from the East?' (and in various articles in NLR, etc.) In 
the case of Afghanistan, the Soviet leadership had had cordial 
relations with both the monarchy and the Daud regime, played no role in 
the April 1978 revolution and sent in the troops only in December 1979, 
six months after the CIA had begun funding the mujahideen (as both 
Zbigniew Brzezinski and Robert Gates have subsequently admitted).

Darren Williams.





Fancy a job? - http://www.tiscali.co.uk/jobs/
__________________________________________



From sabocat59 at mac.com  Wed Mar  4 04:58:09 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 11:58:09 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Italy on the Verge?
Message-ID: <174023620-1236167995-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-311459856-@bxe1036.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

From stewart's article:

 This weekend 300 militants of the neo-Nazi organization Forza Nuova bused into the prosperous city of Bergamo near Milan for the opening of its new office. The Nazis were escorted and protected by police against Left protesters.

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

Stewart describes this scenario being played out a few times recently.  It reminds me of an anti klan rally I went to once on the south side of Atlanta back in 1982.  The Klan decided to protest on the front lawn of the local police station in a predominantly black neighborhood. 

While a klansman ran a confederate flag up the flag pole dozens of police in riot gear marched out and formed a protective ring around the few klan members present. The demo was militant and people were VERY angry but they held back from attacking the police. 

Of course none of this was surprising to the predominantly African-American protesters but there were plenty of sharp words.  

Greg McDonald 
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

From Jscotlive at aol.com  Wed Mar  4 05:00:19 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 07:00:19 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
Message-ID: <bff.560b2204.36dfc753@aol.com>

Darren:
 
In 
the case of Afghanistan, the Soviet leadership had had cordial  
relations with both the monarchy and the Daud regime, played no role in  
the April 1978 revolution and sent in the troops only in December 1979,  
six months after the CIA had begun funding the mujahideen (as both  
Zbigniew Brzezinski and Robert Gates have subsequently  admitted).


Reply:
 
Exactly, and as released transcripts of Politbureau meetings of the  period 
reveal, the Soviet leadership were initially reluctant to get involved,  as 
they believed the material conditions were not present for the reforms which  the 
PDPA were trying to implement in the countryside. 
 
 
 
 

From J.M.P.Cloke at lboro.ac.uk  Wed Mar  4 05:24:02 2009
From: J.M.P.Cloke at lboro.ac.uk (J.M.P.Cloke at lboro.ac.uk)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 12:24:02 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Changes in Cuba
In-Reply-To: <COL112-W2045F1C838D42E6AC23E6BD7A70@phx.gbl>
References: <COL112-W2045F1C838D42E6AC23E6BD7A70@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <web-4987036@frim.lboro.ac.uk>

Far from being the Titanic, surely the discovery of 
substantial oil reserves some 20Km off the coast near 
Havana give Cuba the potential to become an even more 
influential player in regional politics?

-- 
Dr Jon Cloke
Project Officer EnergyCentral and Research Associate
Global and World Cities Group
Geography Department
Loughborough University
Loughborough LE11 3TU

E-mail: j.m.p.cloke at lboro.ac.uk
Tel: 00 44 07984 813681


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Wed Mar  4 05:37:30 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 07:37:30 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] China's holdings of US Debt
References: <49ACC47E.10005@sfu.ca><908b689f0903022205s14183adek5342600ecafc3938@mail.gmail.com>
	<20090304023055.GA3886@tiglon.ecst.csuchico.edu>
Message-ID: <E938C2844611419B816130019D2B1225@dmsthinkpad>

Don't remember hims saying that.  Don't doubt it for a second-- that he said 
that.

I think the issue is, however:

-- prior to the collapse of Lehman Bros., prior to the collapse of Bear 
Stearns, prior even to the 2007 folding of the 2 Bear Stearns hedge funds 
that marked, more or less, the return of the chickens coming home to die, 
the argument was that China, as a creditor to the US and as a center of  FDI 
and industrial production, was going to surpass the US, replace the US as 
the linchpin of the world economy, that the imbalances in trade would lead 
to a shift in the economic center of gravity.

I guess that's still the issue-- does anything that has happened since March 
2007 confirm that "shift"?   Is such a shift in global capitalism even 
possible without the usual way such "transfers" are made--  world wars?  Can 
China assume any of that role given its overall uneven of development, and 
unproductive agricultural sector, lack of a freely convertible currency?  Do 
its debt instrument holdings give it a leg up that ladder?


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Perelman" <michael at ecst.csuchico.edu>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 9:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] China's holdings of US Debt




From sartesian at earthlink.net  Wed Mar  4 05:42:24 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 07:42:24 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
References: <30589334.1236134746955.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<908b689f0903032140h3b11c8e7i75dc03f4487075e0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1C25340F97DA4AA3B5FA82BC38439C0D@dmsthinkpad>

Right, the USSR was going to invade Pakistan next-- except the USSR never 
invaded Afghanistan first-- the USSR reluctantly, and I do mean, reluctantly 
intervened to protect a friendly government, on its borders, from being 
overthrown.

Invade Pakistan?   When and where since the end of WW 2 and the division of 
Europe had the USSR ever invaded any western allied country--- nowhere.

You don't read maps, you don't read history--  what you provide isn't 
ruthless criticism, but rather useless hypothecation.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ruthless Critic of All that Exists" <ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:40 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Afghanistan




From sabocat59 at mac.com  Wed Mar  4 05:57:29 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 12:57:29 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Obama to Single Payer Advocates: Drop Dead
Message-ID: <239412590-1236171556-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-680562415-@bxe1036.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

 Obama to Single Payer Advocates: 

           Drop Dead 

Corporate Crime Reporter, March 3, 2009
 
 http://www.pnhp. <http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/march/obama_to_single_paye.php> org/news/2009/march/obama_to_single_paye.php
 
 President Obama?s White House made crystal clear this week: a
Canadian-style, Medicare-for-all, single payer health insurance system
is off the table. Obama doesn?t even want to discuss it.
 
 Take the case of Congressman John Conyers (D-Michigan). Conyers is the leading advocate for single payer health insurance in Congress. Last week, Conyers attended a Congressional Black Caucus meeting with President Obama at the White House.
 
During the meeting, Congressman Conyers, sponsor of the single payer
 bill in the House (HR 676), asked President Obama for an invite to the President?s Marchy 5 health care summit at the White House. Conyers said he would bring along with him two doctors ? Dr. Marcia Angell and Dr. Quentin Young ? to represent the majority of physicians in the United States who favor single payer.

 Obama would have none of it.
 
 This week, by e-mail, Conyers heard back from the White House ? no invite. Why not?
 
 Well, believe it or not, the Obama White House is under the thumb of
 the health insurance industry. Obama has become the industry?s chief enforcer of its key demand: single payer health insurance is off the table.
 
Earlier this week, Obama named his health reform leadership team ?
 Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius and Nancy-Ann DeParle. Single payer
 advocates were not happy.
 
 Since leaving Medicare, DeParle cashed in as a director at major for
profit health care corporations, including Medco Health Solutions, Cerner, Boston Scientific, DaVita, and Triad Hospitals.
 
Now, what does the health insurance industry make of the Sebelius/DeParle team?
 
 Here is Karen Ignagni, president of the lead health insurance lobbying group, America?s Health Insurance Plans:
 
 ?Today the President is putting in place a team that is ready on day
one to provide the leadership necessary to achieve health care reform. Governor Sebelius is the right person to move the President?s health
care agenda forward. She is a proven leader with extensive knowledge of
health care issues and a long history of working effectively across the
political aisle. As a former CMS
administrator, Nancy-Ann DeParle brings considerable experience and a
strong track record working on all of the health care issues facing the
nation.?
 
Karen sounds really upset, right?
 
Dr. David Himmelstein is a founder and spokesperson for Physicians for a National Health Program.
 
Himmelstein?s take ? Obama is caving to the insurance industry.
 
?The President once acknowledged that single payer reform was the
best option, but now he?s caving in to corporate healthcare interests
and completely shutting out advocates of single payer reform,?
Himmelstein said. ?The majority of Americans favor single payer, and
it?s the most popular reform option among doctors and health
economists, but no single payer supporter has been invited to
participate in the administration?s health care summit. Meanwhile, he?s
appointed as his health reform czar Nancy-Ann DeParle, a woman who has made her living advising health care investors and sits on the board of many for-profit firms that have made billions from Medicare. Her
appointment ? and the invitation list to the healthcare summit ? is a
clear signal that the administration plans to propose a corporate-friendly health reform that has no chance of actually solving our health care crisis.?
 
 Obama to single payer advocates: drop dead.

Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

From info at kersplebedeb.com  Wed Mar  4 06:37:32 2009
From: info at kersplebedeb.com (kersplebedeb)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 08:37:32 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Why the Red Army Faction Matters
Message-ID: <49AE841C.9080806@kersplebedeb.com>

It is of immense importance that the soldier, high or low, whatever rank 
he has, should not have to encounter in War those things which, when 
seen for the first time, set him in astonishment and perplexity; if he 
has only met with them one single time before, even by that he is half 
acquainted with them. This relates even to bodily fatigues. They should 
be practiced less to accustom the body to them than the mind. In War the 
young soldier is very apt to regard unusual fatigues as the consequence 
of faults, mistakes, and embarrassment in the conduct of the whole, and 
to become distressed and despondent as a consequence. This would not 
happen if he had been prepared for this beforehand by exercises in peace.
    - Carl von Clausewitz, On War


A couple of years ago i visited San Francisco to table at the Bay Area 
Anarchist Bookfair, which was a somewhat disappointing experience - 
however, the bonus of any such trip is the chance to meet with comrades 
and colleagues who you otherwise only know via email.

So it was in this way that after the bookfair i found myself out with 
some folks from AK Press drinking beer. Talk turned to work and future 
publishing plans, and on the walk back to the subway someone asked me 
why today's radicals would be interested in reading about the Red Army 
Faction - West Germany's iconic Cold War urban guerillas, and the 
subjects of a book i had vague plans to publish.


full: 
http://sketchythoughts.blogspot.com/2009/03/why-red-army-faction-matters.html

***********************

The Red Army Faction, A Documentary History - Volume 1: Projectiles For 
the People
by Andr? Moncourt and J. Smith, with forewords by Bill Dunne and Russell 
"Maroon" Shoats
Paperback 736 pages
Published by Kersplebedeb and PM Press in 2009
ISBN 9781604860290

available from www.leftwingbooks.net (Kersplebedeb) and www.pmpress.org

for more information on the Red Army Faction, check out the German 
Guerilla website: http://www.germanguerilla.com



From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Mar  4 07:34:09 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 09:34:09 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Why the Red Army Faction Matters
In-Reply-To: <49AE841C.9080806@kersplebedeb.com>
References: <49AE841C.9080806@kersplebedeb.com>
Message-ID: <49AE9161.8020106@panix.com>

Comrade kersplebedeb,

Near the end of your article, you write: "Urban guerilla warfare will 
likely never be waged again in exactly the same way it was in the 1970s, 
but it is equally unlikely to ever be completely removed from the menu. 
By theorizing about what they were doing while they were doing it, the 
RAF combatants have left us a rich legacy from which to draw not only 
inspiration, but also knowledge and understanding of the dynamics and 
pitfalls associated with armed clandestine movements."

One thing is for sure. As long as the masses have illusions in the 
system and continue to vote for bourgeois candidates like Obama et al, 
urban guerrilla war is premature. Perhaps if a dictatorship assumes 
power in the US, we should study the RAF for technical advice on how to 
stage a bank robbery. But on the Marxist (or radical?) politics that you 
claim that they had such a good grasp of, there is no evidence of that 
in your post.



From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Mar  4 07:43:42 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 09:43:42 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] American nightmare
Message-ID: <49AE939E.3040803@panix.com>

http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/prashad030309.html
American Nightmare
by Vijay Prashad

     They used to tell me I was building a dream,
     and so I followed the mob,
     When there was earth to plow, or guns to bear,
     I was always there right on the job.
     They used to tell me I was building a dream,
     with peace and glory ahead,
     Why should I be standing in line,
     just waiting for bread?
     -- Yip Harburg, "Brother, Can You Spare a Dime" (1931)

On February 6, 2009, the United States government's Bureau of Labor 
Statistics (BLS) released its monthly "Employment Situation Summary." 
The first paragraph of the report contained startling data.  In January 
2009, the U.S. economy lost almost 600,000 jobs (the highest figure in 
34 years).  The official unemployment rate rose from 7.2 per cent to 7.6 
per cent (the highest in 16 years).  Since December 2007, which the BLS 
identified as the start of the current recession, the U.S. economy has 
lost 3.6 million jobs (2.8 million lost since September 2008).  In the 
quiet, measured language of this data-collection agency, "in January, 
job losses were large and widespread across nearly all major industry 
sectors."  The scale of the number is unimaginable.

A White House forecast, released by the Bush administration days before 
it left office (January 16), pointed out that the U.S. economy would 
lose 235,000 jobs a month in 2009, or 2.8 million jobs.  This estimate 
now seems modest.  In November 2008, Goldman Sachs revised its own 
earlier estimate to suggest that in 2009 the unemployment rate would be 
over 7 per cent (it was 5.6 per cent then).  President Barack Obama went 
on air shortly after the BLS released its report.  This was in itself 
remarkable since BLS reports are normally of no interest to the general 
public and are rarely reported on by the mainstream media.  Obama 
acknowledged that this particular report bore "devastating news" and the 
data "could not be more serious."  The head of Obama's Council of 
Economic Advisers, Christina Romer, warned that if the government did 
not act swiftly "we are likely to lose millions more jobs and the 
unemployment rate could reach double digits."

Obama recognized that while this number was enormous, "this is not an 
abstract debate.  It is an urgent and growing crisis that can only be 
fully understood through the unseen stories that lie underneath each and 
every one of those 600,000 jobs that were lost."  Factories close their 
doors, small businesses pull down the shutters, houses are abandoned to 
foreclosure: people who lived their life with the promise of the 
American Dream are rapidly abandoned even though they have put in their 
hours for decades.

The numbers are magical.  Inside that 600,000 figure are 207,000 
manufacturing jobs; this is the largest decline of manufacturing jobs in 
a single month since the high point of deindustrialisation (1982). 
Alongside this figure is 734,000 "discouraged workers," people who have 
stopped looking for jobs because they do not think they are out there. 
If you add these two figures, the picture is even more dismal.  The 
decline in manufacturing has meant a gradual parity in the number of men 
and women in the active workforce.  In the past year, men accounted for 
eight of the 10 lost jobs, and more men gave up looking for work than women.

Boston Globe columnist Ellen Goodman points out, "You not only have a 
near-equal number of women in the workforce, you have a lot of women in 
formerly two-earner families who've become the breadwinners. 
Breadwinners?  Or should I say crustwinners.  The other dubious part of 
this 'equality' for families is that even if women fill half of the 
payroll jobs, they don't bring home half the pay checks.  They still 
earn 78 cents for every male dollar.  In two-worker households, husbands 
earn close to two-thirds of the income and usually hold the job with the 
health insurance."  That is gone.  Women's jobs (in health care and 
education, for example) might be more stable for the present, but they 
are also less profitable.

Inventory sits in warehouses and in retail stores as sales go down. 
Like a blood clot, these unsold goods clog up the system, dampening any 
need to increase production.  The U.S. Commerce Department released its 
own dreary report, showing that new orders received by U.S. factories 
fell by 3.9 per cent in December, following a 6.5 per cent slump in 
November.  Retail sales for January fell by 1.6 per cent (according to 
the International Council of Shopping Centers).

The verdict of the Washington Post was stark: "If the jobless rate keeps 
rising at the pace it has for the past two months, it will hit double 
digits in the summer and reach its highest rate since the Great 
Depression in the fall. . . .  Companies in nearly every sector of the 
economy have cut jobs or announced that they would take other steps to 
save on cost, including freezing or reducing pay or eliminating 
contributions to employee retirement programs" (February 7, 2009).  The 
January numbers, in other words, will be dwarfed by those figures that 
come for February, March, April, May, and June.  No one wants to 
consider what is going to happen after midsummer.

Those who watch the way the government collects the numbers are wary of 
this data.  Government figures are only so good as the methodology used 
by its agencies.  In 1995, the Clinton administration convened the 
Advisory Commission to Study the Consumer Price Index.  Bill Clinton 
appointed Michael Boskin, the former head of President Bush's Council of 
Economic Advisers, to head the commission.  The Boskin Commission's 
report (1996) recommended that the BLS revise its method for sampling. 
As a result of this report, the BLS conducted a form of statistical 
pruning, cutting its household sampling size from 60,000 to 50,000.  An 
important aspect of this cut was the reduction of households from inner 
cities, which have a disproportionate number of non-white residents and 
also of impoverished families.  Further, the BLS began to exclude 
"discouraged workers" from its calculation of unemployment.

With Boskin's new method, the poverty rate fell, as did the unemployment 
rate, and it was notable that (without the inner-city data) suddenly 
blacks enjoyed better economic health than before.  This fabulous world 
renewed enthusiasm for the American Dream even as the reality hidden in 
segregated slums was quite different.

Statistician John Williams (whose newsletter is available at 
www.shadowstats.com) reanalyzes the government numbers using the 
pre-Clinton era methodology.  He finds that the current unemployment 
rate hovers between 13.5 per cent and 18 per cent (using two different 
data sets and formulae).  As Williams lifts the statistical camouflage 
off the faked numbers, the situation seems more drastic.  As columnist 
Alexander Cockburn put it, "the air is whistling out of the American 
economy."  It is this deflating balloon that worries even those within 
the inner circle of American power.  Obama's leading economic adviser, 
Lawrence Summers, recently said that the government must "contain what 
is a very damaging and potentially deflationary spiral."  The people who 
have lost their jobs have no cushion to maintain their lifestyles.  The 
social security nets have been eviscerated, and of these, unemployment 
benefits are minuscule (indeed, because employers are penalized when 
their former workers go on unemployment, there have been many cases of 
workers being fired so that their departure does not increase the 
unemployment insurance that a firm must pay).  Additionally, since the 
1980s, the saving rate has plummeted.

The latest Survey of Consumer Finances shows that households have less 
wealth than in 2001.  The saving rates went down from 9 per cent in the 
1980s to 5 per cent in the 1990s to 0.6 per cent over the past few 
years.  Unemployed people with no wealth and access to modest social 
insurance will certainly foreclose on the homes that they hoped would 
build them wealth; this will create less incentive for banks to lend, 
and once more lead to further job cuts.  The cycle is inevitable and 
bleak.  The North America chief economist of BNP Paribas Bank, Brian 
Fabbri, told the Washington Post: "The economy is suffering.  Things are 
getting worse, not better.  Everything is weakening at a faster pace 
than we have ever seen.  You don't need to embellish" (February 5, 2009).

Stimulus Measure

The downward spiral of the U.S. and world economy has challenged the 
intellectual house of Milton Friedman's monetarism.  Things are at such 
a sad pass for proponents of laissez faire that the Cato Institute (a 
libertarian foundation) ran a full-page advertisement in the New York 
Times extolling its beleaguered principles.  Even the most conservative 
Republicans (such as Senator Lindsey Graham) are resigned to such 
extreme steps as bank nationalization.  This would have been unheard of 
a few years ago.

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan offered his own mea culpa 
before Congress as the theory that control of money supply is enough to 
provide a stimulus now sounds ludicrous.

Obama arrived in Washington with a proposal to raise $775 billion in 
stimulus spending.  Within weeks he was able to push this Bill through 
Congress, which agreed to lift the amount to $787 billion.  Admittedly, 
the thrust of the earlier Bill was changed quite dramatically: the 
legislature diverted much of the direct spending proposals towards 
further tax cuts.  But, nevertheless, the idea that the U.S. government 
was going to borrow towards "shovel ready" job creation projects is 
quite astounding.  The list of how to spend the money is already long: 
infrastructural spending, expenditure towards research and development, 
and outlay towards education.  There are many ideas, and many 
outstretched hands.  Whether this money will actually create jobs 
quickly enough is an open question.  The government says that the 
stimulus measure might create or maintain 3.5 million jobs.  This would 
just about stem the tide of the jobs hemorrhaged over the past few 
months.  As the chair of the Progressive Caucus in Congress, Lynn 
Woolsey, said, "the first thing to recognize is that while the Bill 
isn't perfect, it's $800 billion better than what we had a few weeks ago."

Goldman Sachs' economic analysis team looked at the stimulus package and 
concluded that the Bill "is unlikely to do much more than stabilise the 
U.S. economy in the near term.  Unless recovery in the private sector 
proves to be much stronger than we expect over the next two years, we 
think more stimulus will be needed before the end of 2010."

Obama inherited a federal deficit of $1.2 trillion.  His spending will 
raise this to over $2 trillion, with every expectation that this will 
rise to $3 trillion.  Obama's Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner unveiled a 
plan with few specifics, dodging one large problem (an economy with 
insolvent banks) by offering trite promises about another (the 
joblessness).  If the banks are indeed beyond salvation (the 
International Monetary Fund estimates that the bank losses are now at 
$2,200 billion), then it is unlikely that the various stimulus packages 
will do more than act as a stop-gap measure until something is done 
about them.

The government will make stimulus spending routine to prevent a social 
collapse until it comes to terms with what Martin Wolf of the Financial 
Times calls the "zombie institutions," whose toxic presence is going to 
undermine the ability of hard-working people to get good jobs.
Vijay Prashad is George and Martha Kellner Chair in South Asian History 
and Professor of International Studies, Trinity College.  He is the 
author of eleven books, most recently, The Darker Nations: A People's 
History of the Third World (The New Press, paperback 2008), which was 
picked by the Asian American Writers' Workshop as the nonfiction book of 
2008.  This article first appeared in Frontline 26.5 (28 February - 13 
March 2009); it is reproduced here with the author's permission.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Mar  4 07:45:49 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 09:45:49 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Polish economy tumbles
Message-ID: <49AE941D.3080507@panix.com>

http://wsws.org/articles/2009/mar2009/pola-m04.shtml
Polish economy tumbles as global investors take flight
By Marius Heuser
4 March 2009

The international economic crisis is having a devastating impact on 
eastern European countries. Poland and the Czech Republic, whose 
economies until recently had been considered stable, are both being hit 
by mounting unemployment. Although the economic upturn over the last 
decade was achieved mainly at the expense of the working class, the 
government is moving to impose the cost of the current economic crisis 
completely onto the shoulders of the population.

As in the whole of Eastern Europe, one of Poland's most significant 
problems is the virtual halting of investment and credit flows?the basis 
for the economic growth of the recent period?from Western countries. In 
2008 Poland was receiving credit amounting to 140 billion zloty ($38 
billion). According to some estimates credit will not exceed 40 billion 
zloty ($11 billion) in 2009. This catastrophe is primarily a consequence 
of the financial crisis, but it also stems from a particularly Polish 
"sub-prime crisis".

In recent years, rising real estate prices fuelled a boom in the 
property market and induced more and more householders to obtain credit 
by taking out mortgages on their homes. Working people used this to 
offset their worsening social conditions, while western European banks 
and their branches in Poland made huge profits from the sale of debt. 
Western companies, controlling the bulk of Polish retailing, were also 
able to cash in on increased spending power, resulting from the wide 
availability of credit.

The Polish mortgage bubble burst with the onset of the international 
financial crisis. Real estate values have fallen dramatically. Numerous 
building programmes have been abandoned and experts expect real estate 
prices to drop by as much as another 20 percent. Countless workers will 
lose their homes even as they remain in debt for the rest of their lives.

Particularly hard-hit will be those private citizens or firms that have 
borrowed money in foreign currencies. This applies to 25 percent of all 
current debt in Poland. Most of the mortgages, 60 percent, were 
contracted in Swiss francs. Due to the extremely weak zloty, loan 
repayment rates increased by 12 percent in just a few weeks.

Numerous Western banks, first and foremost in Austria, have already had 
to write off billions of euros. Hardly any institute is now prepared to 
extend credit to Poland, even on extremely favourable terms for the lender.

In recent months the government has attempted to counter the credit 
crisis by significantly reducing interest rates. But this has only 
worsened the situation and contributed to sharp losses in the value of 
the zloty, which has fallen from 3.6 to 4.7 zloty to the euro since last 
October?the same rate reached five years ago.

Lack of credit and investment, together with the falling demand for 
commodities in the Eurozone, has led to a severe weakening of economic 
performance. In January, industrial output declined 14.9 percent. 
Production in the automobile industry fell 34 percent, compared to the 
previous year.

The official unemployment rate has risen from 9.5 to 10.5 percent. The 
government forecasts a further increase to at least 12.5 percent by the 
end of this year. This figure is a gross underestimation, since it is 
expected that some 100,000 of the 2 million Poles working abroad will be 
returning home to seek jobs, on account of the economic crisis.

In February the government corrected its growth forecast for 2009 from 
3.7 to 1.7 percent. In 2007 it had been 6.5 percent. In the past 12 
months, the Polish stock index WIG20 lost more than half its value, 
falling to 1,365 points.

The rapidity and extent of the collapse is bound up with the social and 
economic relations that emerged as capitalism was restored to Poland 
over the last two decades. Closely cooperating with European Union (EU) 
institutions, a narrow social layer of former Stalinist functionaries 
and nouveau riche carved up the Polish economy in the name of 
rationalisation and squandered state property in the course of the 
privatisation of formally state-owned enterprises. Deprived of any real 
economic foundations, Poland was left wholly dependent on foreign credit 
and investment. The country's trade deficit ran to ?9.6 billion in 2007.

In the last 20 years, Poland's ruling elite has striven to attract the 
greatest possible number of investors to the county. It competed 
relentlessly against its European neighbours to secure the most 
attractive conditions for investment?corporate taxes were abolished, 
labour laws dismantled, wages cut, social and democratic rights 
curtailed. All this led to flagrant social inequality, with misery and 
poverty on the one hand and utterly perverse levels of personal fortunes 
on the other. According to a study by the Organisation for Economic 
Cooperation and Development, every fourth child in Poland lived in 
poverty in 2007.

The extent of the current flight of foreign capital from Poland reveals 
the character of the country's economic growth in recent years. It was 
based almost exclusively on direct investment from abroad and exploited 
principally by investors who failed to develop the Polish economy in any 
substantial way.

The government is incapable of combating the crisis. Prime Minister 
Donald Tusk, of the ultra free market Citizens Platform (PO), is hoping 
to stabilize the floundering zloty by securing Poland's speedy entry 
into the European currency union. He has announced that official 
negotiations with the European Central Bank will take place this month 
and hopes to be able to introduce the euro into Poland in 2012. However, 
a precondition for entering is that the value of the zloty does not 
fluctuate by more than 15 percent in the two years prior to the proposed 
entry into the currency union. At the same time, the Eurozone itself is 
currently proving to be far from stable.

After the government managed to partially stabilize the zloty by 
purchasing euros from European structural stimulus funds, the Polish 
central bank immediately reduced the key interest rate again last 
Wednesday, this time from 25 basis points to 4.0 percent, thereby 
risking further collapse of the zloty. The intention was to kick-start 
the flow of credit.

In line with its customary practice, the PO government's chief response 
was to intensify its efforts to offer Poland as the most attractive and 
lucrative destination for direct foreign investment and to achieve this 
by doing away with social rights, slashing wages and reducing business 
taxes.

In January, the government passed a bill authorising a ?25 billion 
bailout package for the banks. Some ?10 billion of this was to serve as 
security on loans made among the banks. The measure also included a 
reduction in taxation on business energy consumption and import costs. 
In order to avoid putting Poland's entry into the euro currency union at 
risk, the government announced the package without applying for loans, 
but rather by resolving to pay for it through budgetary cuts. In view of 
dwindling treasury resources, this constitutes a massive assault on what 
remains of the country's welfare system.

At the beginning of last month, the cabinet decided to cut 19.7 billion 
zloty (about ?4.2 billion), which came in large measure from education 
and social security. The government also moved to liberalise labour 
laws, clearing the way for the introduction of short-time work and to 
carry out the privatisation of remaining state-owned enterprises. In a 
time of crisis, this only means selling them off at prices far below 
their true value.

These measures will exacerbate rather than solve the fundamental 
problems of Polish capitalism and lead to massive confrontations between 
the government and the working class. The government is working closely 
with the trade unions to prepare for these confrontations. The president 
and the prime minister, together with employee delegates and trade 
unionists, met at a so-called "social round-table" on February 25 to 
discuss the most cunning ways in which the working class was to be 
saddled with the burden of the crisis.

The trade union bureaucrats are just as corrupt and reactionary as the 
government. Instead of uniting Europe's workers in this time of crisis, 
they stir up chauvinism and nationalism. According to the Gazeta 
newspaper, Jan Guz, leader of Poland's second biggest trade union 
association (OPZZ), has called for a ban on the employment of non-EU 
workers in Poland. He said that, in difficult economic times, it was 
time for White Russians and Ukrainians to leave Poland.

The trade unions are resorting to such chauvinist appeals in an 
increasingly desperate effort to prevent a struggle by workers against 
the government and big business. On February 5, 3,000 steel workers from 
the Stalowa Wola mill in south Poland protested against the destruction 
of their jobs. Driven to despair, they hurled stones at the police, set 
fire to tyres and broke through barriers. Thirty years after the 
explosive struggles of the working class that gave rise to Solidarity?a 
mass movement, which was ultimately betrayed by its pro-capitalist 
leadership?a social storm is once again brewing in Poland.

About the WSWS | Contact Us | Privacy Statement | Top of page



From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Mar  4 07:47:57 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 09:47:57 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] So Marx was right after all
Message-ID: <49AE949D.9080604@panix.com>

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/mark-steel/mark-steel-so-karl-marx-was-right-after-all-1636864.html
March 4, 2009
Mark Steel: So Karl Marx was right after all
Maybe the Mail will be yelling, ?Smash the bosses, get the worker?s Mail?

The sudden change is disconcerting. For years I might suggest society 
would be improved if we sacked these vastly overpaid bankers, and the 
response would be some variety of "Here he goes again".

Now if you say the same thing the response is "SACK them? I'll tell you 
what we should do, we should cover them in marmalade and lock them in a 
greenhouse full of wasps, then scour the stings with a Brillo pad. Then 
prick them with hedgehog spikes, smear them with fish paste and dip them 
in Sydney Harbour, then glue them to a pig and send them into an 
al-Qa'ida training camp with a letter announcing they're a work of art, 
never mind sack them."

Even the Daily Mail exclaimed on its front page, "I'm keeping every 
penny" in outrage at Fred Goodwin's pension. Maybe the paper is planning 
a change of direction, and will be sold in shopping precincts by 
left-wing groups, yelling "SMASH the bosses, get the WORKER'S Mail, for 
suburban fashion tips, 20 ways to cook a parsnip and an all-out GENERAL 
strike."

Even Karl Marx himself is in vogue. Most papers have had articles about 
him in their business sections, commending his analysis of booms and 
slumps, and he was on the front page of The Times. Soon a Times 
editorial will begin: "As the global downturn gathers pace, perhaps one 
economic remedy to be considered by our esteemed guardians is a violent 
workers' revolution as envisaged by Mister Karl Marx, and championed 
with consummate aplomb on page 32 by William Rees-Mogg."

A passage from Marx about the insatiable greed of bankers was quoted on 
Radio 2 one morning by Terry Wogan. For all I know he's doing it every 
day now, muttering: "Now here's a jolly old lesson from the old boy Karl 
? about those rascals of the bourgeoisie, it seems they've been robbing 
us blind all along and no mistake, so let's overthrow the nitwits for a 
bit of mischief. In the meantime this is 'Surrey with the Fringe on Top'."

Sales of Marx's Capital are at an all-time high, and this can't just be 
due to the current rage against characters such as Fred Goodwin and his 
merry bonus. It must also be because Marx fathomed that under 
capitalism, boom and slump would remain a perpetual cycle, as opposed to 
those such as Gordon Brown, who said once an hour for five years, "We 
have abolished boom and bust", a theory which is now in need of a minor 
tweak.

But Marx might be surprised at the way he usually appears in these 
articles, as if he was mostly an analyst, a Robert Peston of his day. As 
a professional analyst, Marx would have been a disaster. For example, 
one year after Capital was due, his publishers asked him when it would 
arrive and he wrote back: "You'll be pleased to know I have begun the 
actual writing."

But he might also dispute the idea attributed to him, that slumps make 
the collapse of capitalism inevitable. Because while he said SLUMPS were 
inevitable, he also said the outcome wasn't inevitable at all, but 
depended on whether the poor allow the rich to make them pay for it.

Which is to say an abridged version of the 1,100 pages of Capital would 
go: "I'll tell you what we should do, spray them with wildebeest odour 
and make them run through the Serengeti, with a commentary by 
Attenborough, then..."


From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 07:59:20 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 09:59:20 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
In-Reply-To: <bff.560b2204.36dfc753@aol.com>
References: <bff.560b2204.36dfc753@aol.com>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903040659k5d1b2465l724ad600b1ca0f78@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 7:00 AM,  <Jscotlive at aol.com> wrote:

> Reply:
>
> Exactly, and as released transcripts of Politbureau meetings of the ?period
> reveal, the Soviet leadership were initially reluctant to get involved, ?as
> they believed the material conditions were not present for the reforms which ?the
> PDPA were trying to implement in the countryside.

In which case, after they got bogged down in a quagmire scenario, why
didn't they leave soon? Why did it take them such a long time to
withdraw ?


From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 08:20:21 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 10:20:21 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
In-Reply-To: <1C25340F97DA4AA3B5FA82BC38439C0D@dmsthinkpad>
References: <30589334.1236134746955.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<908b689f0903032140h3b11c8e7i75dc03f4487075e0@mail.gmail.com>
	<1C25340F97DA4AA3B5FA82BC38439C0D@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903040720u6e84747fyf994e3314c46a36e@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 7:42 AM, S. Artesian <sartesian at earthlink.net> wrote:

> Invade Pakistan? ? When and where since the end of WW 2 and the division of
> Europe had the USSR ever invaded any western allied country--- nowhere.

If the Soviets had succeeded in Afghanistan, Pakistan would have been
caught between two USSR-allied countries (Af. and India), and in a
difficult position -- posing an easy target to invade.

Very different from, say, invading France or W. Germany.

Also, it became amply clear after the Soviets came to Af. that most
Afghans did NOT want them there. Why didn't they just leave,
respecting the wishes of the people? Only geostrategic
reasons/ambitions can explain why they continued/persisted in Af.  for
so long.


From Jscotlive at aol.com  Wed Mar  4 09:04:45 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 11:04:45 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
Message-ID: <d5c.347e7ef6.36e0009d@aol.com>

Ruthless:
 
If the Soviets had succeeded in Afghanistan, Pakistan would have  been
caught between two USSR-allied countries (Af. and India), and in  a
difficult position -- posing an easy target to invade.

Reply:
 
This is absolute garbage. Anyone with even the slightest knowledge of the  
history of the SU would know that since the end of the Second World War, and  
even more so after the death of Stalin in 1953, the overriding priority of the  
Soviet bureaucracy was to maintain its privileges. Peaceful coexistence was  
their mantra, responsible for a rigid conservatism behind every turn it  took 
both domestically and internationally. 
 
Pakistan was a US Cold War ally. Why the fuck would the US wish to invade  
one of its allies?
 
Ruthless:
 
Also, it became amply clear after the Soviets came to Af. that  most
Afghans did NOT want them there. Why didn't they just  leave,
respecting the wishes of the people? Only  geostrategic
reasons/ambitions can explain why they continued/persisted in  Af. for
so long.

Reply:
 
Afghanistan was split between the countryside and the urban centres. The  
Soviet backed govt enjoyed popular support in the cities, which even the Wall St  
Journal acknowledged at the time. Where do you get your information from, 
cause  my guess is that you're making this up as you go along?
 
The Soviets left in 1989 and it took another four years for the country to  
fall to the US-backed, armed, and trained Mujahedeen thereafter.   
 
Seriously, are you a Marxist?

From editor at intertheory.org  Wed Mar  4 09:08:30 2009
From: editor at intertheory.org (Nicholas Ruiz III)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 08:08:30 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Kritikos V.6, Jan-Feb. 2009
Message-ID: <543746.70669.qm@web301.biz.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



Kritikos V.6, Jan-Feb. 2009

The Permeable Border Between Us and  Them: Cinema, 9/11 and Radical Politics...(p.stasi)

http://intertheory.org/stasi3.htm



 Nicholas Ruiz III, Ph.D
Editor, Kritikos
http://intertheory.org

From nmgoro at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 11:04:37 2009
From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 19:04:37 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Are we facing the mother of all bubbles?
Message-ID: <2fa158550903041004q55d7ce88o75ca6c6e974bf770@mail.gmail.com>

Against anything received economic knowledge would suggest, the
currency of the USofAm is increasing its value.

Of course, many explanations can and should be advanced. I suggest
what I think is the most concrete one.

Am I too stupid in thinking that after recycling itself through the
most bizarre boulevards ("emerging" countries, dot.coms, unpayable
mortgages, etc.) we are witnessing the ultimate recycling of global
excess surplus?

Are we not beginning to see the DOLLAR BUBBLE?

I am just asking. Those less plainclothes than yours truly may -and I
hope they will- give some hints.

-- 

N?stor Gorojovsky
El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a


From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Mar  4 11:18:10 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 13:18:10 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] George Packer and the DSA
Message-ID: <49AEC5E2.4000501@panix.com>

Along with Paul Berman, Packer was one of the higher profile Americans 
involved with the project that Richard Seymour describes as the liberal 
defense of murder. This is from his idiotic New Yorker Magazine blog:

---

This clip from the weekend?s Conservative Political Action Conference 
reminds me exactly of what meetings of the Democratic Socialists of 
America sounded like in the nineteen-eighties. Just substitute 
?free-market capitalism? for ?big government,? ?the New Deal? for ?the 
era of Reagan,? and everything else?the defensive contempt toward 
popular rule, the retreat into the comfort of a purified ?philosophy,? 
the denunciations of unnamed appeasers within the ranks, the call to 
?stamp out? middle-way weaklings?is the same. I attended some of those 
conferences. With each year they became more righteous and more insular, 
and I remember exactly what it felt like to know that my side was going 
to be the losing side for years to come. I remember looking around at my 
fellow democratic socialists and wondering whether I really even 
belonged there.

---

I wrote to him stating that his description of the DSA as if it were 
the Workers World Party reflects a really skewed view of the universe, 
and that it was no wonder that he ended up as Donald Rumsfeld's Gunga Din.


From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 13:00:21 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 15:00:21 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Akhila Raman: "Six Weeks of Obama Presidency: Engage or
	Demonise?"
Message-ID: <908b689f0903041200u1d4d8798x5743bff34e20c4db@mail.gmail.com>

http://home.comcast.net/~raman_akhila/articles/demonizing_obama.htm

*Demonizing Obama
*By Akhila Raman



?**


"*I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation
where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content
of their character...I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up...
live out the true meaning of its creed:" We hold these truths to be
self-evident that all men are created equal". *" Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I
Have a Dream"
<http://www.stanford.edu/group/King/publications/speeches/address_at_march_on_washington.pdf>Speech,
Aug. 28, 1963



Only 45 years since Martin Luther King Jr. delivered the rousing speech "I
have a dream", Barack Hussein Obama, the son of a Kenyan father and Kansas
mother who used foodstamps at times to feed her family, has become the first
Black President of the United States of America, beating all odds. While he
has been vilified and subjected to a barrage of criticism and ridicule from
both ends of the political spectrum, he has been largely supported and
praised by most of the African Americans who mobilized massively in tens of
millions to vote for him, who feel immensely proud of the first Black Family
in the "White" House. How do we reconcile such violently opposing reactions
and could we judge him by his record so far, as opposed to judging him by
sound bites?

*Judging Obama by Sound bites*

During his presidential campaign, Obama used carefully scripted sound bites
such as "I am not a Muslim"(Don't worry), "I will bomb Al-qaeda in
Pakistan"(I am a Strong Leader), "Israel's security is sacrosanct"(I feel
Israel in my kishkas) which infuriated progressive liberals around the world
who denounced him vociferously as a vacuous hope and change peddler and a
"corporate candidate".
[1]<http://home.comcast.net/~raman_akhila/articles/demonizing_obama.htm#fn1>Similarly
Obama's lines "I will raise the payroll taxes and capital gains
taxes on the wealthy making above 250,000 dollars a year" infuriated those
on the Right who denounced him likewise.
[2]<http://home.comcast.net/~raman_akhila/articles/demonizing_obama.htm#fn2>In
the six weeks following his inauguration, similar sounding lines from
Obama and his delayed remarks on Gaza and continuing policy on Afghanistan
and North West Pakistan have drawn sharp criticism from the Left. In the
meanwhile, most of the African Americans, right from ordinary women
like Henrietta
Hughes <http://henriettahughes.com/>and Harlem children
<http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/06/harlem.school/index.html>to renowned
scholars like John Hope Franklin
<http://www.theroot.com/views/john-hope-franklin-obama-presidency>, Henry
Louis Gates Jr.<http://www.philly.com/dailynews/opinion/20081107_Crossing__the_Ultimate_Color_Line_.html>and
poet Maya
Angelou
<http://jezebel.com/5077253/maya-angelou-on-barack-obama-we-all-rise>rejoiced
in his victory and consider him as *one of their own* though he has no slave
ancestry.

Can we step back and examine Obama's record so far from a neutral
perspective, rather than through a puritanical ideological prism?


*Man of action or Hope and Change Peddler?*


? - *Positive actions *
? ? ?In the first six weeks following his inauguration on January 20,
? ? ?President Obama has managed to sign a number of important bills
so far and
? ? ?outline foreign policy directions.

? ? ?- *Domestic Policy*

? ? ?[1] The first legislation he signed into law was Lily Ledbetter Fair
? ? ?Pay Act<http://commonlaw.findlaw.com/2009/01/obama-signs-lilly-ledbetter-fair-pay-act.html>which
will help workers and other victims of past pay discrimination.

? ? ?[2] He signed into law expansion of children's health insurance -
? ? ?SCHIP<http://children.webmd.com/news/20090204/obama-signs-kids-health-insurance-bill>,
? ? ?which will provide health insurance for 4 million additional children.

? ? ?[3] Obama's $787 billion stimulus bill
? ? ?<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009#Healthcare>signed
? ? ?on Feb 17, 2009 contains progressive social investments
creating/saving 2-3
? ? ?million jobs. [ foodstamps, medicaid, welfare, housing and Unemployment:
? ? ?$208b ; Education: $91b ; Infrastructure: $81b ; Energy incl. Renewable:
? ? ?$50b ]

? ? ?[4] He has signed orders for closure of
Guantanamo<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7845585.stm>and secret
CIA prisons around the world and banned waterboarding. [It may
? ? ?take a year to fully close guantanamo and figure out what to do with the
? ? ?several hundred inmates but at least it ensures there will be no new
? ? ?victims]

? ? ?Obama administration has withdrawn
? ? ?<http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090204/sc_mcclatchy/3160804_1>oil
? ? ?and natural gas leases on 130,000 acres of public land in Utah RedRock
? ? ?Wilderness area, granted in haste during last weeks of Bush
administration,
? ? ?indicating that it intends to restore the right balance between
development
? ? ?of resources and protection of environment.

? ? ?[5] Obama's proposed budget for 2010
? ? ?<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_federal_budget#Total_spending>allocates
? ? ?more than half the budget for social security, medicare,
medicaid, housing,
? ? ?education, health and human services. It proposes to create a
$634 billion
? ? ?health care reserve fund over 10 years towards downpayment for healthcare
? ? ?reform. It also proposes reversing tax cuts
? ? ?<http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/26/news/economy/obama_budget_outline/index.htm?cnn=yes>for
? ? ?the wealthy, raise capital gains tax on those making over $250k;
increases
? ? ?corporate taxes with an overall tax increase of $600b over 10
years for the
? ? ?wealthy and corporates.

? ? ?The Republicans are expected to fight him tooth and nail on this
? ? ?budget with a possible Senate filibuster, but Obama can *hardly* be
? ? ?denounced as a "corporate candidate" any more, nor can his "hope" and
? ? ?"change" message be denounced as "vacuous", given his stimulus bill and
? ? ?proposed budget.

? ? ?- *Foreign Policy*

? ? ?[1] *Iraq troop withdrawal *: On Feb 27,2009 Obama outlined his plans
? ? ?for withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, in keeping with his
campaign pledge
? ? ?for "responsible phased withdrawal of troops from Iraq". A
minimum of 90,000
? ? ?troops out of current 140,000 troops will be withdrawn with end of combat
? ? ?mission by August 2010 and he remains committed to removing *all* U.S.
? ? ?troops from Iraq by the end of 2011 under the Status of Forces Agreement
? ? ?with the Iraqi
government.[3]<http://home.comcast.net/~raman_akhila/articles/demonizing_obama.htm#fn3>

? ? ?Many anti-war activists would like faster total withdrawal of troops.
? ? ?Anti-war journalist Nir Rosen's revealing on-the-ground report from
? ? ?Iraq<http://www.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2008/myth_surge_6785>makes
it quite clear that sectarian tension between Shias and Sunnis remains
? ? ?suppressed under the surge and is very real. Former Sunni "Resistance" is
? ? ?today's "Sahwa" working with the US troops Working on a regional
pact with
? ? ?Iran and other neighbours will be crucial for Iraq's long-term stability.
? ? ?Which might explain Obama's policy "We need to be as careful to
get out as
? ? ?we were careless to get in".

? ? ?[2] *Mid-east: *Obama's Al-Arabiya interview shortly after his
? ? ?inauguration was conciliatory towards the Muslim world. Especially his
? ? ?remarks such as "I have muslim relatives" and reiteration of
willingness to
? ? ?talk to Iran( which Ahmedinejad has responded warmly to lately.) and also
? ? ?subtle admission of "mistakes in the past" [ "My job to the
Muslim world is
? ? ?to communicate that the Americans are not your enemy. We sometimes
? ? ?make mistakes
? ? ?<http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/01/27/65096.html>. We have not
? ? ?been perfect..."]



? - *Negative actions*

? Unfortunately, there has been little change in the foreign policy of
? Obama administration towards Afghanistan and North-West Pakistan with
? continued drone attacks which kill many innocent civilians. None of his
? positive actions outlined in the previous section are any comfort for the
? Afghan and Pakistani civilians who bear the brunt of these attacks. But
? there are indications of possible policy changes in future.

? [1] *Afghanistan: *In his 02/17/09 interview to CBC, Obama admitted
? failure <http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/02/17/obama-cbc.html> of
? military policy in afghanistan and mentioned the need for "comprehensive
? strategy using diplomacy and development to counter the growing Taliban
? insurgency in Afghanistan". [towards which he has ordered a policy review].

? [2] *Mid-east: *Obama's initial silence on Israel's recent brutal assault
? on Gaza was disturbing. Israel appears to have done a strategic unilateral
? ceasefire just before Obama's inauguration, presumably so as not to get in
? his bad books, following Obama's delayed remarks of his "concern for
? palestinian civilian casualty". Which could mean at the *very minimum*,
? during Obama's term(s), Israel may not dare another blatant carnage on the
? *scale* of gaza war and 2006 lebanon war [for which it had unconditional
? backing from the Bush administration.] Notwithstanding his pre-election
? capitulation in front of AIPAC, Obama has recently made veiled
remarks that a
? future without hope for the Palestinians
? <http://www.metimes.com/International/2009/01/23/arabs_weigh_obamas_words_to_assess_his_viewpoints/9992/>is
? unacceptable (along with obligatory reaffirmation of commitment to Israel's
? security). He has appointed George Mitchell as the envoy for mid-east, who
? has former successful negotiating experience in Northern Ireland Peace
? Process. US has also recently donated $900m
? <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7918105.stm>to the Palestinian
? Authority for Gaza reconstruction.


*Walk The Walk and Talk The Talk*

It is clear that Obama's record has been mixed. There has been intense
criticism <http://www.antiwar.com/avnery/?articleid=12963> over his speech
in front of AIPAC in June 2008. Rashid Khalidi, a Palestinian American
Professor at Columbia University, who knew Obama well has described Obama's
support for Israel as a "requirement to win a national election in the U.S"
and does not begrudge<http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-obamamideast10apr10,0,7297945,print.story>his
friend for being out of touch and remains hopeful that Obama will do
better towards Palestinians.

Clearly Obama is prepared to "Walk The Walk and Talk The Talk" as he himself
described as what is required to run for US Presidency. As a mainstream
politician, he cannot expect to win if he speaks like a puritanical Ralph
Nader. He appears to have formulated cleverly crafted stump speech lines
which will appeal to the masses and has stayed away from controversial
stances. All this can be justified if he manages to effect policies which
help people at the margins of the society, which he certainly *has* done
with his stimulus bill outlined in the previous section, which *will* surely
help millions of workers and people at the margins.

Not all his cabinet choices are corporate idealogues, his main economic
advisor Lawrence summers himself has evolved
<http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/10/magazine/10wwln-summers-t.html>from
deregulation enthusiast towards pro-regulation of financial sector and even
writes now in favour of income equality, higher taxes for rich and lower for
the poor and is one of the main driving forces in Obama's stimulus bill and
proposed budget. Besides his cabinet has diversity with many women and
minorities. [4]<http://home.comcast.net/~raman_akhila/articles/demonizing_obama.htm#fn4>

*Engaging Obama Vs Demonizing Obama*

People on the Left who are disenchanted with Obama have two options: Hold a
very puritanical ideological banner, view everything that Obama says or does
through an ideological prism and continue to whip the latest President in
Washington on perceived moral high grounds. Alternatively, they could choose
to give him credit where it is due- such as progressive measures outlined in
the previous section- and *engage* him on grounds of *mutual respect* with
progressive issues of interest to them where he is lagging behind.

Dean Baker and Mark Weisbrot of Center for Economic Policy research(CEPR)
have chosen the latter approach and have consistently written articles with
helpful and constructive
criticism<http://www.cepr.net/index.php/op-eds-&-columns/op-eds-&-columns/health-care-reform-is-needed-now-more-than-ever/>.
And Obama administration has taken care to invite
them<http://www.cepr.net/index.php/press-releases/press-releases/progressive-leaders-at-white-house-summit-today-underscore-need-for-health-care-reform/>recently
to a White House fiscal summit, as they have invited
<http://www.politicalbase.com/profile/Mark%20Nickolas/blog/&blogId=6376>other
progressive groups such as moveon.org(anti-war) and Planned Parenthood
recently who choose to engage with them based on mutual respect.
[5]<http://home.comcast.net/~raman_akhila/articles/demonizing_obama.htm#fn5>

It may be worthwhile remembering the words of Hugo Chavez before being
unduly harsh on Obama:

"* I believe it's better to die in battle, rather than hold aloft a very
revolutionary and very pure banner, and do nothing ... Try and make your
revolution, go into combat, advance a little, even if it's only a
millimetre, in the right direction, instead of dreaming about utopias. *" Hugo
Chavez in an interview with Tariq Ali
<http://www.counterpunch.org/tariq08162004.html>

*Akhila Raman *
March 2009


[ The author is a researcher based in California. Full Text of the article
with detailed references can be found in: Demonizing Obama
<http://home.comcast.net/~raman_akhila/articles/demonizing_obama.htm>]
**


*References:*

[1]<http://home.comcast.net/~raman_akhila/articles/demonizing_obama.htm#fnr1>
John
Pilger: From Kennedy to Obama: Liberalism's last fling.
<http://www.johnpilger.com/page.asp?partid=489>
Ralph Nader on Obama
<http://www.democracynow.org/2008/6/18/ralph_nader_on_barack_obama_it>

[2]<http://home.comcast.net/~raman_akhila/articles/demonizing_obama.htm#fnr2>Obama
Tax Plan
<http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes/Factsheet_Tax_Plan_FINAL.pdf>
Capital Gains: Families with incomes below $250,000 will continue to pay the
capital gains rates that they pay today. For those in the top two income tax
brackets ? likewise adjusted to affect only families over $250,000 ? Obama
will create a new top capital gains rate of 20 percent. Obama?s 20% rate is
equal is the lowest rate that existed in the 1990s and the rate that
President Bush proposed in 2001. It is almost a third lower than the rate
that President Reagan signed into law in 1986.

Average Tax Rates Below the 1990s: Overall, the top 1 percent of households
? people with an average income of $1.6 million per year ? would see their
average federal income and payroll tax rate increase from 21 percent today
to 24 percent, less than the 25 percent these households would have paid
under the tax laws of the late 1990s.

[3]<http://home.comcast.net/~raman_akhila/articles/demonizing_obama.htm#fnr3>Responsibly
Ending the War in Iraq
<http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-of-President-Barack-Obama-Responsibly-Ending-the-War-in-Iraq/>
"..by August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end...And under the
Status of Forces Agreement with the Iraqi government, I intend to remove all
U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2011..."

[4]<http://home.comcast.net/~raman_akhila/articles/demonizing_obama.htm#fnr4>Pendulum
swings towards regulation: Lawrence
Summers<http://www.hks.harvard.edu/news-events/news/commentary/pendulum-towards-regulation>
Cabinet and top
advisors<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%20Presidential_transition_of_%20Barack_Obama#Cabinet_and_top_
advisors>

[5]<http://home.comcast.net/~raman_akhila/articles/demonizing_obama.htm#fnr5>Obama
and Nader<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/feb/24/obama-nader-bid-would-not-hurt-campaign/>
Obama has always resented the notion that if two parties disagree with each
other on a specific issue, that should necessarily mean that one of them is
not substantive enough.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Mar  4 13:03:59 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:03:59 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] 4 Months, 3 Weeks, 2 Days
Message-ID: <49AEDEAF.7080504@panix.com>

Along with Wall-E, I ordered 4 Months, 3 Weeks, 2 Days from Netflix. 
This is a 2008 Romanian movie about the horrors of illegal abortion in 
Ceausescu?s Romania. The first movie was named best animated feature by 
my colleagues in NYFCO, while the second earned best foreign movie last 
year. I had misgivings about both movies, but felt obligated to 
experience what my peers backed with my own eyes.

Just as I am suspicious of any product with the brand name Disney on it, 
I am also averse to any movie that falls within the general category of 
how evil Communism was. Like The Lives of Others, which was named best 
foreign movie by NYFCO in 2007, I didn?t need to watch a movie to know 
that East Germany or Romania were crushing the human spirit and all that 
sort of thing. My preferences are for movies like Goodbye, Lenin, which 
at least tried to humanize the old guard Communists even if they are 
hardly an appeal to overthrow the capitalist system.

Much to my surprise, my misgivings about 4 Months were unfounded, as was 
not the case with Wall-E. Rather than being an ideological blunderbuss 
against Stalinism, the movie is much more a story about two young women 
dealing with a problem that exists in countries ruled by the right and 
the left alike. Although there is clearly an implied critique of a 
social system that operated on nominally egalitarian values, director 
Cristian Mungiu was far more interested in the human drama which pits 
vulnerable college roommates against some completely callous men, 
including the abortionist from hell.

full: http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2009/03/04/4-months-3-weeks-2-days/


From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 13:05:50 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 15:05:50 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
In-Reply-To: <d5c.347e7ef6.36e0009d@aol.com>
References: <d5c.347e7ef6.36e0009d@aol.com>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903041205v4340be85kec144f77d4446113@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 11:04 AM,  <Jscotlive at aol.com> wrote:

> Ruthless:
>
> If the Soviets had succeeded in Afghanistan, Pakistan would have ?been
> caught between two USSR-allied countries (Af. and India), and in ?a
> difficult position -- posing an easy target to invade.
>
> Reply:

>
> Pakistan was a US Cold War ally. Why the fuck would the US wish to invade
> one of its allies?



Huh??  Who said anything about the *US* invading Pakistan?

You are not making any sense here, I am sorry.


From info at kersplebedeb.com  Wed Mar  4 13:20:13 2009
From: info at kersplebedeb.com (kersplebedeb)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:20:13 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Why the Red Army Faction Matters
In-Reply-To: <49AE9161.8020106@panix.com>
References: <49AE841C.9080806@kersplebedeb.com> <49AE9161.8020106@panix.com>
Message-ID: <49AEE27D.5090309@kersplebedeb.com>

Dear Louis,
Thanks for your response - of course, the point of the post was 
certainly not to argue that the time is now for urban guerilla warfare 
to be adopted as a strategy by the left. In fact, the point of the post 
had nothing to do with whether or not "the time is right" - rather, it 
was meant to explain why the Red Army Faction are worth learning about.

Obviously, if everybody believed it to be premature to engage in armed 
struggle (or any other tactic) as long as the masses keep their 
illusions in the system, well then the time would never be right. 
Popular consciousness is influenced by tactics and strategies we adopt, 
and our refusal to even contemplate certain forms of struggle doesn't do 
anything to move things forward; at times a strategy that the masses 
initially reject can polarize a situation to our advantage - it doesn't 
often happen that way, but it can.

In the RAF's case, against the odds, this strategy bore some fruit. Call 
in counterintuitive, or call it dialectics, but varieties of focoism 
were adopted by many groups in the seventies, and while the armed 
organizations were largely wiped out in the first world, their political 
legacy has not been completely extinguished. While i think focoism is a 
pretty bad idea, i don't think it can be dismissed without actually 
studying its effects. And a rejection of focoism does not entail a 
rejection of armed struggle per se.

Regardless of one's opinions about it, clandestine and violent actions 
are a predictable feature of any radical movement, of the left or the 
right. Within all of the most promising twentieth century movements, 
some individuals and groups did begin to complement what aboveground 
organizing was occurring with occasional clandestine and illegal acts of 
sabotage and violence. By doing so they themselves became a part of the 
equation, and at times dramatically changed the balance of forces - in 
ways at times harmful and at times beneficial to the broader movement.

Looked at in retrospect, we can see that some of what the RAF did was 
disastrous, some of it was quite helpful. But in either case i would 
argue that learning this history, and seeing how the guerillas arrived 
at the positions they did, is helpful whether we agree with them or not. 
& studying the RAF is particularly rewarding because at least during 
their first seven years they produced so many writings about what they 
were doing and why they were doing it, making

As to the RAF's grasp of Marxism, or the value of their radical ideas, 
you certainly won't be able to get a handle on these from my post. If 
you're interested you may find it useful to check out the German 
guerilla website (http://www.kersplebedeb.com), though the texts up at 
the moment are from previous translations - we're in the process of 
replacing them with the translations from the the book i recently 
co-published along with PM Press, Projectiles for the People. (Or of 
course you could pick up the book itself - 
https://secure.leftwingbooks.net/index.php?l=product_detail&p=240.)

But to dismiss the value of learning about the RAF because you dismiss 
armed struggle in the present context strikes me as silly.

-k



From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Mar  4 13:34:25 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:34:25 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Why the Red Army Faction Matters
In-Reply-To: <49AEE27D.5090309@kersplebedeb.com>
References: <49AE841C.9080806@kersplebedeb.com> <49AE9161.8020106@panix.com>
	<49AEE27D.5090309@kersplebedeb.com>
Message-ID: <49AEE5D1.3010302@panix.com>

kersplebedeb wrote:
> 
> Obviously, if everybody believed it to be premature to engage in armed 
> struggle (or any other tactic) as long as the masses keep their 
> illusions in the system, well then the time would never be right. 
> Popular consciousness is influenced by tactics and strategies we adopt, 
> and our refusal to even contemplate certain forms of struggle doesn't do 
> anything to move things forward; at times a strategy that the masses 
> initially reject can polarize a situation to our advantage - it doesn't 
> often happen that way, but it can.

I would rule out bank robberies, etc. in countries that are 
parliamentary democracies. This seems like ABC to me. I don't know how 
old you are, kersplebedblep, but I am a veteran of the 60s and 70s and 
saw how such adventurism undermined our movement.

> In the RAF's case, against the odds, this strategy bore some fruit. 

Well, please fill us in.

> Regardless of one's opinions about it, clandestine and violent actions 
> are a predictable feature of any radical movement, of the left or the 
> right. Within all of the most promising twentieth century movements, 
> some individuals and groups did begin to complement what aboveground 
> organizing was occurring with occasional clandestine and illegal acts of 
> sabotage and violence. 

Of course. But Germany in the 1970s was not run by Batista or anybody 
like him. If students were being picked up by the cops or death squads, 
then developing an underground would have not only been mandatory, it 
would have been foolish to avoid doing so. But you have to know what 
stage of the struggle you are in. It is like confusing the first month 
of a pregnancy with the last--you don't want to end up with an abortion.

> Looked at in retrospect, we can see that some of what the RAF did was 
> disastrous, some of it was quite helpful. But in either case i would 
> argue that learning this history, and seeing how the guerillas arrived 
> at the positions they did, is helpful whether we agree with them or not. 

I prefer reading about gorillas, and strongly recommend George B. 
Schaller's "The Year of the Gorilla".

> As to the RAF's grasp of Marxism, or the value of their radical ideas, 
> you certainly won't be able to get a handle on these from my post. If 
> you're interested you may find it useful to check out the German 
> guerilla website (http://www.kersplebedeb.com), though the texts up at 
> the moment are from previous translations - we're in the process of 
> replacing them with the translations from the the book i recently 
> co-published along with PM Press, Projectiles for the People. (Or of 
> course you could pick up the book itself - 
> https://secure.leftwingbooks.net/index.php?l=product_detail&p=240.)

Why don't you favor us with some of their profound insights.


> But to dismiss the value of learning about the RAF because you dismiss 
> armed struggle in the present context strikes me as silly.

Okay, I am just an old silly-billy.








From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Wed Mar  4 14:02:14 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 16:02:14 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban government changes and imperialist and other
	speculations
Message-ID: <4E501DB4D26F4AEA97980C221C76E262@office1pc>

The broadcast below from Free Speech Radio/Council of Hemispheric Affairsj
is a useful source mostly acts as a counter to the more extreme speculations
about the government changes. Fidel Castro's statements are also valuable,
but I will admit that his comments about personal ambitions and the hopes of
the imperialist media in a couple of the reassigned or ousted figures is
cryptic, although Fidel who tries to be completely honest, I am convinced,
though he is also completely human, may well be expressing something real.
Those who know nothing, the category we are all in, are stuck with knowing
nothing.

I, for instance, knew Roque as a very competent voice of Cuba's
international line. (Not my favorite foreign minister. As an old-timer,
these are Raul Roa and Carlos Rafael Rodriguez. But totally in their line
and tradition.)

I certainly made no assumption one way or the other over whether, in
addition of this, he had the qualifications required of a successor of Fidel
and Raul. Got me there. (Although I admit I kind of have my eye on Elian 
Gonzalez, who I have tended to think since I first heard him speak at the
age of five is an extraordinarily talented and strong-minded young person.)


The radio or podcast or whatever report below makes one statement I would
directly challenge. That is that Hugo Chavez flew into Cuba in the last few
days specifically to ask Raul Castro to retain Roque. I don't think Chavez
makes such interventions in Cuban internal matters, and I know the Cuban
leadership has always regarded such interventions in other countries'
internal government matters as insulting and violations of sovereignty. 

But over time, Cuba's economic, foreign, and social policies have developed
a degree of integration, as well as close cooperation in many political
areas. So I don't doubt that Raul would consider it natural to report to him
directly on changes of this scope.

In the US media, including  some radical outlets, the governmental changes
are portrayed in the context of a fight between "capitalism" and
"socialism," which is portrayed as their only possible explanation. 

"Capitalism" is supposedly represented by the famous "China current" which
advocates the establishment of capitalist relations on the scale that the 
Chinese government. Raul is portrayed as a  sometimes presented as a full
member of the "China current -- desperately awaiting the death of his
brother so that he can reestablish capitalism (also known in bourgeois
terminology as "reality," "practicality" and "reality") and get rid of
"socialism" (defined solely as "ideology" imposed by "ideologues" on a
resistant "real world."  

This conception is really in the, to state my own opinion, Maoist styloe
which has been alien to the Cuban revolution and the Castro leadership style
from the beginning.

And one of the available facts is that although the Cuban "China current" is
world famous, and the US media waits with baited breath for its inevitable
victory, there is no solid evidence that it exists. It is an application of
high-Kremlinological "deep reading" to a Cuban society that is more
transparent (though not totally open) than the analysts care to admit. Do I
deny that it exists? No. Do I think there is a "China current" in Cuba.
Rather doubt it.

However, Cuba faces a consistent problem with organizing and planning its
resources and improving living standards in the country. How can it become,
in a period where Latin America has opened up to Cuba to an unprecedented
degree, a real contributor to the process of Latin American integration. I
see no evidence that Cuba, in restructuring its economy -- a constant need
in fact -- is looking primarily toward Miami or Wall Sreet or Washington, 
DC. I think they are looking not a Miami, Wall Street, or Washington DC.
I think they are looking at Venezuela, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Ecuador,
Uraguay, Argentina, Honduras, El 
Salvador, Nicaragua, Haiti. South, not north or west as the "China current" 
mythology has them doing.
Fred Feldman


Cuba Government Shake Up
News Segments Tue, 03/03/2009 - 13:06 

Length: 4:11 minutes (3.84 MB)
Format: MP3 Mono 44kHz 128Kbps (CBR)

Cuban President Ra?l Castro has shaken up that country?s cabinet, ousting
several of Fidel Castro?s closest advisors. Included in that list is Felipe
Perez Roque, who some thought might be next in line to become president of
the socialist island-nation. It?s unclear if the shake-up connotes a
significant power change or simply a generational change. Aura Bogado speaks
with Larry Birns, Director of the Washington-based Council on Hemispheric
Affairs.


 






From jim.ferguson1917 at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 14:04:50 2009
From: jim.ferguson1917 at gmail.com (Jim Ferguson)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 16:04:50 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] "Critique of Intelligent Design " book review
Message-ID: <181b16100903041304q2920fb5auf174432dc9d93ae7@mail.gmail.com>

http://socialistworker.org/2009/02/26/evolution-of-intelligent-design

The strange evolution of "intelligent design"
Scott Johnson reviews a new book that traces the debate over
intelligent design--and its anti-materialist roots.

February 26, 2009

THE RALLYING cry of the intelligent design (ID) movement is that
Charles Darwin's theory of evolution is "only a theory" and that
schools should "teach the controversy." They then go about attempting
to poke holes in this mere "theory"--ignoring that relativity and even
Newtonian mechanics are also "theories"--with little to show for their
own theory.

Every attempt to explain a presumably unexplainable adaptation by
evoking the theory of an "intelligent designer" eventually collapses
under the weight of research that shows the evolutionary roots of the
organism or its trait.

In spite of--or probably because of--the weaknesses of their
arguments, ID supporters prefer to focus on the "gaps" in Darwinian
evolution, no matter how small, rather than talk about the background
to their own theory. Many biologists who provide brilliant and
devastating critiques of ID tend to keep the argument on this ground
as well, reluctant to take on the philosophical implications behind
either theory.

There are a number of excellent books upholding the science of natural
selection and criticizing the pseudo-science of intelligent design,
but few look the philosophy behind the ID movement square in the face
and challenge it on those terms. Critique of Intelligent Design by
John Bellamy Foster, Brett Clark and Richard York attempts to rectify
this situation.

The modern roots of the intelligent design movement lie in the 1987
Supreme Court ruling Edwards v. Aguillard, which ruled that teaching
Biblical creation as an alternative to evolution was an
unconstitutional endorsement of religion. The vague notion of an
intelligent designer--possibly but not necessarily a God or other
supernatural force, but not requiring a religious commitment to the
Garden of Eden or Noah's Ark--suddenly became the new theory of
creationists.

A creationist book in the making called Creation Biology was renamed
Of Pandas and People, with the word "creationism" crudely substituted
with "intelligent design" throughout, a fact that would expose the
religious roots of the ID movement in a 2005 trial.

An even bigger expos?, however, occurred with the publication of the
Discovery Institute's "Wedge Document"--an explicit multi-year battle
plan documenting the actual goals of the movement's leading
think-tank. Never meant for public eyes, this document was "liberated"
in 1999 by a part-time worker entrusted with copying it and his
tech-savvy friend who posted it on the Internet.

In one key passage quoted by Bellamy et al., we find that "The
Discovery Institute's Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture
seeks nothing less than the overthrow of materialism and its cultural
legacies." Elsewhere, the document states that their goal is to change
attitudes on "sexuality, abortion and belief in God."

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

SO IT is clear that the background and purpose of ID are religious,
but a further theme of Critique of Intelligent Design is the
anti-materialist roots of the ID arguments. These neo-creationists are
opponents of all of the obvious figures in materialist philosophy and
the scientific revolution such as Charles Darwin, Karl Marx and
Sigmund Freud. But they also have a particular bone to pick with
Epicurus, the ancient Greek materialist philosopher who was a
contemporary of Plato and Aristotle.

According to leading ID ideologue William Dembski, "All roads lead to
Epicurus and the train of thought he set in motion." Apparently, this
is a grudge going back many centuries before Christ.

ID proponents despise Epicurus because he rejected the interference of
the Gods as explanations of the material world and even had a crude
theory of evolution to explain the development of life. While he
avoided engaging in politics in favor of contemplating philosophy in
his academic "Garden," he admitted women and slaves to study as
equals--unlike other Greek academies. Karl Marx, who was impressed by
his philosophy, would later write his doctoral dissertation on
Epicureanism.

In return for his philosophical contributions, as Critique explains,
Western thinkers have attacked and downplayed the ideas of Epicurus
for centuries. Dante's Inferno "consigned Epicurus and his followers
to an eternity of torture in open coffins in the sixth circle of
Hell."

The Catholic theologian Thomas Aquinas rejected Epicurus in favor of
the idealist Plato because Epicurus "denied that there is any
providence" and "held that the world came about by chance." Aquinas
also argued that the material world was directed by some
"intelligence...like an archer giving a definite motion to an arrow to
wing its way to the end."

The book provides a specifically Marxist perspective that the authors
employ in an attempt to avoid the traps of either ceding too much
ground to religious ideas (as they argue radical paleontologist
Stephen Jay Gould did) or simply retreating to a "crude atheism" that
dismissively snubs its nose at religion:

As a materialist, Marx opted not to invest in the abstraction of God
and religion. At the same time, he did not attempt to disprove the
supernatural existence of God, since that transcended the real,
empirical world and could not be answered, or even addressed, through
reason, observation, and scientific inquiry...[A]s Marx observed in
his Theses on Feuerbach, a crude atheism that sought to establish
itself alongside traditional religion "as an independent realm in the
clouds" had relatively little to offer. The critique of religion was
therefore socially meaningful only to the extent that it...[was]
rooted in "revolutionary practice."

Much of Critique of Intelligent Design discusses this centuries-long
battle between materialists and anti-materialists. Fortunately, even
though the book is more about philosophy than science and politics, it
is not an unreadable tome of abstract ideas.

Rather, this slim volume is meant as an intervention in the discussion
around intelligent design, giving a philosophical underpinning to the
debate in a way that most scientific discussions do not. The book also
provides a valuable and brief introduction to the history of
materialist philosophy and its detractors.

What is surprising is how often the book is able to show that the
battles against materialist ideas have invoked evidence of
"intelligence" and a "designer," much like the arguments taking place
in the classrooms and courtrooms today. The authors are quite
convincing in using this fact to make the point that these arguments
are not new not, are not going away, and are about even more than
whether evolution is taught in the classroom.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Review: Books
John Bellamy Foster, Brett Clark and Richard York, Critique of
Intelligent Design [2]. Monthly Review Press, 2008, 240 pages, $16.95.


From info at kersplebedeb.com  Wed Mar  4 14:10:49 2009
From: info at kersplebedeb.com (kersplebedeb)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 16:10:49 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Why the Red Army Faction Matters
In-Reply-To: <49AEE5D1.3010302@panix.com>
References: <49AE841C.9080806@kersplebedeb.com>
	<49AE9161.8020106@panix.com>	<49AEE27D.5090309@kersplebedeb.com>
	<49AEE5D1.3010302@panix.com>
Message-ID: <49AEEE59.9070708@kersplebedeb.com>

Louis Proyect wrote:
>> In the RAF's case, against the odds, this strategy bore some fruit. 
>>     
> Well, please fill us in.
>   

The 1972 May Offensive, in which the RAF bombed two U.S. Army bases, the 
offices of a right-wing newspaper chain, a judge's car and two police 
buildings, was inspirational and helped pull sections of the 
non-dogmatic left to adopt more radical positions and struggles. By 
establishing clandestine bombings as the "outer limit" of what the 
movement was capable of, the RAF and other armed groups helped establish 
a situation in which other forms of mass violence were easier to adopt 
and defend. This ended up having a broad effect far beyond the ranks of 
their supporters. Of course, some of these folks ended up engaging in 
armed activities, so if like Louis one starts the discussion with the a 
priori judgment that that's a dead end, then i guess this isn't a good 
thing. But that's a point you've stated, but haven't proven.

The RAF prisoners use of hunger strikes is another example of the group 
adopting a particularly extreme form of struggle, one which on the face 
of it may seem abhorrent, and using it to turn the situation to their 
advantage. As detailed in my post 
(http://sketchythoughts.blogspot.com/2009/03/why-red-army-faction-matters.html), 
and in the book Projectiles for the People, this use of hunger strikes 
allowed a small organization that had been all but wiped out by arrests 
to renew itself, drawing in new members.

Finally, even the 1977 campaign to free the prisoners, which is viewed 
by everyone as having been a catastrophe not only for the left, but also 
for the RAF, was not an unmitigated defeat. By pushing Schmidt to lurch 
to the right the tiny guerilla organizations managed to help lay the 
basis for breaking leftists away from the SPD, which in turn contributed 
to the breakthrough of the Greens. Of course, some of these folks ended 
up integrated into the system, so if like me one starts the discussion 
with the a priori judgment that that's a dead end, then i guess this 
isn't a good thing. But that's a point i've stated, but am not going to 
argue here.
> Why don't you favor us with some of their profound insights.
>
>   
check out the book - its 500+ pages of their documents translated. or 
keep on checking the www.germanguerilla.com website where many of these 
documents will appear. i mean i could start copy pasting their documents 
and sending them out over the list, but i think you'd be (rightly) 
unsubbing me pretty quickly

> Okay, I am just an old silly-billy.
>   
Ah, but a lovable old silly-billy. i believe "curmudgeon" is the word 
most admirers would use.

In all seriousness: i don't expect you or many Marxmailers to agree with 
me on this. & i wasn't trying to bait you (or anyone else) into a 
discussion of a.s. - i know we disagree, and debating it would be a 
waste of my time and yours. But i think the RAF's experience is an 
interesting story, and can be of interest even to those who reject their 
choices.


From bhaskar.sunkara at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 14:12:17 2009
From: bhaskar.sunkara at gmail.com (Bhaskar Sunkara)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 16:12:17 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] George Packer and the DSA
In-Reply-To: <49AEC5E2.4000501@panix.com>
References: <49AEC5E2.4000501@panix.com>
Message-ID: <bee7ff780903041312h2fbadab6j89e08be5553d75d@mail.gmail.com>

Actually I can sort of see that analogy between the rhetoric of CPAC and
progressive conferences during the worse of the neoliberal years.  The rest
of his passage is nonsense though.  As far as some of DSA majority stances
in the 1980s, like not standing with Jesse Jackson, I would say that DSA has
moved well to the left since that time (I believe most of the national
committee supported Nader in 2000).  But during the 1980s, it appears to me
that many people of the left were willing to accept a centrist to stop
Reaganism, whereas the right-wing today wants to elect someone further right
despite the progressive direction of public opinion.

From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 14:13:43 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 16:13:43 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Conference on the Solidarity Economy, Amherst,
	Massachusetts, March 	19-22
Message-ID: <908b689f0903041313r1ef7adb6q943d5fc5e9da207e@mail.gmail.com>

---------- Forwarded message ----------

The US Solidarity Economy Network is an organization whose mission is
to collect all the positive alternatives to capitalism that are out
there and build a movement out of them.

Their first conference is March 19-22 in Amherst, Massachusetts.

http://www.populareconomics.org/ussen/?q=node/99


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Wed Mar  4 14:20:24 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 16:20:24 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
References: <30589334.1236134746955.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net><908b689f0903032140h3b11c8e7i75dc03f4487075e0@mail.gmail.com><1C25340F97DA4AA3B5FA82BC38439C0D@dmsthinkpad>
	<908b689f0903040720u6e84747fyf994e3314c46a36e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <A9A3DD75341844B796EC331E31D23A91@dmsthinkpad>

Ruthless, you don't have any idea what you are talking about.  It useless 
and fruitless replying to Ruthless.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ruthless Critic of All that Exists" <ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 10:20 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Afghanistan




From sartesian at earthlink.net  Wed Mar  4 14:22:34 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 16:22:34 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Are we facing the mother of all bubbles?
References: <2fa158550903041004q55d7ce88o75ca6c6e974bf770@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <DFA0C02ADCFF495DA97C0994D55993C0@dmsthinkpad>

Don't think there's much of a bubble too it.  Compared to the EU, and the UK 
the US is a picture of stability.   Then yen, of course, has risen 
considerably vs. the euro and the dollar, much to Japan's dismay.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "N?stor Gorojovsky" <nmgoro at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 1:04 PM
Subject: [Marxism] Are we facing the mother of all bubbles?


> Against anything received economic knowledge would suggest, the
> currency of the USofAm is increasing its value.



From sartesian at earthlink.net  Wed Mar  4 14:23:52 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 16:23:52 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Why the Red Army Faction Matters
References: <49AE841C.9080806@kersplebedeb.com>
	<49AE9161.8020106@panix.com><49AEE27D.5090309@kersplebedeb.com>
	<49AEE5D1.3010302@panix.com>
Message-ID: <48233DC4F30E455A865C7E2C63473DEB@dmsthinkpad>

I'd rule out bank robberies because the bourgeoisie already did that, beat 
us to the punch and on a scale we  could only match with a revolution.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Louis Proyect" <lnp3 at panix.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Why the Red Army Faction Matters


>
> I would rule out bank robberies, etc. in countries that are
> parliamentary democracies. This seems like ABC to me. I don't know how
> old you are, kersplebedblep, but I am a veteran of the 60s and 70s and
> saw how such adventurism undermined our movement.



From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Mar  4 14:33:22 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 16:33:22 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Why the Red Army Faction Matters
In-Reply-To: <49AEEE59.9070708@kersplebedeb.com>
References: <49AE841C.9080806@kersplebedeb.com>	<49AE9161.8020106@panix.com>	<49AEE27D.5090309@kersplebedeb.com>	<49AEE5D1.3010302@panix.com>
	<49AEEE59.9070708@kersplebedeb.com>
Message-ID: <49AEF3A2.8090100@panix.com>

kersplebedeb wrote:
> The 1972 May Offensive, in which the RAF bombed two U.S. Army bases, the 
> offices of a right-wing newspaper chain, a judge's car and two police 
> buildings, was inspirational and helped pull sections of the 
> non-dogmatic left to adopt more radical positions and struggles.

Well, I reject the idea that bold actions serve to spark the rest of the 
left. This is not Leninism, but Blanquism. Furthermore, these armed 
attacks allowed the German government to escalate its attacks on the 
mass movement.

> By 
> establishing clandestine bombings as the "outer limit" of what the 
> movement was capable of, the RAF and other armed groups helped establish 
> a situation in which other forms of mass violence were easier to adopt 
> and defend. This ended up having a broad effect far beyond the ranks of 
> their supporters. Of course, some of these folks ended up engaging in 
> armed activities, so if like Louis one starts the discussion with the a 
> priori judgment that that's a dead end, then i guess this isn't a good 
> thing. But that's a point you've stated, but haven't proven.

What do you mean by "proven"? Do I need to explain how the bourgeois 
press made an amalgam between us and the Weatherman maniacs who would 
commandeer high school classes and browbeat students? That's all the 
proof I needed, to see the impact of this kind of idiocy on our movement.

  > Finally, even the 1977 campaign to free the prisoners, which is viewed
> by everyone as having been a catastrophe not only for the left, but also 
> for the RAF, was not an unmitigated defeat. By pushing Schmidt to lurch 
> to the right the tiny guerilla organizations managed to help lay the 
> basis for breaking leftists away from the SPD, which in turn contributed 
> to the breakthrough of the Greens.

The Greens didn't need adventurists to prepare their way. It was 
ordinary people's alarm over nuclear power that did the job.

> check out the book - its 500+ pages of their documents translated. or 
> keep on checking the www.germanguerilla.com website where many of these 
> documents will appear. i mean i could start copy pasting their documents 
> and sending them out over the list, but i think you'd be (rightly) 
> unsubbing me pretty quickly

Well, I took a brief look at their archives on www.germanguerilla.com 
and it strikes me as utterly devoid of the sort of thing that Lenin was 
up to when he wrote on the origins of capitalism in Russia, etc. It is 
mostly juvenile ranting like this:

 >>The media?s message in a nutshell is... Sell. Anything that can?t 
sell is considered pukeworthy: News and information become commodities 
for consumption and the most popular publications become commercially 
saturated. A ratings war ensues on television. All this is an attempt to 
avoid contradictions and antagonisms latent in public audiences, those 
contradictions that are highlighted are never of any real consequence. 
In order to achieve any position in the market you must attach yourself 
to huge media corporations, for example the dependency of smaller 
entities on the Springer Corporation grows in proportion to Springer?s 
expansion ? it has now started swallowing up local newspapers. An Urban 
Guerilla can expect absolutely nothing but bitter hostility from these 
institutions. An Urban Guerilla can only orient himself by means of 
self-criticism and Marxist critique ? nothing else: ?Whoever is not 
afraid of execution dares to tear the king down from his horse.? (Mao)<<

Embarrassing.




From markalause at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 14:34:04 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 16:34:04 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Why the Red Army Faction Matters
In-Reply-To: <48233DC4F30E455A865C7E2C63473DEB@dmsthinkpad>
References: <49AE841C.9080806@kersplebedeb.com> <49AE9161.8020106@panix.com>
	<49AEE27D.5090309@kersplebedeb.com> <49AEE5D1.3010302@panix.com>
	<48233DC4F30E455A865C7E2C63473DEB@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0903041334oe5ab62cx90f16570f65e4cce@mail.gmail.com>

Talk about smuggling the conclusion into the premise... The opening
quote of this post from Clausewitz, On War reads: "It is of immense
importance that the soldier, high or low, whatever rank he has, should
not have to encounter in War those things which, when seen for the
first time, set him in astonishment and perplexity; if he has only met
with them one single time before, even by that he is half acquainted
with them. This relates even to bodily fatigues. They should be
practiced less to accustom the body to them than the mind. In War the
young soldier is very apt to regard unusual fatigues as the
consequence of faults, mistakes, and embarrassment in the conduct of
the whole, and to become distressed and despondent as a consequence.
This would not happen if he had been prepared for this beforehand by
exercises in peace."

The implication could not be more clear...that readers should be made
familiar with military and paramilitary activities and their effects
if we're going to be involved in radical politics.  It is, of course,
utterly absurd....

People should have gotten playing war out of their system before they
reach adulthood....

ML


From Waistline2 at aol.com  Wed Mar  4 14:43:43 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 16:43:43 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Eight Theses on the Economic Crisis
Message-ID: <c92.42d76831.36e0500f@aol.com>


. . . a Marxist unraveling of crisis, any crisis begins with  Marxism and the 
environment of private property; an assessment of ones specific  state of 
development of the productive forces and the condition of the  workers as value 
producers.  
 
The financial crisis that came to a head in the fall of 2008 expresses the  
increasing destruction of value that is undermining the system of exchange. The 
 continuing financial instability threatens the collapse of the entire world  
economy. This collapse is taking place in the context of the working class  
taking it on the chin - as falling wages, for 30 relentless years. 
 
The speculative bubble as housing - temporal phenomena, is not simply a  case 
of  "just speculation," but rather, expresses speculation in a wholly  new 
environment. Speculation today is not the old historical form of "tulip  
speculation." The emergence of a new technological regime allows an entirely new  
international architecture - infrastructure, of finance to come into existence  
and dominate finance capital. 
 
In the temporal sense the housing bubble began deflating - visibly, in  2005, 
specifically at the front of the curve. The front of the curve was  Florida, 
Nevada (Vegas) and Arizona to a large degree. The index establishing  the 
front, was and remain new housing starts and the entire productivity  
infrastructure represented in new housing starts. As this tangible index  expanded so did 
exotic financing. Specifically, the more economically stable  layers of the 
working class found it easier to "move up" on the basis of easy  credit and 
speculation; and so did successive layers of the working class.  Inasmuch as 
credit extension is theoretically unlimited, credit - not debt, was  extended to 
all and the next generation by inference. 
 
Game over.  
 
Less than three weeks ago President Obama fled to Florida, ground zero, to  
launch his political battle against his sectarian opponents in Congress to pass 
 his "stimulus bill:" the historic Southern fascist axis. He picked Florida  
precisely because it is ground zero and to indicate the line would be "drawn  
here."  The images were broadcast nation wide.  Entire communities  rendered 
homeless. 
 
New housing starts as an index, peaked and the layoffs began; credit began  
incrementally drying up as the smart money sought refuge in safe havens,  
awaiting the next Ponzi scheme. New housing starts was used as an index -  this 
time, because it gives a view on how many more suckers are left to enter  the 
Ponzi game. It is in fact a credit crisis rather than its mirror image  
expression as "debt crisis" financing. Hence the liquidity crisis. 
 
Game Over. 
 
Right now to day, from every quarter of the bourgeoisie, is the clarion  call 
to destroy commodities and productive forces. "Burn down," "bull doze"  but 
by all means eliminate the glut in the housing market. Reestablish the  
material index for the imaginary relations. 
 
The destruction of productive forces is at hand. 
 
Someone scream "Firrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeee!" 
 
In what some call the "mathematization of the market," electronic  technology 
(read: the progress of industry,  . . .read the progressive  accumulation of 
productive forces) makes it possible to bundle, re-bundle,  divide a bundle 
into one hundred components, track, and pay dividends on  investments in 
financial derivatives, credit default swaps, currency and price  speculation, and 
various other financial investments. The 1/100th part of the  bundle sold and 
resold is valueless. The investors are accumulating huge hoards  of wealth and 
inflicting catastrophe on the world's poorest workers. But this  wealth does not 
reflect value.  The labor deployed to create this wealth is  not simply 
divorced from material production but is deployed to manipulate  symbols. 
 
Nay, the 1/100 th part of the bundle sold and resold is "exotic" or a super  
symbolic mathematical relations. No one can figure out or predict how far down 
 the rabbit hole goes. 
 
"Bur baby burn . . . burn the house down"
 
"Tear the roof off the sucker." 
 
The sudden loss of wealth in the current crisis expresses the prolonged  
decline in the amount of socially necessary labor (value) in the mountains of  
commodities generated by the world economy. No form or amount of re-regulation,  
nationalization of risk, or other government intervention can accomplish a  
return to a sound economy on the old foundation. The old foundation of society  
is the electro-mechanical configuration of the productive forces. Restoration 
of  profitability on the old foundation would mean devolution and destruction 
of the  very financial architecture that created the form of this crisis: its  
financial/speculative form. 
 
The incremental 20 year building up of the revolution in the mode of  
production; the increasing elimination - outing, of labor from production,  drives 
the value of all commodities, including the commodity labor to zero. Zero  is 
the line that is the cost of reproduction of the workers class, rather than  an 
abstract "nothing" or "no labor deployed" or a hideous vision of  the  machine 
society/civilization of the Matrix movies. 
 
In response to the declining rate of profit and the contracting market for  
real goods, trillions of dollars had flooded into financial instruments,  
speculation, and other investments that rest only remotely, minutely and  
abstractly on the real production of value, or rather an expanded value.   These 
trillions of dollars dwarf the value of the real economy. More than $1,000  trillion 
is invested in these financial instruments on the world financial  market ? 
the equivalent of 20 years' real, value-producing, labor-employing  global 
production. 
 
The FROP is not a mere tendency but a law of capital manifesting the  
property relations. This is not an abstract thing but super material. It is the  
material relations of production that is the focus. From the largest point of  
view what is taking place is no more or less than the development (progress) of  
industry. The development of industry is the product of science and innovation 
 but can only manifest itself on the basis of all the laws inherent to 
bourgeois  production. The external form of the sum total of these laws is the 
anarchy of  production or competition, which means in the last instance competition 
in  reducing the cost - value, socially necessary labor of commodities. The  
increasing destruction of value hurls capital out of the bond with labor; 
forces  it to flee to areas of greater returns. 
 
The historical limit has been hit. Now comes the social consequence . . .  to 
your neighborhood. My neighborhood got hit in 1997.  
 
Capital ruptured from value production, appearing as modern speculation is  
not the meaning of fiction capital. Fiction capital is capital not ruptured 
from  value production and appearing as the "not of promise." A promissory note, 
index  to tangible commodities.  
 
Speculative capital is "kukoo." 
 
Capital ruptured from value production is impossible.
 
But there it is. 
 
Then an era of social revolution begins. 
 
Communist Revolution. 
 
Unite or Perish.
 
WL. 
 
**************Need a job? Find employment help in your area. 
(http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=employment_agencies&ncid=emlcntusyelp00000005)


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Wed Mar  4 14:53:15 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 16:53:15 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Beige Book, and Comparisons of Productivity,
	Unit Labor costs
Message-ID: <055BD41489F04D22B1EF35F9728C71F6@dmsthinkpad>

Reports from the twelve Federal Reserve Districts suggest that national 
economic conditions deteriorated further during the reporting period of 
January through late February.  Ten of the twelve reports indicated weaker 
conditions or declines in economic activity; the exceptions were 
Philadelphia and Chicago, which reported that their regional economies 
"remained weak."  The deterioration was broad based, with only a few sectors 
such as basic food production and pharmaceuticals appearing to be 
exceptions.  Looking ahead, contacts from various Districts rate the 
prospects for near-term improvement in economic conditions as poor, with a 
significant pickup not expected before late 2009 or early 2010.
full at: 
http://www.federalreserve.gov/FOMC/BeigeBook/2009/20090304/default.htm


And:

INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS OF MANUFACTURING PRODUCTIVITY AND UNIT LABOR COST 
TRENDS 2007, REVISED

Manufacturing labor productivity increased in 2007 in 14 of the 17 economies 
compared by the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics. The 
Republic of Korea and Taiwan had the largest productivity increases of 8.7 
percent each. The United States productivity increase of 4.7 percent was the 
fourth largest.

full at: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/prod4.pdf



From Jscotlive at aol.com  Wed Mar  4 14:55:22 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 16:55:22 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
Message-ID: <cca.4896e88e.36e052ca@aol.com>

Ruthless:
 
Huh?? Who said anything about the *US* invading Pakistan?

You are  not making any sense here, I am sorry.

Reply:
 
You are right. I misread that section of your post. My  apologies.

From shmage at pipeline.com  Wed Mar  4 15:11:58 2009
From: shmage at pipeline.com (Shane Mage)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 17:11:58 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban government changes and imperialist and other
	speculations
In-Reply-To: <4E501DB4D26F4AEA97980C221C76E262@office1pc>
References: <4E501DB4D26F4AEA97980C221C76E262@office1pc>
Message-ID: <77E75788-7025-45C2-B352-753A731467A7@pipeline.com>


On Mar 4, 2009, at 4:02 PM, Fred Feldman wrote:
>
> ...Those who know nothing, the category we are all in, are stuck  
> with knowing nothing...This conception is really in the, to state my  
> own opinion, Maoist style which has been alien to the Cuban  
> revolution and the Castro leadership style from the beginning.
>
What can be more characteristic of "the Maoist [cold Stalinist]  
style"  than to make important leadership changes behind closed doors,  
without any discussion among ordinary workers, peasants, citizens--or  
even party members--and then to announce them with only the vaguest  
boilerplate rationale and no comment at all from the people negatively  
affected but with slanderous suggestions of some sort of corruption  
from the superannuated supreme leader himself!!  Fred truly "knows  
nothing" if he thinks this "style" of leadership has been anything but  
characteristic of the Fidelista variant of Stalinism since the very  
beginning of his regime.

It is truly saddening that at this crucial juncture the Cuban  
revolution is being entrusted to its Gamelins and Weygands while its  
deGaulles and Leclercs are being fired.


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 lajany_otum at yahoo.co.uk  Wed Mar  4 15:13:41 2009
From: lajany_otum at yahoo.co.uk (Lajany Otum)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 22:13:41 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
References: <30589334.1236134746955.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net><908b689f0903032140h3b11c8e7i75dc03f4487075e0@mail.gmail.com><1C25340F97DA4AA3B5FA82BC38439C0D@dmsthinkpad>
	<908b689f0903040720u6e84747fyf994e3314c46a36e@mail.gmail.com>
	<A9A3DD75341844B796EC331E31D23A91@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <452653.25582.qm@web27401.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>



Artesian writes: 
>
> Ruthless, you don't have any idea what you are talking about.  It useless 
> and fruitless replying to Ruthless.
>

Ruthless does seem to enjoy taking you on a game of swat a mole.  
Lajany Otum



      

From info at kersplebedeb.com  Wed Mar  4 15:33:11 2009
From: info at kersplebedeb.com (kersplebedeb)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 17:33:11 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Why the Red Army Faction Matters
In-Reply-To: <b16d8daf0903041334oe5ab62cx90f16570f65e4cce@mail.gmail.com>
References: <49AE841C.9080806@kersplebedeb.com>
	<49AE9161.8020106@panix.com>	<49AEE27D.5090309@kersplebedeb.com>
	<49AEE5D1.3010302@panix.com>	<48233DC4F30E455A865C7E2C63473DEB@dmsthinkpad>
	<b16d8daf0903041334oe5ab62cx90f16570f65e4cce@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <49AF01A7.4050305@kersplebedeb.com>

i find it surprising that anyone could think of getting involved in 
radical politics without wanting to be familiar with military and 
paramilitary realities - i mean take a look at Marxmail threads, and 
you'll see these are often discussed. Military theory does not mean 
military technique - i.e. understanding the effects (political and 
otherwise) of a military or paramilitary event doesn't require knowing 
how to participate in said events. And being familiar with something 
does not mean engaging in it - but making a fetish out of one's 
unfamiliarity with military science just strikes me as weird.

As Ward Churchill put it in his back-cover blurb on the book we're 
discussing, the point of studying the RAF is not only to set the 
historical record straight, but also to know why these leftists did what 
they did, and to draw consequent lessons from their experience. There is 
no assumption that these lessons will lead in mimicry, in fact that is 
very far from the argument put forward.

As to the Clausewitz quote, the point is not that one should get 
military training or exercise more often (though that may not be a bad 
idea), but that one should learn about things prior to "the time being 
ripe". If you wait until "the time is ripe" to learn about something, 
then you're bound to be unprepared, to become demoralized, to make 
unnecessary errors. As the RAF put it in their 1972 document Serve the 
People: "We believe that the guerilla will develop, will gain a 
foothold, that the development of the class struggle will itself 
establish the idea of armed struggle only if there is already an 
organization in existence conducting guerilla warfare, an organization 
that is not easily demoralized, that does not simply lie down and give up."

Of course, some people's politics seems based on the assumption that the 
time never will be ripe. Oh well...



Mark Lause wrote:
> The implication could not be more clear...that readers should be made
> familiar with military and paramilitary activities and their effects
> if we're going to be involved in radical politics.  It is, of course,
> utterly absurd....
>
> People should have gotten playing war out of their system before they
> reach adulthood....
>
> ML
>   



From Waistline2 at aol.com  Wed Mar  4 15:33:16 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 17:33:16 EST
Subject: [Marxism] Theses on the Economic Crisis/Eample of factual data
	& process
Message-ID: <c61.4234307b.36e05bac@aol.com>

_http://thewolfatthedoor.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2004-01-01T00%3A00%3A
00-05%3A00&updated-max=2005-01-01T00%3A00%3A00-05%3A00&max-results=23_ 
(http://thewolfatthedoor.blogspot.com/search?updated-min=2004-01-01T00:00:00-05:00&up
dated-max=2005-01-01T00:00:00-05:00&max-results=23) 
 
5. Semiconductors: Capital on a Wafer, or, The Transubstantiation of Value,  
or, Your Virtual Check is in the Email 
 
Semiconductor fabrication has always been a cyclical business, but a  
cyclical business with a difference. Over the past 40 years, the semiconductor  
industry has achieved a compounded annual growth of 17 percent per year. That?s  a 
big difference. The capital investment requirements of the industry are  
enormous as the production process can only circulate its capital and operating  
costs by introducing accelerating speeds, power, and quality to each successive  
product, thus devaluing its previous products, its previous capital 
investments.  Technical innovation in the production process through capital investment 
 reduces the unit costs of production in conjunction with the technical  
innovation of the finished product. The result of this juncture of technical  
innovation in both process, measured by cost per kb, and product, as measured in  
millions of instructions per second (MIPS) has been the dramatic decline in  
semiconductor prices. Private and government organizations have taken on the  
challenge of quantifying the adjusted price drop for semiconductors, expressed  
in dollars per kilobit for the individual products of the industry and for 
all  products. The US Bureau of Economic Analysis has that ratio for DRAM chips  
produced in 1975 at 1.8125. In 1995, the ratio was calculated at .0030 or  
1/600th of the 1975 ratio. For the total basket of products, the index of prices 
 in 1996 were less than half the index of prices in 1992. The rate of growth 
of  semiconductor prices for the period 1975-1985 is a negative 36.9 percent 
per  annum. For the 1985-1996 period, the annual rate of decline was 
approximately 20  percent. 
 
In the mid 1980s, Japan was the source of most of the world?s DRAM  
production. US companies, reluctant to invest in what had become essentially  contract 
bulk production, abandoned the field and retooled for the production of  
specialty chips, microprocessor systems, MOS logic chips, and flash memory  
products. Intel, which accounts for 80 percent of microprocessor sales,  developed 
its "copy exactly" fabrication plant system during this time, bringing  these 
plants online in the mid 1990s. Revenue per employee, measured at $114,000  in 
1985, climbed to $461,000 in 1995. Overall corporate revenues tripled while  
the work force had declined some 30 percent. The estimated capital investment in 
 each new fabrication plant was $1.2 billion. 
 
For the semiconductor industry as a whole, product sales increased 265  
percent between 1991 and 1995, leaping ahead 40 percent in 1995 alone, only to  
collapse in 1996 as the industry had produced too many fabrication plants  
extracting proportionately more surplus value from less labor and thus, could  not 
offset the reduced rate of profit. Sales declined 8 percent in 1996. Sales  did 
not exceed the 1995 mark until 1999 when revenues were reported at $149  
billion. At the same time as fabrication plants were being closed in 1996-1997,  
the industry began again its cycle of technical innovation in production 
process  and product. This process centered around developing the 300mm fabrication  
process, in which a larger wafer would be the basis for production, yielding 
a  greater number of processors, with each processor of greater quality than 
the  previous generations. The capital requirement for each 300mm fabrication 
plant  is estimated to be $2.5 billion. 
 
Capital intensity in the production process, the increased value of the  
instruments and products used in fabrication, had recorded a compound annual  
growth rate of 13 percent between 1987 and 1995. Between 1995 and 1999 that  
growth accelerated to reach 19 percent. 
 
The microprocessor fabrication process was re-engineered to produce an  
economically viable yield at a faster rate. Utilization of more advanced and  
reliable manufacturing equipment, faster and better methods for wafer inspection  
were employed to decrease the time from production to market. Through this  
acceleration, the fabrication process sought to offset the devaluation of its  
previous products and techniques. 
 
Sales again rocketed forward, this time to $204 billion in 2000. And once  
again, at their new historical peak, sales collapsed. In 2001, sales fell to  
$139 billion. By the end of 2001, 34 fabrication plants, 11.5 percent of the  
North American total, had been taken out of production. By the very demands of  
its own process to realize profit, semiconductor fabrication has replaced its  
cyclical nature with a structural predicament. The industry itself recognizes 
 that the 2001 contraction is more severe and different in kind than the 
previous  cyclical downturns. Capital spending in 2002 was 38 percent below the 
2001  level. 
 
The structural predicament is the result of the accumulation of capital  
depressing the margin of profitability. The implied margin (revenues minus  costs, 
divided by total revenues) in the fabrication process had declined by  17.5 
percent between 1993 and 1999, from 88.2 to 72.8. At a certain point the  
expansion of production, the increase in the mass of profits cannot offset this  
decline in margin, this fall in rate of profit. We call that  overproduction.
 
This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from 
_http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm_ (http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm) 
**************Need a job? Find employment help in your area. 
(http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=employment_agencies&ncid=emlcntusyelp00000005)


From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Mar  4 15:53:19 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 17:53:19 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Why the Red Army Faction Matters
In-Reply-To: <49AF01A7.4050305@kersplebedeb.com>
References: <49AE841C.9080806@kersplebedeb.com>	<49AE9161.8020106@panix.com>	<49AEE27D.5090309@kersplebedeb.com>	<49AEE5D1.3010302@panix.com>	<48233DC4F30E455A865C7E2C63473DEB@dmsthinkpad>	<b16d8daf0903041334oe5ab62cx90f16570f65e4cce@mail.gmail.com>
	<49AF01A7.4050305@kersplebedeb.com>
Message-ID: <49AF065F.8040002@panix.com>

kersplebedeb wrote:
> Of course, some people's politics seems based on the assumption that the 
> time never will be ripe. Oh well...
> 

Given the economic crisis, it is entirely possible that a militant 
working class mobilization will provoke violent attacks from the 
ultraright. In those events, workers will have to defend themselves. But 
I don't see what that has to do with bank robberies, etc.

Here's how the American Trotskyists dealt with violent ultrarightists in 
the 1930s:

The United States in the 1930s became a battleground between industrial 
workers and the capitalist class over whether workers would be able to 
form industrial unions. There had been craft unions for decades, but 
only industrial unions could fight for all of the workers in a given 
plant or industry. This fight had powerful revolutionary implications 
since the captains of heavy industry required a poorly paid, docile 
work-force in order to maximize profits in the shattered capitalist 
economy. There were demonstrations, sit-down strikes and even gun-fights 
led by the Communist Party and other left groups to establish this basic 
democratic right.

Within this political context, fascist groups began to emerge. They drew 
their inspiration from Mussolini's fascists or Hitler's brown- shirts. 
In a time of severe social crisis, groups of petty-bourgeois and lumpen 
elements begin to coalesce around demagogic leaders. They employ 
"radical" sounding rhetoric but in practice seek out working- class 
organizations to intimidate and destroy. One such fascist group was the 
Silver Shirts of Minneapolis, Minnesota.

In chapter eleven of "Teamster Politics", SWP leader Farrell Dobbs 
recounts "How the Silver Shirts Lost Their Shrine in Minneapolis". It is 
the story of how Local 544 of the Teamsters union, led by Trotskyists, 
defended itself successfully from a fascist expedition into the city. 
Elements of the Twin Cities ruling-class, alarmed over the growth of 
industrial unionism in the city, called in Silver Shirt organizer Roy 
Zachary. Zachary hosted two closed door meetings on July 29 and August 2 
of 1938. Teamster "moles" discovered that Zachary intended to launch a 
vigilante attack against Local 544 headquarters. They also discovered 
that Zachary planned to work with one F.L. Taylor to set up an 
"Associated Council of Independent Unions", a union-busting operation. 
Taylor had ties to a vigilante outfit called the "Minnesota Minute Men".

Local 544 took serious measures to defend itself. It formed a union 
defense guard in August 1938 open to any active union member. Many of 
the people who joined had military experience, including Ray Rainbolt 
the elected commander of the guard. Rank-and-filers were former 
sharpshooters, machine gunners and tank operators in the US Army. The 
guard also included one former German officer with WWI experience. While 
the guard itself did not purchase arms except for target practice, 
nearly every member had hunting rifles at home that they could use in 
the circumstance of a Silver Shirt attack.

Events reached a climax when Pelley came to speak at a rally in the 
wealthy section of Minneapolis.

Ray Rainbolt organized a large contingent of defense guard members to 
pay a visit to Calhoun Hall where Pelley was to make his appearance. The 
powerful sight of disciplined but determined unionists persuaded the 
audience to go home and Pelley to cancel his speech.

full: http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/fascism_and_war/fascism.htm


From Paula_cerni at msn.com  Wed Mar  4 16:02:03 2009
From: Paula_cerni at msn.com (Paula)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 15:02:03 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Limbaugh's definitions of socialism
Message-ID: <BAY122-DS4A24B2586CAAF4ADF4BF380A70@phx.gbl>

'Socialism is the government's going to take care of everything' says the caller. But government gave us the subprime crisis and a permanent underclass, says Rush.
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_030209/content/01125112.guest.html

Paula

From stuartmunckton at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 16:07:17 2009
From: stuartmunckton at gmail.com (Stuart Munckton)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 10:07:17 +1100
Subject: [Marxism] BDS victory and Briain boycotts Israeli tycoon over
	settlementsth
Message-ID: <2c6145850903041507x6707cf57ia92d4859acaa299e@mail.gmail.com>

* **Adalah-NY: The Coalition for Justice in the Middle East
*


Media Contact: *info at adalahny.org*


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

*UK Government Boycotts Israeli Tycoon
Lev Leviev over Settlement Construction
*


Decision a Victory for Coordinated Campaign in Palestine,
US, UK and Israel


*New York, NY, March 4 -* The government of the United Kingdom has decided
to
boycott Israeli diamond and real estate mogul Lev Leviev over his companies'
construction of Israeli settlements on Palestinian land in the Occupied West
Bank, the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz Daily (1) reported today. The decision

by the UK government followed a coordinated advocacy  campaign by human
rights advocates in New York, the UK, Palestine and Israel demanding that
the UK government end plans to rent the new UK Embassy in Tel Aviv from
Leviev's company Africa-Israel.

The UK's Tel Aviv Ambassador notified Leviev of the decision by letter,
following a British parliamentary debate, and inquiries with Leviev's
company Africa-Israel over its activities in the West Bank,  Ha'aretz
reported. According to Ha'aretz, "The embassy in Tel Aviv confirmed the
details of the story."

The Ha'aretz article did not note the construction of the settlement of
Zufim on the land of the village of Jayyous by Leviev's company Leader. (2)
The Israeli army has recently intensified efforts to crush Jayyous' protest
campaign against the construction of Leviev's settlements and Israel's wall
on village land. (3)  Sharif Omar, the head of Jayyous' Land Defence
Committee, commented, "We feel heartened by the UK government decision
opposing Leviev's settlement construction, and we expect our brothers and
sisters in the UAE to follow the UK government's example by banning Leviev
from selling his diamonds in Dubai. We need more pressure in order to end
Israeli repression, return our land, and restore our rights."

 Adalah-NY has held 13 protests at Leviev's Madison Avenue jewelry store
since it opened. (4)  UNICEF and Oxfam (5) have renounced Leviev over human
rights abuses, Hollywood stars have distanced themselves from him, (6) and
the Dubai government is under pressure to boycott Leviev's businesses. (7)
Additionally, Africa-Israel has also lost 90% of its value and has been
engaged in an embarrassing New York real estate battle.(8)

Leviev's companies have built Jewish-only homes on occupied Palestinian land

in the Israeli settlements of Zufim, Mattityahu East, (9) Har Homa and Maale

Adumim, (10) impoverishing villages like Bil'in  (11) and Jayyous and
violating international law. (12)   Leviev also funded the settlement
organization the Land Redemption Fund. (13)  In December, the Israeli
financial journal Globes published an expose of Leviev's serious human
rights abuses and failure to fully comply with the Kimberley Process in
Angola article in English). (14)  And in Namibia, Leviev recently fired
around 200 striking diamond polishers, (15) some of whom were already
struggling to survive on less than $2 per day. (16)

After  Israeli  (17) and British papers reported the UK's plans to rent its
new Tel Aviv embassy from Leviev, (18)  eight groups in the US, UK and
Palestine launched a letter-writing campaign to the UK's Foreign Office.
(19) Among those writing to demand a boycott of Leviev were ex-BBC Middle
East Correspondent Tim Llewelyn, US academics Norman Finkelstein and Noam
Chomsky, Vice President of the European Parliament Luisa Morgantini, (20)
and British lawyer Daniel Machover, writing in the Independent. (21) A
November 22 letter in the Guardian by eight Palestinian civil society
leaders, (22)including Palestinian Legislative Council members Mustafa
Barghouti and Hanan Ashrawi, called on the UK to "publicly guarantee that it

will not do business with settlement-builders such as Lev Leviev."

Omar Barghouti, one of the initiators of the Palestinian civil society call
for Boycott, Divestment  and Sanctions (BDS) said, "I wholeheartedly
congratulate British activists and Adalah-NY for this substantial
achievement for the boycott movement. This is a step in the right direction
for the British government, a government that has taken thousands of steps
in the wrong direction, not least of which is its open complicity in
Israel's war crimes in Gaza and the rest of the occupied territory. Time for

a British arms ban on Israel." (23)



(1)  <*http://www.haaretz..com/hasen/spages/1068545.html*>

           (2) <*http://adalahny.org/images/file/leviev-registrar.pdf*>

(3)<*http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=45896*>
(4) <*
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustrialConglomerates/idUSN2047885820080620
*>
(5) <*
http://www.oxfamamerica.org/whatwedo/emergencies/israeli-palestinian-conflict/hollywood-pin-ups-statement
*>
(6) <*
http://adalahny.org/index.php/press-releases/25-press-releases-land-developer/268-celebrity-phote-leviev-website-removed
*>
(7) <*http://www.albawaba.com/en/main/238631/&mod=print*>
(8)<*http://ny.therealdeal.com/articles/tick-tock-for-leviev*>
(9)<*http://www.newleftreview.org/?view=2624*>
(10) <*
http://adalahny.org/index.php/boycott-divestment-a-sanction/boycott-against-land-developers-leviev?start=9
*>
(11) <*
http://adalahny.org/index.php/letters-a-statements/17-letters/212-bilin-leviev-unicef
*>
(12) <*
http://adalahny.org/index.php/letters-a-statements/17-letters/211-jayyous-leviev-unicef
*> 13)
(13) <*http://www.peacenow.org/hot.asp?cid=247*>
(14) <*
http://adalahny.org/index.php/press-coverage-2/265-leviev-globes-angola-mines
*>
(15) <*http://allafrica.com/stories/200807141371.html*>
(16) <*http://www.newera.com.na/article.php?db=oldarchive&articleid=21504*>
(17 <*http://www.ibcc.co.il/news.htm#9*>
(18) <*
http://www..guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/09/israelandthepalestinians.foreignpolicy
*>
(19) <*
http://adalahny.org/index.php/press-releases/25-press-releases-land-developer/234-press-release-leviev-uk-embassy
*>
(20)<*
http://adalahny.org/index.php/letters-a-statements/17-letters/235-morgantini-uk-embassy-leviev
*>
(21) <*
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/letters/letters-west-bank-settlements-936182.html
*>
(22) <*
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/22/tel-aviv-lev-leviev-israelhttp:/www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/22/tel-aviv-lev-leviev-israel
*>
(23)<*http://www.bdsmovement.net/*



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

"The basis of optimism is sheer terror" ? Oscar Wilde

From Waistline2 at aol.com  Wed Mar  4 17:44:58 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 19:44:58 EST
Subject: [Marxism] China's holdings of US Debt
Message-ID: <d39.441f644c.36e07a8a@aol.com>

Further, it was said less than perhaps two years ago, that the China  holding 
of US dollars, (currency!!!) posed a "hidden" threat to the US economy  if 
China decided to divest itself of this currency. This was and is of course  
nonsense because of the fiat nature of US dollars, and  . . . and because  dollars 
are not a conduit of value, but riveted to oil as purchase, backed by  force 
. . . military might of the US.
 
This relationship is becoming unglued and undesirable. Because of  . .  . . . 
. 
 
it all falls down. 
 
"Do like I tell you or I will slug you in the kisser," is the mode of  
operation of American capital.  
 
China is simply marvelous and proves our daily task. 
 
The best capitalists are always former communists, precisely because they  
have read Marx Capital. This applies not simply to the exaggerated charges of  
Trotskyism and former adherents of this trend "running government" but to  
Stalinists as well. The reason for this peculiar phenomena, in all its  expression 
cannot be located in ideology. 
 
After 5, 10, 20 or more years in the trenches, some make a decision to use  
their learnt ability to care for their families and loved ones and profit from  
blood. Those leaning on the bureaucracy, as it leans on them, are dubbed  
Stalinists. I am alright with this understanding. 
 
Brother for 30 years we have waited for our moment in time, surrendering  not 
one molecule of Marx to the bourgeoisie; marching as loyal soliders of the  
proletariat along the singular line the turns all our individual  follies into 
victory: the advance - progress, of industry.  
 
The composition of capital.  . . . today  . . . at this moment .  . .not 
yesterday . . . look it changed again.
 
Today . . . in the real word  . . . on the news our bourgeoisie is  seeking 
to hang its hat on China. The circle is complete. The inexorably logic  is 
inescapable. 
 
Of course former communists understand capital better than capitalists. 
 
Now is our time. 
 
"Only stroke  . . . 
 
death stroke, tongue all down her throat. 
Nothing I can do
But send her home to you,
I'm through.
Will you sing a song for me blue?" 
 
"Biggie Lives!" 
 
 
WL. 
 


In a message dated 3/4/2009 7:37:53 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
sartesian at earthlink.net writes:
Don't remember hims saying that.  Don't  doubt it for a second-- that he said 
that.

I think the issue is,  however:

-- prior to the collapse of Lehman Bros., prior to the collapse  of Bear 
Stearns, prior even to the 2007 folding of the 2 Bear Stearns hedge  funds 
that marked, more or less, the return of the chickens coming home to  die, 
the argument was that China, as a creditor to the US and as a center  of  FDI 
and industrial production, was going to surpass the US, replace  the US as 
the linchpin of the world economy, that the imbalances in trade  would lead 
to a shift in the economic center of gravity.

I guess  that's still the issue-- does anything that has happened since March 
2007  confirm that "shift"?   Is such a shift in global capitalism even  
possible without the usual way such "transfers" are made--  world  wars?  Can 
China assume any of that role given its overall uneven of  development, and 
unproductive agricultural sector, lack of a freely  convertible currency?  Do 
its debt instrument holdings give it a leg up  that ladder?
 
**************Need a job? Find employment help in your area. 
(http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=employment_agencies&ncid=emlcntusyelp00000005)


From fred.fuentes at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 18:00:36 2009
From: fred.fuentes at gmail.com (Fred Fuentes)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 12:00:36 +1100
Subject: [Marxism] Chavez seizes Cargill unit, threatens to nationalise Polar,
	the 	country's largest private sector employer
Message-ID: <b5a2a8180903041700x4d38f3am997091928e184555@mail.gmail.com>

Chavez seizes Cargill Venezuela unit
Wed Mar 4, 2009 7:54pm EST

By Patricia Rondon

CARACAS (Reuters) - President Hugo Chavez seized a local unit of
American food giant Cargill on Wednesday and threatened to nationalize
Venezuela's largest private company, Polar, as he demanded industry
produce cheaper rice.

The clash with the food companies came less than three weeks after
Chavez, a Cuba ally who has nationalized swaths of the Venezuelan
economy, won a referendum on allowing him to run for reelection.

"I warn you this revolution means business," said Chavez.

The anti-U.S. president is popular among the poor for pressuring
companies to produce cheap goods and for government programs that
provide subsidized food in city slums.

In recent days Chavez has seized some Polar rice mills after accusing
the food industry of skirting his price controls and failing to
produce enough cheap rice.

U.S. company Cargill, which operates one rice mill in Venezuela, said
earlier in the week it was expecting a visit from officials even
though it does not produce the type of rice that is at the center of
the dispute.

Chavez said he ordered the takeover because Cargill -- the largest
privately owned U.S. company -- does not produce basic rice that is
subject to government price controls.

"Prepare the decree, we are going to expropriate Cargill. We are not
going to tolerate this," Chavez said.

It was not clear if Cargill's other Venezuelan food units would be
affected. Cargill Venezuela did not answer calls to their offices.

Polar, which is the country's largest private sector employer and
produces and distributes everything from beer to flour, has vowed to
take legal action over the rice mill takeovers.

(Writing by Saul Hudson, Editing by Frank Jack Daniel)

-- 
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 bhaskar.sunkara at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 18:10:35 2009
From: bhaskar.sunkara at gmail.com (Bhaskar Sunkara)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 20:10:35 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
In-Reply-To: <908b689f0903040720u6e84747fyf994e3314c46a36e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <30589334.1236134746955.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<908b689f0903032140h3b11c8e7i75dc03f4487075e0@mail.gmail.com>
	<1C25340F97DA4AA3B5FA82BC38439C0D@dmsthinkpad>
	<908b689f0903040720u6e84747fyf994e3314c46a36e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <bee7ff780903041710q29c84cd3k6d930ad0571c6b47@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Ruthless Critic of All that Exists <
ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com <ok.president%2Bnbsy at gmail.com>> wrote:

> If the Soviets had succeeded in Afghanistan, Pakistan would have been
> caught between two USSR-allied countries (Af. and India), and in a
> difficult position -- posing an easy target to invade.


What the hell.

From johnedmundson at paradise.net.nz  Wed Mar  4 18:26:15 2009
From: johnedmundson at paradise.net.nz (John)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 14:26:15 +1300
Subject: [Marxism] Afghanistan
In-Reply-To: <bee7ff780903041710q29c84cd3k6d930ad0571c6b47@mail.gmail.com>
References: <30589334.1236134746955.JavaMail.root@elwamui-ovcar.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
	<908b689f0903032140h3b11c8e7i75dc03f4487075e0@mail.gmail.com>
	<1C25340F97DA4AA3B5FA82BC38439C0D@dmsthinkpad>
	<908b689f0903040720u6e84747fyf994e3314c46a36e@mail.gmail.com>
	<bee7ff780903041710q29c84cd3k6d930ad0571c6b47@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1236216375.11416.122.camel@john-desktop>

On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 20:10 -0500, Bhaskar Sunkara wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Ruthless Critic of All that Exists <
> ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com <ok.president%2Bnbsy at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
> > If the Soviets had succeeded in Afghanistan, Pakistan would have been
> > caught between two USSR-allied countries (Af. and India), and in a
> > difficult position -- posing an easy target to invade.
> 
> 
> What the hell.

Presumably the Communist rulers of India would have cooperated with an
hypothetical Soviet invasion of Pakistan. As I said, better left to
www.alternatehistory.com
Cheers,
John



From markalause at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 18:45:41 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 20:45:41 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Why the Red Army Faction Matters
In-Reply-To: <49AF065F.8040002@panix.com>
References: <49AE841C.9080806@kersplebedeb.com> <49AE9161.8020106@panix.com>
	<49AEE27D.5090309@kersplebedeb.com> <49AEE5D1.3010302@panix.com>
	<48233DC4F30E455A865C7E2C63473DEB@dmsthinkpad>
	<b16d8daf0903041334oe5ab62cx90f16570f65e4cce@mail.gmail.com>
	<49AF01A7.4050305@kersplebedeb.com> <49AF065F.8040002@panix.com>
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0903041745s31db35fdud4cd7302f8ee7d1e@mail.gmail.com>

I write about military history when the subject calls for it.
Familiarity doesn't make my politics a jot better.  And it doesn't
prepare me one bit more for "the time" than anyone else.  I'd be a lot
more impressed if, under these conditions, people were studying how to
organize unions, wage strikes, form unemployed groups, build mass
antiwar demonstrations, etc.

That's the stuff we need RIGHT NOW and--you know what?--it's the
essential skills that we'll need LATER....

Still, I'm not sure if anyone taking their strategic cue from Ward
Churchill is going to be impressed with the mass-orientation strategy
among the socialists of how to deal with the far right.

ML


From lnp3 at panix.com  Wed Mar  4 18:55:40 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 20:55:40 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] They don't make Republicans like they used to
Message-ID: <49AF311C.7030000@panix.com>

Doug posted this today on LBO-Talk:

http://www.eisenhowermemorial.org/presidential-papers/first-term/documents/1147.cfm

Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, 
unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you 
would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a 
tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. 
Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few 
other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business 
man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.

---

This I came across in the conclusion to David Gibbs's soon to be 
published book on Yugoslavia that I will be reviewing:

http://www.edchange.org/multicultural/speeches/ike_chance_for_peace.html

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired 
signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not 
fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.

This world in arms is not spending money alone.

It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, 
the hopes of its children.

The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in 
more than 30 cities.

It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 
population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals.

It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement.

We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat.

We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more 
than 8,000 people.


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Wed Mar  4 19:31:23 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 21:31:23 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Theses on the Economic Crisis/Eample of factual data&
	process
References: <c61.4234307b.36e05bac@aol.com>
Message-ID: <E5A5081091FF42A4AFB88F421151EB33@dmsthinkpad>

That was good, wasn't it?  Once in a while even I get it right.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Waistline2 at aol.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 5:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Theses on the Economic Crisis/Eample of factual data& 
process 



From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 20:50:00 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 19:50:00 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Guadeloupe General Strike update Weds. Evening, March 4
Message-ID: <49AF4BE8.3060206@gmail.com>

To the Endorsers of the Sign-On Letter in Support of the Workers and 
People of Guadeloupe

Dear All,

It's Wednesday evening here in San Francisco.

The press in Guadeloupe and France announced this morning that a final 
agreement should have been signed today that granted the workers and 
people of Guadeloupe the overwhelming majority of the demands for which 
they have staged a nationwide general strike since January 20. As of 
this writing, I have not heard from folks in Guadeloupe to find out if 
this is what occurred.

As you know, a tentative agreement was reached late last week. In the 
wee hours of Friday morning, after the tentative agreement was 
announced, there was great joy and celebration in the streets of 
Guadeloupe.  But over the weekend the French authorities, through the 
French-appointed Prefect, or Governor, and the main employers' 
association, the MEDEF, went to the media to announce that an agreement 
had been reached and that everyone should go back to work on Monday.

This outraged the LKP Strike Collective and the workers and people of 
Guadeloupe. No agreement had been signed. And it was up to the Black 
majority on the island, organized in their own LKP Strike Collective, 
the only recognized leadership of the mass movement, to announce whether 
the strike was to end or whether it was to continue. It was not up to 
the Bek?, the white ruling elite on the island, and its colonial 
paymasters in France to speak on behalf of the strikers -- especially 
when they had not signed an agreement.

The people felt that the government and the employers were trying to 
pull a fast one; that is, end the strike without signing a binding 
agreement. And there was additional reason for resentment and distrust: 
Two weeks earlier, the French Minister of Overseas Departments and 
Territories, Yves J?go, had announced during his trip to Guadeloupe, 
where he had joined the negotiating team, that he supported the LKP 
Strike Collective's demand for a 200 euro wage increase. But no sooner 
had he made this declaration than he was disavowed by French Prime 
Minster Francois Fillon and ordered back to Paris. This dashed the 
people's hope that the strike would come to an end, with a victory for 
the workers.

On Monday, March 2, the LKP Strike Collective disclosed the tentative 
agreement: All the main demands of the strikers had been won. 
Negotiations were to resume late Monday morning with the Prefect, the 
MEDEF, and the Small Business Employers' Association to finalize and 
sign the agreement.

But there was now a hitch: The MEDEF employers' association now reneged 
on the part of the agreement involving the 200 euro increase in the 
minimum wage. According to the agreement, the French government would 
pay 100 euros per worker (out of the 200 euro increase) for a period of 
three years by releasing the employers from paying into pension and 
healthcare funds for the workforce -- but after three years, that extra 
charge would have to be paid once again by the employers organized in 
the MEDEF. Now the MEDEF was demanding that the French government assume 
that 100 euro charge indefinitely.

This sent things back to Paris. For the past three days, heated and 
angry debates, negotiations and mobilizations have been the order of the 
day in Guadeloupe.

I hope to get a report first thing tomorrow morning from Guadeloupe. I 
will keep you posted as soon as I hear something.

Thanks again for your interest and support,

In solidarity,

Alan Benjamin


From ratbagradio at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 21:23:07 2009
From: ratbagradio at gmail.com (Ratbag Media)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 14:23:07 +1000
Subject: [Marxism] A message from Mike Crook,
	Socialist Alliance candidate for Sandgate
In-Reply-To: <57b410090903041513xa615001ua2288f984dc6fa12@mail.gmail.com>
References: <57b410090903041513xa615001ua2288f984dc6fa12@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57b410090903042023r3c6bbd51yf9c5ae84a5631146@mail.gmail.com>

?Mike Crook is the Socialist Alliance candidate for Sandgate at the
upcoming Queensland state election on March 21st.
.Click to Play VIDEO
http://socialistalliance-brisbane.blogspot.com/2009/03/essage-frommike-crook-socialist.html

A member of the ALP for 20 years, Mike recently joined the Socialist
Alliance, having become increasingly disenchanted with the ALP's
anti-worker, pro-corporate agenda.

Mike recently participated in a brigade to Venezuela, and seeing
participatory, grassroots democracy, was convinced that the future
lies in mobilizing people for socialist change.

Mike has been a steering committee member and activist on the Your
Rights At Work campaign committee which was instrumental in kicking
out the Howard government, and has campaigned tirelessly for
industrial rights and shorter working hours.

You can read more about the campaign ?on the Socialist Alliance website
http://socialistalliance-brisbane.blogspot.com


From mqduck at sonic.net  Wed Mar  4 21:58:40 2009
From: mqduck at sonic.net (Jeffrey Thomas Piercy)
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 20:58:40 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] More Jon Stewart
Message-ID: <49AF5C00.9010202@sonic.net>

Jon Stewart is about the only liberal I've seen who's stuck to his
principals as the letter after the president's name changed from (R) to (D).

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=220241&title=mess-opotamia-the-iraq-war-is

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



From sebastian at amadeobordiga.u-net.com  Wed Mar  4 22:54:01 2009
From: sebastian at amadeobordiga.u-net.com (Sebastian Budgen)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 06:54:01 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] New from Haymarket Books: Western Marxism and the Soviet
	Union by Marcel van der Linden
References: <361d94f70903040949h2ed71885kaea0aa9983d77192@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BA5EAF57-7E04-4D07-85DD-33FFFC25F32B@amadeobordiga.u-net.com>

> De : Sarah Macaraeg <sarah at haymarketbooks.org>
> Date : 4 mars 2009 18:49:48 HNEC
> ? : sebastian.budgen at clara.co.uk
> Objet : New from Haymarket Books: Western Marxism and the Soviet  
> Union by  Marcel van der Linden
>
> New from Haymarket Books:
>
> WESTERN MARXISM AND THE SOVIET UNION
> By Marcel van der Linden
> Part of the Historical Materialism Book Series
>
> Ordering and review copy information below
>
> ?The Russian Question??understanding the political, economic, and  
> social dynamics of the former Soviet Union?constituted a central  
> problem for Marxism in the twentieth century. Analysts and scholars  
> have offered widely divergent analyses of the character of Soviet  
> society, from viewing it as the embodiment of Communist ideals, to,  
> alternatively, a form of ?bureaucratic collectivism? or ?state  
> capitalism.?
>
> Van der Linden offers an encyclopedic review of this diversity of  
> assessments. This book summarizes the theories and debates,  
> describes the development of different methodological approaches,  
> and chronicles what impact these have had on intersecting issues in  
> political theory and historical analysis.
>
> Western Marxism is a vital resource that stands alone as the only  
> study of the competing perspectives on Soviet society. It includes  
> an exhaustive bibliography, and is organized into well-defined  
> chapters that make it ideal for students and scholars of Russian and  
> global history, social theory, and the contested history of Marxism  
> itself.
>
> ?The amount of sources the author has studied is staggering...the  
> book [has] an encyclopedic value and [is] accessible to all scholars  
> interested in political history.? ?Martin Kragh, Stockholm School of  
> Economics
>
> ?Since the Russian experience is still used to vilify the idea of  
> socialism, the debate remains relevant. Van der Linden...has now  
> produced a comprehensive scholarly account of the arguments.? ?Ian  
> Birchall, London Socialist Historians Group
>
> MARCEL VAN DER LINDEN is research director of the International  
> Institute of Social History and professor in the Department of the  
> History of Social Movements at the University of Amsterdam.
>
> **
>
> To order, please visit:
> http://www.haymarketbooks.org/product_info.php?products_id=1611&osCsid=bd0bd5c83e3ea09b76c3f2cc9bb1b170
>
> For Haymarket's review copy policy, please visit:
> http://www.haymarketbooks.org/contactus_academic.php
>
> About the Historical Materialism Book Series:
> Haymarket is pleased to be the international publisher of the  
> paperback editions of the Historical Materialism Book Series. After  
> the disappearance of Marxism as a (supposed) state ideology, a need  
> for a serious and long-term book publishing programme on Marxism was  
> recognized. Most publishers of scholarly work have abandoned any of  
> the systematic publication of critical research on Marxist theory  
> that they may have indulged in during the 1970s and early 1980s. The  
> peer-reviewed Historical Materialism Book Series addresses this  
> great gap with original monographs, translated texts and reprints of  
> ?classics?. In September 2009, Haymarket will publish the complete  
> series. Historical Materialism titles currently available include:
>
> Between Equal Rights: A Marxist Theory of International Law
> By China Mi?ville
>
> The Theory of Revolution in the Young Marx
> By Michel L?wy
>
> Lenin Rediscovered: What is to Be Done? in Context
> By Lars T. Lih
>
> The German Revolution, 1917-1923
> By Pierre Brou?
>
> **
>
> Book information:
> WESTERN MARXISM AND THE SOVIET UNION
> By Marcel van der Linden
> ISBN 978-1-931859-69-1
> Trade paper $20
> March 2009
> Distributed to the trade by Consortium: 800-283-3572, www.cbsd.com
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sarah Macaraeg
> Publicity
> Haymarket Books
> 773-583-7884 office
> 312-315-8476 cell
> sarah at haymarketbooks.org
> www.haymarketbooks.org



From jayroth6 at cox.net  Wed Mar  4 23:08:48 2009
From: jayroth6 at cox.net (J Rothermel)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 01:08:48 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] L'Humanite eulogizes Updike
Message-ID: <49AF6C70.7020206@cox.net>

ORIGINAL FRENCH ARTICLE : John Updike Le li?vre ne court plus 
<http://www.humanite.fr/2009-01-29_Cultures_John-Updike-Le-lievre-ne-court-plus> 


By A. N.


  John Updike : The rabbit stops running

Translated mardi 10 f?vrier 2009, par Philip Taylor <spip.php?auteur233>

Obituary.

John Updike, author of the Rabbit novels and Couples, is dead.

The sarcastic bard of the hopes and disappointments of the American 
middle-class has died from lung cancer at the age of seventy-six. The 
double Pulitzer prize winner, also known for his gentle and vicious 
contributions to The New Yorker, was born on 18 March 1932, on a farm in 
the small Pennsylvanian borough of Shillington. It was there that he 
grew up, an only child whose mother was obsessed with writing. He 
attended Harvard on a scholarship, as well as studying graphic arts at 
the Ruskin School in Oxford. Already, at the young age of twenty-seven, 
he published the enormously successful *Rabbit, Run.* This was the first 
in a series of five novels devoted to average American Harry ?Rabbit? 
Angstrom, afflicted with the Madame Bovary syndrome and who seeks to 
escape the mediocrity of his existence. Angstrom was to grow resigned to 
his lot, then become rich, finally coming to peace with himself as the 
end drew near. Two of the books in this series, *Rabbit is Rich* and 
*Rabbit at Rest*, won Updike a pair of Pulitzer Prizes, in 1971 and 1990.

It was in 1968 that Updike reiterated the same themes, with *Couples*, a 
ferocious novel on the illusion of being sexually emancipated in 
small-town America. ?In a man?s lifetime, the three most secret things 
are Sex, Art and Religion?, he once said. While not exactly a puritan, 
Updike, the grandson of a Presbyterian minister, had deep Christian 
faith. Yet his approach was far from a conservative one. As he stated in 
2005, ?Rabbit and I have both been pleasantly surprised, in the course 
of the last fifty years, by the decline of puritanism in the fields of 
morality, law, and female fashion?. It was, in fact, due to his 
anti-conformism and his nostalgia for the traditional values of New 
England that John Updike set about exposing the illusions of the 
individualist quest for happiness.

For the sake of of those same American values, he published *Terrorist* 
in 2006, a novel which explores the motivations of Ahmad Ashmawy Mulloy, 
an eighteen-year-old American Muslim manipulated by fundamentalists. 
/Critiques/ of the book were particularly harsh in the aftermath of 911. 
Earlier, he had revisited the literature of the fantastic, 
American-style, with the publication of *The Witches of Eastwick* in 
1984, whose success as a film largely dissipated feminist suspicions of 
misogyny. A less convincing sequel, *The Widows of Eastwick*, appeared 
last year.

Having published twenty-five novels, a dozen collections of short 
stories and several volumes of poetry, Updike occupies a leading place 
in American letters.

-








From bhaskar.sunkara at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 00:05:56 2009
From: bhaskar.sunkara at gmail.com (Bhaskar Sunkara)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 02:05:56 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] My (belated) review of Naomi Klein's Shock Doctrine
Message-ID: <bee7ff780903042305m531f0458p582fcf04a0eefdc7@mail.gmail.com>

http://theactivist.org/blog/
?the-shock-doctrine?-overrated-like-brett-farve-antonio-negri-david-beckham-apple-pie-and-dane-cook

From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Mar  5 07:19:15 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 09:19:15 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Ivory Tower Unswayed by Crashing Economy
Message-ID: <49AFDF63.40203@panix.com>

NY Times, March 5, 2009
Ivory Tower Unswayed by Crashing Economy
By PATRICIA COHEN

For years economists who have challenged free market theory have been 
the Rodney Dangerfields of the profession. Often ignored or belittled 
because they questioned the orthodoxy, they say, they have been shut out 
of many economics departments and the most prestigious economics 
journals. They got no respect.

That was before last fall?s crash took the economics establishment by 
surprise. Since then the former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan 
has admitted that he was shocked to discover a flaw in the free market 
model and has even begun talking about temporarily nationalizing some 
banks. A Newsweek cover last month declared, ?We Are All Socialists 
Now.? And at the latest annual meeting of the American Economic 
Association, Janet Yellen, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of San 
Francisco, said, ?The new enthusiasm for fiscal stimulus, and 
particularly government spending, represents a huge evolution in 
mainstream thinking.?

Yet prominent economics professors say their academic discipline isn?t 
shifting nearly as much as some people might think. Free market theory, 
mathematical models and hostility to government regulation still reign 
in most economics departments at colleges and universities around the 
country. True, some new approaches have been explored in recent years, 
particularly by behavioral economists who argue that human psychology is 
a crucial element in economic decision making. But the belief that 
people make rational economic decisions and the market automatically 
adjusts to respond to them still prevails.

The financial crash happened very quickly while ?things in academia 
change very, very slowly,? said David Card, a leading labor economist at 
the University of California, Berkeley. During the 1960s, he recalled, 
nearly all economists believed in what was known as the Phillips curve, 
which posited that unemployment and inflation were like the two ends of 
a seesaw: as one went up, the other went down. Then in the 1970s 
stagflation ? high unemployment and high inflation ? hit. But it took 10 
years before academia let go of the Phillips curve.

James K. Galbraith, an economist at the Lyndon B. Johnson School of 
Public Affairs at the University of Texas, who has frequently been at 
odds with free marketers, said, ?I don?t detect any change at all.? 
Academic economists are ?like an ostrich with its head in the sand.?

?It?s business as usual,? he said. ?I?m not conscious that there is a 
fundamental re-examination going on in journals.?

Unquestioning loyalty to a particular idea is what Robert J. Shiller, an 
economist at Yale, says is the reason the profession failed to foresee 
the financial collapse. He blames ?groupthink,? the tendency to agree 
with the consensus. People don?t deviate from the conventional wisdom 
for fear they won?t be taken seriously, Mr. Shiller maintains. Wander 
too far and you find yourself on the fringe. The pattern is 
self-replicating. Graduate students who stray too far from the dominant 
theory and methods seriously reduce their chances of getting an academic 
job.

?I fear that there will not be much change in basic paradigms,? Mr. 
Shiller wrote in an e-mail message. ?The rational expectations models 
will be tweaked to account for the current crisis. The basic curriculum 
will not change.?

?I hope I am wrong,? he added.

The political undercurrent undoubtedly makes change more difficult. 
There is a Crayola box full of differently named economic schools that 
are critical of mainstream free-market theory, but these heterodox ? as 
opposed to orthodox ? economists generally tend to fall into the liberal 
camp.

Given the short time span since the crisis began, no one expects large 
curriculum changes yet. But in addition to Berkeley and the University 
of Texas, professors at a number of departments including those at the 
University of Chicago, Harvard, Yale and Stanford, say they are unaware 
of any plans to reassess their curriculums and reading lists, or to 
rethink the way introductory courses are organized.

John B. Taylor, an economist at Stanford and one of President George W. 
Bush?s advisers, whose forthcoming book is titled ?Getting Off Track: 
How Government Actions and Interventions Caused, Prolonged, and Worsened 
the Financial Crisis,? said he was planning to update his introductory 
textbook, ?Principles of Macroeconomics,? because of the crash. But 
while the revision will include information about the financial crisis, 
he said, explanations of fundamental principles won?t change.

To Philip J. Reny, chairman of the economics department at the 
University of Chicago ? Milton Friedman?s intellectual home and free 
market headquarters ? such caution is a good thing. ?Academia typically 
moves slowly and carefully and thoughtfully,? he said. ?There is a lot 
of speculation in the press? as to why the financial system collapsed, 
he added, but a lot of ?work needs to be done to figure out what really 
happened, which dominoes are in front and caused others to fall.?

Outside of the classroom, debates about the crash are taking place in 
several public lectures and faculty workshops on the subject. But 
?before we?re certain of what the answer is, we?re unlikely to think in 
terms of changing the curriculum,? Mr. Reny added. ?That?s very serious. 
The responsible thing to do is wait until we have some understanding of 
what went on here.?

There are a handful of departments that have welcomed alternative 
theorists, like the University of Massachusetts, Amherst; the University 
of Massachusetts, Boston; the University of Utah; and the University of 
Missouri, Kansas City (where the Heterodox Economics Newsletter is 
published).

To Mr. Galbraith and L. Randall Wray, an economist at Missouri, the two 
thinkers whose work is most relevant today are John Maynard Keynes, who 
argued that the government should spend its way out of the Great 
Depression, and Hyman Minsky, who maintained that financial institutions 
could prompt ruinous crashes by taking on too much risk. Neither, Mr. 
Galbraith said, is part of the core curriculum in most economics 
graduate programs.

When asked why graduate students don?t study Keynes or Minksy, Mr. Reny 
replied that graduate students work on subjects ? like real models of 
business cycles ? that are at the frontier of the field; by contrast 
Keynes and Minsky are not on the frontier anymore.

Mr. Wray prefers to call such mathematical modeling ?the frontier of 
nonsense.? For more than a decade Mr. Wray has asserted that both the 
theory and the models used by risk-rating agencies are wrong. He has 
been invited to speak at the University of Chicago, he said, but by 
social science graduate students, not by the economics department.

When it comes to the financial crisis Dani Rodrick, an economist at 
Harvard, said, ?The problem wasn?t with the economics but with the 
economists.? Theories and models are tools, but ?we have fixated on one 
of the possible hundreds of models and elevated that above the others,? 
he said, referring to free market theory. ?We form a narrative of the 
moment, which fits the zeitgeist.?

For many the narrative that seemed to best explain the experiences of 
the 1970s, ?80s and ?90s, when the Soviet economy collapsed, and India 
and China became more market oriented was told by free market theorists.

A real shift among economists will come only if there is a wholesale 
collapse, Mr. Wray and Mr. Card agreed. If unemployment is still high 
three years from now, then you might start to see a paradigm shift, Mr. 
Card said; economists will ?have to say that the market isn?t supposed 
to work this way.? But if the economy bounces back in a year, then they 
will be able to dismiss the financial crash as an anomaly that is 
unimportant to the larger theory, he added.

A field shifts, Mr. Card and Mr. Wray said, not so much because the wise 
elders change their minds, (they are too invested in the way things 
are), but rather because a new generation of scholars comes along and 
pushes into new areas of research.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Mar  5 07:28:37 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 09:28:37 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Hell hath no fury like an imperialist scorned
Message-ID: <49AFE195.1000508@panix.com>

(from the latest anti-Empire report by Bill Blum)

http://www.killinghope.org/bblum6/aer67.html

Hell hath no fury like an imperialist scorned

Hugo Ch?vez's greatest sin is that he has shown disrespect for the 
American Empire. Or as they would say in America's inner cities ? He's 
dissed the Man. Such behavior of course cannot go unpunished lest it 
give other national leaders the wrong idea. Over the years, the United 
States has gotten along just fine with brutal dictators, mass murderers, 
torturers, and leaders who did nothing to relieve the poverty of their 
population ? Augusto Pinochet, Pol Pot, the Greek Junta, Ferdinand 
Marcos, Suharto, Duvalier, Mobutu, the Brazil Junta, Somoza, Saddam 
Hussein, South African apartheid leaders, Portuguese fascists, etc., 
etc., terrible guys all, all seriously supported by Washington at one 
time or another; for none made it a regular habit, if ever, to diss the Man.

The latest evidence, we are told, that Hugo Ch?vez is a dictator and a 
threat to life as we know it is that he pushed for and got a 
constitutional amendment to remove term limits from the presidency. The 
American media and the opposition in Venezuela often make it sound as if 
Ch?vez is going to be guaranteed office for life, whereas he of course 
will have to be elected each time. Neither are we reminded that it's not 
unusual for a nation to not have a term limit for its highest office. 
France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, if not all of Europe and much 
of the rest of the world, do not have such a limit. The United States 
did not have a term limit on the office of the president during the 
nation's first 162 years, until the ratification of the 22nd Amendment 
in 1951. Were all American presidents prior to that time dictators?

In 2005, when Colombian President Alvaro Uribe succeeded in getting term 
limits lifted, the US mainstream media took scant notice. President Bush 
subsequently honored Uribe with the American Presidential Medal of 
Freedom. But in the period leading up to the February 15 referendum in 
Venezuela, the American media were competing with each other over who 
could paint Ch?vez and the Venezuelan constitutional process in the most 
critical and ominous terms. Typical was an op-ed in the Washington Post 
the day before the vote, which was headlined: "Closing in on Hugo 
Ch?vez". Its opening sentence read: "The beginning of the end is setting 
in for Hugo Ch?vez."12

For several years now, the campaign to malign Ch?vez has at times 
included issues of Israel and anti-Semitism. An isolated vandalism of a 
Caracas synagogue on January 30th of this year fed into this campaign. 
Synagogues are of course vandalized occasionally in the United States 
and many European countries, but no one ascribes this to a government 
policy driven by anti-semitism. With Ch?vez they do. In the American 
media, the lead up to the Venezuelan vote was never far removed from the 
alleged "Jewish" issue.

"Despite the government?s efforts to put the [synagogue] controversy to 
rest," the New York Times wrote a few days before the referendum vote, 
"a sense of dread still lingers among Venezuela?s 12,000 to 14,000 Jews."13

A day earlier, a Washington Post editorial was entitled: "Mr. Ch?vez vs. 
the Jews - With George W. Bush gone, Venezuela's strongman has found new 
enemies."14 Shortly before, a Post headline had informed us: "Jews in S. 
America Increasingly Uneasy - Government and Media Seen Fostering 
Anti-Semitism in Venezuela, Elsewhere"15

So commonplace has the Ch?vez-Jewish association become that a leading 
US progressive organization, Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA) in 
Washington, DC, recently distributed an article that reads more like the 
handiwork of a conservative group than a progressive one. I was prompted 
to write to them as follows:

     Dear People,

     I'm very sorry to say that I found your Venezuelan commentary by 
Larry Birns and David Rosenblum Felson to be remarkably lacking. The 
authors seem unable, or unwilling, to distinguish between being against 
Israeli policies from anti-semitism. It's kind of late in the day for 
them to not have comprehended the difference. They are forced to fall 
back on a State Department statement to make their case. Is that not 
enough said?

     They condemn Ch?vez likening Israel?s occupation of Gaza to the 
Holocaust. But what if it's an apt comparison? They don't delve into 
this question at all.

     They also condemn the use of the word "Zionism", saying that "in 9 
times out of 10 involving the use of this word in fact smacks of 
anti-Semitism." Really? Can they give a precise explanation of how one 
distinguishes between an anti-Semitic use of the word and a 
non-anti-semitic use of it? That would be interesting.

     The authors write that Venezuela's "anti-Israeli initiative ... 
revealingly transcends the intensity of almost every Arabic nation or 
normal adversary of Israel." Really. Since when are the totally gutless, 
dictator Arab nations the standard bearer for progressives? The ideal we 
should emulate. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan are almost never 
seriously and harshly critical of Israeli policies toward the 
Palestinians. Therefore, Venezuela shouldn't be?

     The authors state: "In a Christmas Eve address to the nation, 
Ch?vez charged that, 'Some minorities, descendants of the same ones who 
crucified Christ ... took all the world?s wealth for themselves'. Here, 
Ch?vez was not talking so much about Robin Hood, but rather 
unquestionably dipping into the lore of anti-Semitism." Well, here's the 
full quote: "The world has enough for all, but it turns out that some 
minorities, descendants of the same ones who crucified Christ, 
descendants of the same ones who threw Bolivar out of here and also 
crucified him in their own way at Santa Marta there in Colombia ..." 
Hmm, were the Jews so active in South America?

The ellipsis after the word "Christ" indicates that the authors 
consciously and purposely omitted the words that would have given the 
lie to their premise. Truly astonishing.

After Ch?vez won the term-limits referendum with about 55% of the vote, 
a State Department spokesperson stated: "For the most part this was a 
process that was fully consistent with democratic process." Various 
individuals and websites on the left have responded to this as an 
encouraging sign that the Obama administration is embarking on a new 
Venezuelan policy. At the risk of sounding like a knee-reflex cynic, I 
think this attitude is at best premature, at worst rather naive. It's 
easy for a State Department a level-or-so above the Bushies, i.e., 
semi-civilized, to make such a statement. A little more difficult would 
be accepting as normal and unthreatening Venezuela having good relations 
with countries like Cuba, Iran and Russia and not blocking Venezuela 
from the UN Security Council. Even more significant would be the United 
States ending its funding of groups in Venezuela determined to subvert 
and/or overthrow Ch?vez.


From cyborgk at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 07:41:48 2009
From: cyborgk at gmail.com (David Powers)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 08:41:48 -0600
Subject: [Marxism] "When Facebook Isn't Fun, or,
	Why iLife Isn't My Life: Immaterial Labor in the Age of Web 2.0"
	(Draft)
Message-ID: <686ba4e40903050641v73602993mf8ac197726455f7f@mail.gmail.com>

"When Facebook Isn't Fun, or, Why iLife Isn't My Life: Immaterial
Labor in the Age of Web 2.0"

***DRAFT OUTLINE***

I. It Is Your Patriotic Duty to Consume

Consumption, in the capital system, is not only a means of individuals
reproducing themselvees, i.e. in the consumption of basic necessities;
it is objectively necessary to the reproduction of the system. Thus
Bush must admonish good Americans, in the wake of 9/11, to please go
on consuming as usual. Underconsumption represents a danger to the
system, especially to a system based on overproduction of goods that
are not produced on any rational basis but only in the hopes of
realizing a profit (i.e. according to Marx commodities exist only for
their exchange value, not for their use value). It is imperative for
capitalism that the commodity be consumed at some point, in order for
capital, which has been invested in creating the commodity form, may
again return to the form of money and thus capital. (M-C-M =
Money-Commodity-Money).

II. The Curse of Consumption as (Re)Production

Thus, the more one consumes commodities, the more one participates in
the reproduction of capitalism. The consumption of commodities is one
aspect of the reproduction of everyday life under capitalism.
Consumption of commodities, in this sense, must be understood as an
entire system, that includes the consumption of advertising material,
the work of choosing which commodities to buy, and the choice of a
lifestyle or identity based on the consumption of particular kinds of
commodities, both physical and cultural commodities (i.e. the high
school student who identifies as "goth" or the enlightened consumer
who buys only organic food and listens to NPR). Consumption, far from
being an exercise of individual freedom, is in capitalism a duty and a
form of unpaid work which is essential to the ongoing survival of the
system.

III. The Reproduction of Everyday Life

Understanding the productive aspect of consumption requires
understanding the way capitalism, as a totality, reproduces itself in
all the mundane details of everyday existence. The works of Adorno and
Lefebvre are key here, for both wrote extensively on this very
subject. By exploring their theories, we can deepen our understanding
of how contemporary capitalism operates not only in the realm of
production, but as a total system that produces and reproduces persons
and subjectivities and not only commodities.

IV. Why Buy the Cow When You Can Get the Milk for Free


From mqduck at sonic.net  Thu Mar  5 07:59:20 2009
From: mqduck at sonic.net (Jeffrey Thomas Piercy)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 06:59:20 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Why the Red Army Faction Matters
In-Reply-To: <49AEF3A2.8090100@panix.com>
References: <49AE841C.9080806@kersplebedeb.com>	<49AE9161.8020106@panix.com>	<49AEE27D.5090309@kersplebedeb.com>	<49AEE5D1.3010302@panix.com>	<49AEEE59.9070708@kersplebedeb.com>
	<49AEF3A2.8090100@panix.com>
Message-ID: <49AFE8C8.8010600@sonic.net>

Louis Proyect wrote:

> This is not Leninism

Oh no!

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


From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 09:04:17 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:04:17 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Guadeloupe: LKP/State sign agreement!
Message-ID: <49AFF801.7000809@gmail.com>

Dear Friends:

We received this morning a communiqu? from the Guadeloupe-based 
Caribbean Workers and Peoples Association (ATPC) informing us that an 
agreement was signed Wednesday, March 4 at 8 p.m. between the LKP Strike 
Collective, the local governments, the employers and the French State 
that grants the strikers their top 20 immediate demands and allows for 
continued negotiations on the remaining 126 mid-term and long-term 
demands. The general strike has formally ended by vote of the LKP Strike 
Collective, with the unions and community organizations declaring this a 
"First Victory."

Reactions in the French media were mixed. Writing in the mainstream 
press, columnist Jean-Francis P?cresse laments that the French 
government gave in to the "mob pressure of the LKP Strike Collective, 
signing an agreement was preamble proposes nothing less than creating a 
New Order in opposition to the Model of the Plantation Economy." What 
value should we place on agreement signed under pressure from the LKP 
militia, an agreement imposed by intimidation."

I am including below the declaration of the ATPC in French. It will be 
translated later today, and sent out widely along with other press 
dispatches.

Thanks to everyone for your support. As the declaration below notes, one 
of the keys to victory was the international solidarity expressed day 
after day with the general strike.

In solidarity,

Alan Benjamin


********************

*Lawond a Travay? ? P?p an Karayib'la*
*Association des Travailleurs et des Peuples de la Cara?be*
*Caribbean Workers and Peoples Association*
*Asociaci?n de los Trabajadores y de los Pueblos del Caribe*
25, rue Clara Bourgarel 97139 Abymes - GUADELOUPE
Mail: atpc-caraibe at orange.fr
-----------------------------------
*GREVE GENERALE EN GUADELOUPE : UNE PREMIERE VICTOIRE*
Apr?s 44 jours de gr?ve g?n?rale, de manifestations, de n?gociation, un 
premier Protocole d'accord vient d'?tre sign? mercredi 4 mars 2009 ? 20 
h, entre le collectif Liannaj Kont Pwofitasyon, LKP, les Collectivit?s 
locales et l'Etat sur les 20 revendications dites imm?diates de la plate 
forme de revendications qui en compte 146. Cet accord suspend la gr?ve 
g?n?rale mais les n?gociations se poursuivent sur les autres points dits 
? moyen et long termes.

Des gr?ves se poursuivent dans diff?rents secteurs et entreprises, 
notamment la o? les syndicats patronaux, MEDEF et CGPME, n'ont pas sign? 
l'Accord sur les salaires,ex : ? l'usine sucri?re de Gardel, dans les 
hyper march?s appartenant aux b?k?s, Carrefour, ?.
* RAPPEL*
?* Communiqu? du 18 f?vrier 2009.*
*
*/ Malgr? les inlassables appels du collectif Liyannaj Kont Pwofitasyon, 
LKP, le patronat, l'Etat fran?ais ont laiss? pourrir la situation./
/
Au lieu de faciliter r?ellement les n?gociations les repr?sentants de 
l'Etat sont all?s de d?robades en d?robades (d?part du pr?fet de la 
table de n?gociation le 28 janvier, fuite du secr?taire d'Etat ? l'Outre 
Mer le 8 f?vrier suivi du reniement des engagements de l'Etat) tandis 
qu'ils faisaient venir en Guadeloupe plus de 2000 gendarmes mobiles.

Ce qui ?tait pr?visible arriva.
Les travailleurs, les jeunes n'ont pas accept? la violence perp?tr?e 
contre les syndicalistes et une partie de la population par les forces 
de r?pression lundi 16 f?vrier. Depuis la situation ne pouvait que 
d?g?n?rer. Dans la nuit du 17 au 18 f?vrier un syndicaliste de la CGTG a 
?t? tu? par balles ; nous ne savons pas encore les circonstances exactes 
mais les larmes de crocodiles pleuvent.

*L'Association des Travailleurs et des Peuples de la Cara?be, ATPC, 
d?nonce le r?le du patronat et de l'Etat qui ont jou? le pourrissement 
du mouvement pour ensuite et cr?er la situation que nous connaissons 
aujourd'hui.
L'ATPC lance un appel aux organisations de la Cara?be pour qu'elles 
condamnent cette r?pression et exigent la r?ouverture imm?diate des 
n?gociations et la satisfaction des revendications*/
/*SOLIDARITE AVEC LES TRAVAILLEURS ET LE PEUPLE DE GUADELOUPE !
* Pour l'ATPC Robert Fabert, ?

/*REPRISE DES NEGOCIATIONS


* Il a fallu qu'un guadeloup?en soit tu? pour que le Premier ministre et 
le pr?sident de la R?publique de la France interviennent.

Les n?gociations ont bien repris le 23 f?vrier 09 en pr?sence des 
organisations patronales, des syndicats et du repr?sentant de l'Etat, le 
Pr?fet accompagn? des m?diateurs du Minist?re du travail et de la 
Direction du travail de Guadeloupe.

Un accord sur l'augmentation des salaires est intervenu dans la nuit du 
26 au 27 f?vrier qui pr?voit :
- /* 200 ? pour les salari?s percevant entre 132 1? et un 1849 ? bruts ;
*/-/* 6 % d'augmentation pour les salari?s touchant entre 1849 ? et 2113 
? bruts ;
*/-/* 3 % minimum d'augmentation pour ceux touchant plus de 2113 ? bruts ;
*/C'est accord s'appelle * Accord Jacques Bino* ? la m?moire du 
syndicaliste mort au cours du mouvement.

Parall?lement ? l'accord sur les salaires toute une s?rie de mesures ont 
?t? prises par l'Etat et les Collectivit?s : am?lioration et cr?ation 
des prestations sociales, attribution de primes exceptionnelles, .. ;

Les n?gociations se sont poursuivies sur les autres revendications 
imm?diates de la Plate-forme de LKP entre le 27 et le 1er mars 09. Elles 
se sont termin?es dans la nuit du 28 f?vrier au 1 er mars avec la 
satisfaction de la plupart des points, entre autres :

- baisse du prix de l'eau de 6 % en moyenne ;

- recrutement dans l'Education de 22 guadeloup?ens en listes d'attente ;

- indemnisation par le Conseil G?n?ral et l'Etat des transporteurs 
laiss?s pour compte suite ? la r?organisation du transport urbain et 
inter urbain ? raison de 40 000 ? par transporteur ;

- mise ? la disposition r?elle des ex-salari?s de la Ferme de Camp?che 
par les Conseils g?n?ral et r?gional avec une aide compl?mentaire de 
l'Etat de 40 000 ? ;

- diff?rentes dispositions en faveur des agriculteurs dont la r?serve 
d'au moins 64000 ha de surface agricole incompressible et des p?cheurs 
dont une subvention de 350000 ? pour la modernisation et au 
renouvellement des mat?riels de p?che des professionnels ;

- un v?ritable plan d'urgence pour la jeunesse ( emploi et formation 
pour les 8000 jeunes de 16 ? 25 ans concern?s) s'appuyant sur un 
renforcement du des mesures comprises dans la Loi pour le D?veloppement 
de l'Outre Mer, LODEOM;/ Le LKP a rencontr? les jeunes en difficult? ? 
Pointe ? Pitre le mercredi 25 f?vrier. Pr?s d'un millier de jeunes 
pr?sents. Ces jeunes ont exprim? leur d?sespoir mais aussi leur espoir 
et leurs attentes. Ils ont r?affirm? leur soutien ? LKP./
/
/- Baisse des tarifs des services bancaires sur certains produits. La 
n?gociation s'est poursuivie entre le LKP et les repr?sentants de toutes 
les banques de la place s'est poursuivie mardi 2 mars au matin ? la 
Pr?fecture et d?j? abouti ? l'annulation des agios, des ?ventuels 
interdits bancaires, des frais divers qui pourraient ?tre g?n?r?s par la 
situation de crise et ce entre le 20 mars et le 8 avril 09. Ces 
dispositions ont ?t? n?goci?es pour les particuliers et les petites 
entreprises. La n?gociation se poursuit vendredi 6 mars sur d'autres 
sujets telle que la baisse des taux d'int?r?ts.

- diff?rentes mesures d'aide au logement : gel du loyer, pr?vention des 
expulsions ;

- maintien d'une activit? h?teli?re sur le site de l'h?tel Kalenda 
liquid? en 2008 afin d'?viter la sp?culation fonci?re et immobili?re. Le 
Pr?fet installera dans les plus brefs d?lais un comit? de coordination 
des financeurs.

- Concernant les droits syndicaux et les libert?s syndicales, l'Etat 
invitera les organisations professionnelles et organisations syndicales 
de salari?s ? s'engager, sur les questions relatives notamment ? 
l'abaissement du seuil de d?signation des repr?sentants du personnel,?.

D?signation de m?diateurs, Sous-pr?fet et Secr?taire g?n?ral de la 
Pr?fecture, pour r?solution de conflits sp?cifiques, RFO, Air France, 
A?roport,?
- dispositions pour le d?veloppement de la culture..

C'EST UNE PREMIERE VICTOIRE ! Victoire obtenue par les travailleurs et 
tout un peuple en mouvement et par la solidarit? internationale.


Guadeloupe le 5 mars 2009, 10 h


From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Mar  5 09:36:08 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 11:36:08 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Israel and the Nazis
Message-ID: <49AFFF78.8030000@panix.com>

There's a full-page ad for Jonathan Littell's "The Well-Wishers" that 
some have called Holocaust porn.

Here's some information on the 983 page book written originally in 
French by a Jewish Yale graduate:

NY Times, March 4, 2009
Publisher?s Big Gamble on Divisive French Novel
By MOTOKO RICH

It was always going to be a challenging sell.

?The Kindly Ones,? the 983-page novel by Jonathan Littell that went on 
sale on Tuesday, is a fictionalized memoir of a remorseless former Nazi 
SS officer, who in addition to taking part in the mass extermination of 
the Jews, commits incest with his sister, sodomizes himself with a 
sausage and most likely kills his mother and stepfather. Oh, and it?s 
been translated from the French.

Then again, long before the book was released in the United States by 
the Harper imprint of HarperCollins Publishers, it came with a laureled 
publishing history. Mr. Littell, an English-speaking American who 
decided to write in French and now lives in Barcelona, Spain, won the 
Prix Goncourt, France?s most prestigious literary award, as well as a 
prize from the Acad?mie Fran?aise.

The book, published as ?Les Bienveillantes? in France in 2006, sold 
around 700,000 copies there. A French critic compared it to Tolstoy?s 
?War and Peace.?

It was the talk of the Frankfurt Book Fair two years ago, and the 
subject of a heated auction here in the United States, resulting in 
Harper?s paying, according to Publishers Weekly, about $1 million for 
the rights to publish the novel in this country. Now, as it hits 
bookstores ? and the time is near when Harper will find out whether such 
a tome can earn back such a hefty advance ? the novel is meeting a 
dramatically polarized critical response. Last week in The New York 
Times, Michiko Kakutani wrote that ?the novel?s gushing fans, however, 
seem to have mistaken perversity for daring, pretension for ambition, an 
odious stunt for contrarian cleverness,? adding that the book was 
?willfully sensationalistic and deliberately repellent.?

full: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/04/books/04litt.html

---

 From an interview with Jonathan Littell in Haaretz:

Asked whether he thinks the Holocaust shapes Israeli actions today, he 
replies: "On the one hand, Israel is a country that underwent a serious 
trauma, and the Holocaust made it dramatically paranoid. But then there 
is also greed and land-grabbing and all that shit. That's just 
inexcusable. I'm sorry, but this cannot be excused by traumas that 
occurred 60 years ago."

He acknowledges that "there is clearly a raw nerve of fear," but adds 
immediately, "which I don't have. I don't feel fear. Bizarrely, Israel, 
which was created to be a safe haven for Jews, has become the most 
dangerous place in the world for the Jews. And has made it more 
dangerous to be a Jew in other countries, too."

Littell says Israel uses the Holocaust to justify "inexcusable" acts, by 
which he means the situation in the territories, and he likens the 
actions of the Israel Defense Forces to the behavior of the Nazis in the 
period before they came to power.

Would you really compare the two?

"No, we cannot compare: There is nothing like genocide in the 
territories, but they are doing absolutely atrocious things. If the 
government would let the soldiers do worse things, they would. Everyone 
says, 'Look how the Germans dealt with the Jews even before the 
Holocaust: cutting the beards, humiliating them in public, forcing them 
to clean the street.' That kind of stuff happens in the territories 
every day. Every goddamn day. And now they have this whole generation of 
mad Russians who don't care about anything and are very right-wing."

Most of what Littell knows about ongoing events in Israel comes mainly 
from "Red Cross worker types" with whom he is in contact. He last 
visited Israel, he says when asked, when he was eleven.

Does the fact that the book has now been published in a Hebrew 
translation in Israel hold any special meaning for you?

"I think the Israelis should take a better look at themselves. When they 
read a book like my book they shouldn't just look at the Jewish side of 
things. More pragmatically, what's important is to reach a certain level 
of understanding and apply it to what is happening now and maybe use 
that to correct things. Sitting around talking with historians about 
what happened 60 years ago is not very interesting if you don't apply it 
to what's happening today."

Such as?

"Like how what the Americans are doing in Iraq is unacceptable. I'm not 
talking about the war but about torture and things like Abu Ghraib. 
Understanding the Germans of 60 years ago may make you feel that you're 
not that far from it, as Americans or as Israelis. So maybe it will be 
possible to enforce our social mechanisms to prevent our societies, at 
least, from going completely off the wall."

What should your Israeli readers do?

"I think the Israelis, instead of beating their breast, should take a 
long, hard look at what they are doing now. I am not saying that 
present-day Israeli society is comparable to Nazi society in World War 
II, but it is definitely one of the most crazed Western societies."

full: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/988410.html


From lefrak at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 10:27:48 2009
From: lefrak at gmail.com (Paul Lefrak)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 12:57:48 -0430
Subject: [Marxism] New York City: Protest a Region-Wide Foreclosed Home
	Auction!
Message-ID: <b0eece200903050927o64d0151eq8077baf3820e8408@mail.gmail.com>

I received this alert and thought it might be of interest to marxism-list
subscribers in the New York City area.
--PL

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Bail Out the People Movement <Actioncenter at action-mail.org>
Date: Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 11:19 AM
Subject: Sign Now! STOP Foreclosure Auction
To: Paul <lefrak at gmail.com>
Cc: "Activist alerts and news." <action.news at organizerweb.com>


 [image: April 3 & 4: March on Wall Street] <http://www.bailoutpeople.org>
 *
* Endorse April 3 & 4
<http://www.bailoutpeople.org/wallstendorse.shtml> | Become
a Local Organizer for April 3 &
4<http://www.bailoutpeople.org/wallstvolorgcent.shtml>| Find
an Apr 3-4 Organizing Center Near
You<http://www.bailoutpeople.org/apr32009orgcents.shtml>
Donate <http://bailoutpeople.org/donate.shtml> | Download BOPM Working
Paper<http://bailoutpeople.org/Workingpaper.pdf>


  *Protest a Region-Wide Foreclosed Home Auction!*

*Sunday March 8, 10:00 am
At The Jacob Javits Convention Center Entrance*
Between 35th St and 36th St. and 11th Ave. in Manhattan

*Stop the Auction!  Sign the Petition at*:
http://www.bailoutpeople.org/nonycauction.shtml


   - *No more foreclosed home auctions!*
   - *No more foreclosures and evictions!*
   - *Demand a moratorium on foreclosures and evictions!*

Please join us on Sunday morning at 10:00 am sharp at a demonstration
against the biggest auction of foreclosed homes ever in New York City.

The *Real Estate Disposition Corporation* (REDC), the biggest private
auctioneer of foreclosed homes in the country, is auctioning more than 375
foreclosed homes at the Jacob Javits Convention center. This is the biggest
auction ever held in NYC.  The houses being sold to the highest bidder are
the homes of poor and working people who lived in places like Brooklyn,
Queens, Bronx, Newark, Long Island, upstate New York, and Pennslyvania who
were forced out of their homes by Citibank, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, JP
Morgan-Chase and other banks. *These same bankers have received hundreds of
billions of dollars of bail out money while they're throwing working people
out of their homes.   *These foreclosures are illegal.

At a time when an estimated 15,000 families are being evicted from their
homes each day and the number of job layoffs per month in the U.S. is
rapidly approaching one million a month, we cannot and must not be
indifferent about the ugly spectacle of the auctioning of the homes of
displaced families.

In the biggest economic crisis since the depression of the 30?s, these
auctions should not be taking place; they are a symptom of the cruel and
criminal mass eviction campaign that will continue to grow until people
unite and say 'No More!'

Today, the Obama administration announced a $75 billion plan for the federal
government to essentially take over the failed mortgage industry. Mortgage
companies now have a duty to modify virtually every housing loan before
foreclosing.  Until this plan is completely in place and people have a
chance to take make use of the process, *every single foreclosure now taking
place is in violation of Federal Law - 12 USC 5219 and the Housing and
Economic Recovery Act (HERA).*

*But we know that the only force that will stop foreclosures is mass
grassroots mobilization. * Join us on *March 8* to demand an end to the
auction.  And then, help us build for the *National March on Wall Street on
April 3 - when Wall Street is open, continuing on April 4 to demand "Bail
Out the People - Not the Banks!"*  (See http://www.BailOutPeople.org to find
out how you can get involved.)


   - We call upon the City of New York to stop the March 8 auction and we
   demand an immediate stop to call foreclosures and evictions.
   - We call upon the Jacob Javits Center and the Real Estate Disposition
   Corporation (REDC) to cancel the auction, set up to allow financial
   predators to profit from throwing people out on the street.
   - Sign the petition at: http://www.bailoutpeople.org/nonycauction.shtml


Support the nationwide campaign for a moratorium on home foreclosures and
evictions. Join us at the Javits center on Sunday March 8 to say:

No more foreclosed home auctions!
No more foreclosures and evictions!
Immediate moratorium on foreclosures and evictions!


 Stop the Auction!  Sign the Petition at:
http://www.bailoutpeople.org/nonycauction.shtml


 *Bail Out the People Movement*
Solidarity Center
55 W. 17th St. #5C
New York, NY 10011
212.633.6646
www.BailOutPeople.org
Email: bailoutpeople at safewebmail.com




_______________________________________________

You are subscribed as lefrak at gmail.com

Anyone can subscribe.
Send an email request to
Action.News-subscribe at organizerweb.com

To unsubscribe Action.News-unsubscribe at organizerweb.com

Subscribing and unsubscribing can also be done on the Web at
http://www.organizerweb.com/mailman/listinfo/action.news

From bbrace at eskimo.com  Thu Mar  5 10:03:46 2009
From: bbrace at eskimo.com ({ brad brace })
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 09:03:46 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] [microsound] "When Facebook Isn't Fun, or,
 Why iLife Isn't My Life: Immaterial Labor in the Age of Web 2.0"
 (Draft)
In-Reply-To: <686ba4e40903050641v73602993mf8ac197726455f7f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <686ba4e40903050641v73602993mf8ac197726455f7f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.4.58.0903050805090.28964@eskimo.com>


Facebook adheres to the typical self-serving curatorial
agenda, but why not examine one of the most pervasive and
entrenched cultural scams -- artworld institutions! -- where
"unpaid labor" is an accepted abusive tradition! The
acolytes and their institutions, not the artists or their
heirs, get the real money -- and that's trillions of
tax-dollars diverted from possible public works -- only to
stockpile and establish (their received) 'cultural value' in
thousands of upper-middle-class social clubs a.k.a. art
museums!

/:b

On Thu, 5 Mar 2009, David Powers wrote:

> "When Facebook Isn't Fun, or, Why iLife Isn't My Life: Immaterial
> Labor in the Age of Web 2.0"
>
> ***DRAFT OUTLINE***
>
> I. It Is Your Patriotic Duty to Consume
>
> Consumption, in the capital system, is not only a means of individuals
> reproducing themselvees, i.e. in the consumption of basic necessities;
> it is objectively necessary to the reproduction of the system. Thus
> Bush must admonish good Americans, in the wake of 9/11, to please go
> on consuming as usual. Underconsumption represents a danger to the
> system, especially to a system based on overproduction of goods that
> are not produced on any rational basis but only in the hopes of
> realizing a profit (i.e. according to Marx commodities exist only for
> their exchange value, not for their use value). It is imperative for
> capitalism that the commodity be consumed at some point, in order for
> capital, which has been invested in creating the commodity form, may
> again return to the form of money and thus capital. (M-C-M =
> Money-Commodity-Money).
>
> II. The Curse of Consumption as (Re)Production
>
> Thus, the more one consumes commodities, the more one participates in
> the reproduction of capitalism. The consumption of commodities is one
> aspect of the reproduction of everyday life under capitalism.
> Consumption of commodities, in this sense, must be understood as an
> entire system, that includes the consumption of advertising material,
> the work of choosing which commodities to buy, and the choice of a
> lifestyle or identity based on the consumption of particular kinds of
> commodities, both physical and cultural commodities (i.e. the high
> school student who identifies as "goth" or the enlightened consumer
> who buys only organic food and listens to NPR). Consumption, far from
> being an exercise of individual freedom, is in capitalism a duty and a
> form of unpaid work which is essential to the ongoing survival of the
> system.
>
> III. The Reproduction of Everyday Life
>
> Understanding the productive aspect of consumption requires
> understanding the way capitalism, as a totality, reproduces itself in
> all the mundane details of everyday existence. The works of Adorno and
> Lefebvre are key here, for both wrote extensively on this very
> subject. By exploring their theories, we can deepen our understanding
> of how contemporary capitalism operates not only in the realm of
> production, but as a total system that produces and reproduces persons
> and subjectivities and not only commodities.
>
> IV. Why Buy the Cow When You Can Get the Milk for Free
>
> >From consumption, we must now return to the realm of production in its
> cultural (and immaterial) form. With the so called "web 2.0
> revolution," we find that consumers are, in their leisure time, also
> becoming producers. But in this case, they are performing unpaid labor
> in the service of major corporations. Whereas once corporations had to
> pay workers to produce content for individuals to consume during their
> so called "free time," now consumers are producing such content
> themselves, for free! (This gives a whole new meaning to the term
> "free time"). Insofar as this production occurs on large corporate
> websites, such as MySpace and Facebook, consumer-producers are in fact
> allowing themselves to be exploited, creating capital (and surplus
> value) for the large corporations without receiving any compensation.
>
> V. The Struggle for Everyday Life
>
> Despite the overwhelming colonization of everyday life by the forces
> of capitalism, there are always already new possibilities for struggle
> opened up by changes in technology including the so called Web 2.0
> revolution. Especially, the same technologies used by the major
> corporations are also available to individuals and can be used in
> alternative ways; mailing lists, blogs, bulletin boards, and personal
> websites offer the possibility to produce critical thought and to act
> in non-productive ways that do not strengthen the system. Indeed,
> while overall the Facebook phenomena is an example of a new form of
> exploitation of immaterial labor, its content is ambivalent; one can
> imagine a Karl Marx or Theodor Adorno Facebook page, that uses the
> technology precisely in order to spread critical thinking that weakens
> the system, dispels ideology, and breaks through reified and false
> consciousness. One can also organize anti-capitalist and subversive
> actions more effectively using the internet, cell phones, and Web 2.0
> technologies. As long as capitalism exists there will also exist the
> possibility for anti-capitalist action, a possibility that lays the
> groundwork for future revolution.
>
> ***
>
> This is obviously just an outline, and the essay itself will require
> extensive research to complete. Constructive comments would be greatly
> appreciated.
>
> David Powers
> March 5, 2009



"We fill the craters left by the bombs
And once again we sing
And once again we sow
Because life never surrenders."
-- anonymous Vietnamese poem

"Nothing can be said about the sea."
-- Mr Selvam, Akkrapattai, India 2004

{ brad brace }   <<<<< bbrace at eskimo.com >>>>  ~finger for pgp

---    bbs: brad brace sound                               ---
---    http://69.64.229.114:8000                           ---

.
The 12hr-ISBN-JPEG Project       >>>> posted since 1994 <<<<

+ + +         serial           ftp://ftp.eskimo.com/u/b/bbrace
+ + +      eccentric          ftp://  (your-site-here!)
+ + +     continuous         hotline://artlyin.ftr.va.com.au
+ + +    hypermodern      ftp://ftp.rdrop.com/pub/users/bbrace
+ + +        imagery        http://kunst.noemata.net/12hr/

News:  alt.binaries.pictures.12hr   alt.binaries.pictures.misc
               alt.binaries.pictures.fine-art.misc    alt.12hr

.  12hr email
subscriptions => http://bbrace.laughingsquid.net/buy-into.html


.  Other  |  Mirror: http://www.eskimo.com/~bbrace/bbrace.html
Projects  |  Reverse Solidus: http://bbrace.laughingsquid.net/
          |                   http://bbrace.net

.  Blog	  |  http://bbrace.laughingsquid.net/wordpress/

.  IM     |  bbrace at unstable.nl
.  IRC	  |  #bbrace
.  ICQ    |  109352289
.  SIP    |  bbrace at ekiga.net
	  |  registered linux user #323978
~>
I am not a victim
I am a messenger

/:b














From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Mar  5 11:46:59 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 13:46:59 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Israel and the Nazis
In-Reply-To: <49AFFF78.8030000@panix.com>
References: <49AFFF78.8030000@panix.com>
Message-ID: <49B01E23.30807@panix.com>

Louis Proyect wrote:
> There's a full-page ad for Jonathan Littell's "The Well-Wishers" that 
> some have called Holocaust porn.
> 

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090323/moyn
A Nazi Zelig: Jonathan Littell's The Kindly Ones
By Samuel Moyn

Jonathan Littell's novel The Kindly Ones took France by storm in the 
fall of 2006, when it won the Prix Goncourt--the nation's most 
prestigious literary prize--and sold many hundreds of thousands of 
copies. Commercial success fed the heat of scandal, which followed the 
book to Germany in 2008, vaulting it to the top of the bestseller list. 
The furor revolved around nothing less than the governing conceit of 
Littell's thousand-page roman-fleuve: the novel pretends to be the 
memoir of a Nazi SS officer who witnessed the different stages of the 
Holocaust as it was being perpetrated. The dispute over the book was 
another round in the cycle of Holocaust controversies that have marked 
time since the end of World War II with the regularity of a metronome. 
Tempestuous quarrels may have raised public consciousness about the 
Holocaust; but even so, subsequent battles over its representation can 
feel no less unseemly. "Silence over the murder, scandal over the 
books," George Steiner worried in response to one of the first such 
imbroglios, forty years before Littell's intentionally sickening but 
unquestionably brilliant success.

Born in 1967, Jonathan Littell is an American, the son of Robert 
Littell, himself the author of a series of espionage thrillers (his 
latest, The Stalin Epigram, will be published in May). Apart from his 
time as an undergraduate at Yale, Littell fils has lived as an 
expatriate in Western Europe. Though The Kindly Ones was labeled his 
"first literary work," he had tried his hand after college at his own 
brand of potboiler, one based on cyberpunk instead of cold war intrigue. 
But unlike his father, Littell writes in French, and in The Kindly Ones 
he uses an impeccable literary style that--despite a few purists who 
feigned offense at one or two anglicismes, not to mention the whole idea 
of an American scaling the pinnacle of French literature--has garnered 
deserved praise. After finishing college, Littell chose a career with 
the NGO Action Against Hunger. It was his humanitarian work in the 
killing fields of Bosnia and Chechnya during the 1990s, he explained in 
interviews following the publication of The Kindly Ones, that led him to 
quit his job and turn to literature. He focused on the Nazis as the 
archetype of modern evil and plunged into years of research on their deeds.

The device of the Nazi narrator is not unprecedented: John Hawkes's The 
Cannibal (1949) was among the first novels in English to use it, and the 
various attempts in French include a prior winner of the Prix Goncourt, 
Michel Tournier's The Ogre (1970). But in Littell's hands, it is used in 
a new and inflationary way, allowing the novel to track the stages and 
sites of the genocide of the Jews from beginning to end, and with a 
degree of detail that lends authority to the tale. Maximilien Aue, 
Littell's protagonist, is present in the Einsatzgruppen, the mobile 
killing units that began the ethnic cleansing of the East behind the 
lines of the Wehrmacht's invasion of the Soviet Union in the summer of 
1941. A year and a half later, after a brief and eventful interlude in 
Stalingrad, Aue fetches up in Berlin, where as a functionary on Heinrich 
Himmler's staff he visits Auschwitz and the Operation Reinhard death 
camps, which become the factories of the "final solution" when the 
primitive methods of shooting Jews are supplanted by the technically 
evolved elimination through gassing and cremation. In 1943 Aue hears 
Himmler's chilling Posen speech, in which the Reichsf?hrer-SS speaks of 
the Holocaust's glory in an almost public setting; and in 1944 he 
travels to Hungary, to be present while Adolf Eichmann condemns the 
nation's Jews to a massive paroxysm of death. Toward the end of the 
novel, Aue follows the death marches in the winter of 1945, the 
catastrophic months of the regime's collapse. And in the book's closing 
pages, he encounters Adolf Hitler in his bunker. Aue is a Nazi Zelig.

It is the implausible fact that Aue is everywhere that European critics 
attacked most frequently. Claude Lanzmann, whose film Shoah apparently 
piqued Littell's interest in the era, acknowledged that The Kindly Ones 
is learned but complained that it is not a persuasive memoir of one 
man--even a fictional man. Instead, Lanzmann alleged, it is more a 
ventriloquism of the history books Littell read while researching the 
era, which are precisely not one man's experience. In other words, no 
such Nazi ever existed. That objection made little sense, for what is a 
novel but a work of fiction, and what is a character but a fabrication? 
Implicit in Lanzmann's narrow dismissal, however, is a narrower 
question: whether this monstrosity of a novel ought to be read simply or 
even primarily as a compendium of facts--as a vivid summary of, or 
accessible proxy for, the frequently dreary books of historians.

I tend to doubt it, even though Littell is a gifted writer and what he 
achieves in fluently portraying the main characteristics of the SS 
"state within a state" during the war is unparalleled, to my knowledge. 
His depiction of the confusing summer and fall after the Soviet 
invasion--when the SS came to grips with its "special tasks"--is 
particularly interesting. (Less so, perhaps, is the mammoth narration in 
the novel's longest section of the SS's attempt to square its mission to 
eradicate the Jews with pressure to make the Reich's Eastern 
acquisitions economically productive, or at least useful in the war 
effort.) The details are assured throughout, and--despite the irritation 
of some European historians--Littell is rather impressively up to date; 
at times the novel reads like a fictional pr?cis of the most recent 
scholarly research on the Third Reich. To take just one example, Aue's 
scattered reflections on the Soviet invasion as a colonial project, and 
how it might compare with its American, British and French precedents, 
comport with my colleague Mark Mazower's masterful Hitler's Empire, 
published last year.

But in the end, no matter how absorbing, Littell's thousand pages are 
hardly an easy or obvious substitute for historical scholarship or 
narrative history. The chronicle Aue presents is told from his 
idiosyncratic and self-interested point of view; more important, it is 
entangled with his wholly fictional--and perhaps even more 
gripping--personal story. There is too much else going on for "real" 
history to be the main event. At two critical junctures the jaded Aue 
suspends his narration of what he saw--"these camps have been amply 
described in the historical literature, better than I could do," he 
sighs at one point, leaving aside any description of the bulk of the 
killing apparatus--and these pauses prove beyond any doubt that the 
catastrophic history of the era is the occasion for a deeper and more 
complex fictional stratagem. If the novel needs to be so scrupulous in 
its period details and so generous in its scope, it is not merely for 
the sake of the facts.

The other main charge against The Kindly Ones--pressed in a book-length 
French screed amusingly entitled The Complacent Ones as well as in the 
almost unanimously scathing German reviews--is that it is 
sensationalistic and voyeuristic. Actually, almost no violence is 
depicted in the novel, at least outside Aue's family. There are a few 
horrifying scenes at the outset: Aue is present at the slaughter of Jews 
at Babi Yar, near Kiev, in 1941; he even participates in it for an hour, 
but it is expected of all officers present and he does so with regret. 
Otherwise, there is no Jew-killing narrated in the novel; Aue is a 
vicious murderer but not of Jews, and he is not totally convinced they 
deserve their fate. The few times he directly encounters Jew-killing, 
Aue expresses distaste at the sadism of the SS rank and file, and 
denounces it as an insufficiently high-concept version of Nazi thinking. 
After Stalingrad, Aue is not even a so-called Schreibtischt?ter, 
wielding memos as a deadly weapon. He has mixed relations with 
Eichmann's horrific machinery in another part of the SS bureaucracy and 
then takes special care to reject Hannah Arendt's thesis of the 
"banality of evil," even as an explanation of Eichmann personally. Far 
from being a portrait of a "thoughtless" automaton, Eichmann's case 
illustrates, Aue says, the ethos of the typical middle manager eager to 
advance by pleasing his bureaucratic masters, even though he could never 
formulate aims of his own and privately disagrees with the vile orders 
he is given to execute.

No, the novel stands--or falls--on its portrayal of Max Aue, reflecting 
on European history from the vantage of his private National Socialism 
while hiding in a redoubt in provincial France. (His precise means of 
survival after the war, so that he could reinvent himself as an 
anonymous businessman, is a mystery saved for the last page.) More 
precisely, what has to be defended for the novel to merit the laurels 
that have been bestowed upon it is Littell's attempt to correlate Aue's 
personal trajectory with the broader history he narrates and his 
appalling personal deed with the grandiose historical crime he watches 
unfold.

One interesting defense of the novel, offered by Littell's French editor 
and also advanced by Harvard literature professor Susan Rubin Suleiman, 
is that The Kindly Ones is a pioneering experiment in making a Nazi an 
ethical "witness" despite himself. According to this view, Aue, though 
definitely a participant in terrible crimes, is forced into inadvertent 
moral insight about the evil in which he is embroiled. Even the 
perpetrator, Suleiman suggests, ought to be seen as a potential source 
of unwitting testimony to the enormity of the crimes the Nazis committed.

The argument has something to recommend it, but in the end it's 
unpersuasive because it can't account for much of the novel's plot. 
True, Aue is led to bitter reflections about how his Nazification has 
changed him into "a man who can't see a forest without thinking about a 
mass grave." But such moments of introspection are few and far between, 
and absent from the climactic episodes of the book. A world-weary cynic, 
Aue learns little or nothing that he does not already know in the depths 
of his soul about the worst human conduct, which he is generally 
reconciled to; and if he is scandalized by the barbarity he sees, it is 
typically because of its unprofessional extremes rather than the 
appalling nature of the acts. In the opening pages, supposedly written 
long after the fact, Aue presents his memoirs as exculpatory; but if the 
point of the novel is to track its narrator's moral awakening, the 
scarcity of moments of soul-searching hardly justifies it.

The real aim of the book, which is as fascinating as it is dubious, is 
to present a theory of Aue's depravity as a miniature of the wickedness 
of the regime he served. It begins negatively, as Aue--whose story 
hardly figures in the long opening section--witnesses a thousand 
incidents, from the mundane to the appalling, over hundreds of pages, 
and the reader is privy to his reflections on the regime. Aue often 
considers whether the Nazis were anti-Semites. Of course they were, but 
fanaticism was for brutes. Were they sadists? Only a few bad apples. 
Were they servants of power as an end in itself, who saw justice as 
something to define through power rather than something to constrain it? 
Yes, but why construct this reality rather than that one? Were the 
excesses due to submission to the will of the F?hrer, something so 
inscrutable that one had to guess at and "work toward" it? Probably, but 
this explanation too begs the question. Did they really believe their 
crackpot theory of Aryan racial origins and superiority? To a striking 
degree, in their everyday assumptions, but often simply because it was 
the official view or because they were rewarded for honoring it. And 
didn't they believe the Jews controlled Communism or were acting as 
dangerous partisans behind the lines? People said such things, even 
about women and children, but to do so with a straight face was 
difficult: "as in the Middle Ages," Aue comments, "we were reasoning 
with syllogisms that proved each other." So did the Nazis do what they 
did because they were the kind of "ordinary men" who conform in every 
society? For the shock troops, undoubtedly--"the real danger for mankind 
is me, is you," Aue reflects--but not in National Socialism's driving 
causation. The banality of evil is only the last argument to be rejected 
or seriously qualified. The first few hundred pages of the novel, in 
which death is general all over Eastern Europe, is also the graveyard of 
theories.

Aue, and perhaps the reader, is brought quickly to the conclusion that 
the extremity of the violence is no easy puzzle. "If I could understand 
it," Aue concludes, "then I'd understand everything and could finally 
rest." And so, having cleared space for his own conjectures, Littell 
erects an alternative scheme. It is psychosexual--in the train of a long 
tradition of such theories--and is staged in Aue's inner visions and 
dreams, the external atmospherics of his world and his familial drama, 
which climaxes in a dreadful crime at the center of the novel.

At all of these levels, the novel teems with erudite allusions, 
beginning with classical sources, which are in turn refracted through 
recent intellectual currents deeply embedded in the novel's 
orchestration. The novel's title is the euphemistic moniker for the 
Furies of Greek mythology and the title of the third part of Aeschylus' 
Oresteia sequence. In Aeschylus' telling, the Erinyes, or Furies, are 
forced by Athena's intervention in their relentless pursuit of Orestes 
for killing his mother to become the "Eumenides," or kindly ones, and 
join her in generously acquitting him of his crime. Indeed, the bare 
facts of the Oresteia provide the template for the specific acts Aue 
commits, and the defensive contrition of his preface certainly indicates 
that he expects a similar act of redemption.

Littell updates these classical themes by recalibrating their dynamics 
with psychoanalytic theories, especially the unclassifiable German 
thinker Klaus Theweleit's old and generally forgotten analysis of the 
psychology of fascism. (Theweleit became the chief German defender of 
The Kindly Ones and a pen pal with its author.) A generation ago, 
Theweleit published Male Fantasies, which analyzed the inner lives of 
the Freikorps, a group of soldiers who refused to demobilize after World 
War I and formed paramilitary units to put down the socialist revolution 
whose specter briefly haunted German cities. (Aue's father, not 
coincidentally, was a Freikorps officer.) Theweleit's theory 
focused--rather impressively at the time--on the psychic, lived reality 
of reactionaries. He highlighted, most of all, their desperate attempt 
to expunge any traces of femininity from their being, to achieve an 
impermeable "armored" body that would repel the miasma of pestilence and 
infirmity they attributed to the revolutionary left. Theweleit's 
influence shows most of all in the "atmospherics" of The Kindly Ones: in 
Aue's constant, striking immersion in viscous fluids--mud and his own 
shit, above all, but also vomit and semen. Far more than any explicit 
killing, it is the almost constant eruption and flow of greasy 
putrescence that saturates these pages with an inescapable feeling of 
nausea and abjection.

Yet Littell just as clearly wants to apply Theweleit's meditations on 
the psychosexual roots of reactionary politics to the Nazi era--and to a 
deeper syndrome. Another title for The Kindly Ones, given this 
aspiration, might have been Female Fantasies. For Aue, the goal is 
anything but to expel the feminine; it is to revel in and return to the 
feminine, and the various strands of his life are all dyed in the hue of 
this wish. Indeed, he has an intuitive understanding of Theweleit's 
discoveries before their time, and the femininity that could "wreck" 
men's "dominion" and "dissolve their control," so secretly feared by 
Theweleit's fascists, is precisely the self-loss that Aue consciously seeks.

Above all, the plot's fundamental motor, and the heart of Aue's quest, 
is his incestuous passion for his twin sister, Una. Aue's homosexuality 
is one feature of his governing fantasy to rejoin his sister, even to be 
her, or perhaps to return to their enwombed unity. Aue hates his mother 
for breaking up his love affair with his sister (and for driving away 
their father). But other passages indicate that Aue's melancholic 
longing for Una is fixated on something early and metaphysical and not 
late and sexual. In an aside during his work for Himmler, Aue confesses 
to missing "that other life that could have been, if something hadn't 
been broken so early. It wasn't just the question of my sister; it was 
vaster than that, it was the entire course of events, the wretchedness 
of the body and of desire, the decisions you make and on which you can't 
go back, the very meaning you choose to give this thing that's called, 
perhaps wrongly, your life."

The symbol of the twin--and, without giving too much away, it bears 
noting that there are many pairs of twins in the novel--seems to stand 
for the outrageous imperfection that drives Aue's transgression: the 
constant presence in the psyche of another, more perfect self one also 
knows is lost forever. All of Aue's regressive fantasies of 
reconciliation come to a head late in the novel in an extraordinary 
onanistic interlude--a sordid but unexpectedly spellbinding one--in 
which he indulges in his sister's empty house, as Soviet troops 
remorselessly close in. And yet, even in his orgy of self-involvement, 
Aue recognizes that he seeks not sexual ecstasy but metaphysical bliss. 
It is "these imaginings, these forever rehearsed obsessions, and not the 
thing itself," Aue says (emphasis added), "that are the frantic driving 
forces behind our thirst for life, for knowledge, for the agonizing 
struggle of self."

A rather obvious parallel is Thomas Mann's Death in Venice. Much as for 
Gustav von Aschenbach, the symbolism of personal abasement and perhaps 
extinction through feminine transformation is central to the landscape 
of Aue's dreams, some of which--notably an epic reverie after he is shot 
in the head at Stalingrad--are enigmatic in the extreme. It is also as a 
kind of feminine self-loss that Aue understands what one might otherwise 
criticize as an utterly stereotypical link between his Nazism and his 
homosexuality. The comparison with Death in Venice extends to Littell's 
crystalline and resolutely unexperimental prose style: dreams and 
sexuality trigger thematic fireworks, but the rhetoric is almost always 
measured, and the syntax never breaks down.

About the dense intertwinement of classical and Modernist sources and 
themes in Aue's psyche, dissertations will no doubt follow. But what 
does windy speculation about the depths of the psyche reveal about 
Nazism, a collective and concrete historical phenomenon? After all, 
however one interprets Aue's memorable and obsessional character, what 
remains to be sorted out is whether his personal history explains the 
awful history of the era.

One hypothesis to reject right away is that Aue is a representative man 
in the period. Far from it: Aue is, as he puts it, "a somewhat 
complicated intellectual," excellent at his tasks but dependent on more 
bureaucratically adept colleagues like his best friend, Thomas, for 
know-how and on luck for advancement. Aue was trained as a lawyer by 
Reinhard H?hn and rubs shoulders with Werner Best and Otto 
Ohlendorf--all historical figures whom cognoscenti will recognize as the 
self-styled "theorists" of the coming Nazi new order--but he never quite 
represses his literary leanings. His favorite reading for a time is the 
pseudo-academic Festschrift that Best assembled in honor of Himmler's 
fortieth birthday (a book that very much existed). Later, Aue alternates 
his flight from Pomerania before the Red Army in the calamitous final 
months of the war with quiet moments curled up in the forest with 
Gustave Flaubert's Sentimental Education.

In all this, Aue is deeply unlike not just Hitler--Timothy Ryback's 
excellent Hitler's Private Library confirms on the evidence of his 
reading that the dictator was the worst sort of commonplace bore--but 
also the rank-and-file SS, whose goals were narrowly bureaucratic or 
self-serving, to say nothing of Nazis in general. Aue stands for little 
more than his own idiosyncrasy. "A member of the Sicherheitsdienst who 
quotes Tertullian instead of Rosenberg or Hans Frank is always a 
pleasure," is how one of his few admiring colleagues puts it, to which 
one might be tempted to append the wish that there had been more of them.

Among others, Lanzmann griped about Littell's decision to omit the 
victim's perspective by presenting the war entirely through Nazi eyes. 
In an interview with Ha'aretz (the novel has also been translated into 
Hebrew), Littell offered a striking response to this objection. The 
perpetrators, he said, "are the ones who are doing something and 
changing the reality. It's very easy to understand the victim: something 
terrible happens to him and he reacts accordingly. But in terms of 
trying to understand something, there is nothing to examine. The 
perpetrator is more complicated to understand, along with the apparatus 
that activates him. By means of the attempt to give a voice to the 
perpetrator, lessons can be learned that will affect the way we look at 
the world today." But on reflection, the defense is not persuasive--at 
least by itself. If Littell's argument is sound, then why didn't he 
write a different novel, one about a more ordinary Nazi? "Why couldn't 
an SS-Obersturmbannf?hrer have an inner life, desires, passions, just 
like any other man?" Aue asks, fairly, at the start. He can, but some 
rationale for caring about that inner life has to be found once it is 
shown that Aue is so different from the usual case.

Contrary to most foreign critics (and perhaps Littell's self-defense), 
the novel's true premise is not that Aue is like other perpetrators. It 
is that he stands for Nazism as a whole. Indeed, at several critical 
points, Aue tries to link his family story with the larger saga of his 
nation. At his mother's house, just before he commits his crime, Aue 
reflects that he, like Germany, must act in evil ways to overcome the 
past, or try to do so. The novel may turn on this climactic passage, 
which asserts not that Aue is like any other Nazi but that he is like 
all of Germany writ small. "The collective problem of the Germans," he 
thinks, "was the same as my own; they too were struggling to extract 
themselves from a painful past, to wipe the slate clean so they'd be 
able to begin new things. That was how they arrived at the most radical 
solution of them all: murder, the painful horror of murder." Aue, like 
Germany, nurtures a mystified spirit of resentment with a long dark 
history behind it; in his personal war and alongside others in the SS, 
he acts to effect a glorious restoration and purge himself of 
resentment, and the result--in both cases--is a heinous crime. History, 
in Aue's eyes, made them do it.

Before going on his killing spree, Aue asks himself whether "this new 
fact, even less reparable than the ones before it, opened in turn onto 
new abysses?" But it is on the premise of a correlation between world 
history and an individualized psyche--not the disquieting question Aue 
poses in light of that connection--that the design of the novel wholly 
depends. Though its success so far has been nourished by high-profile 
scandal, The Kindly Ones is really a rather earnest attempt to offer a 
lesson about how the most profound causes of potential crime lurk in the 
breasts of all "human brothers" (as Aue calls his hypocrites lecteurs in 
the celebrated opening sentence of the novel). Its curious implication 
is that Aue killed out of universally shared impulses rather than 
because of the evil ideology of his place and time, which, indeed, his 
crime is supposed to explain by a kind of analogy. But if the 
correspondence between Germany and Aue is in any way faulty or 
contrived, Aue's memoir, and thus Littell's enterprise, risks splitting 
into unrelated halves. Its beguiling fictional sounding of the depths of 
individual perversity would not even skim the surface of the sea of 
murder into which the Nazis plunged the Jews, and the world. The 
personal is the political--yet if The Kindly Ones earns its praise, it 
is perhaps only for rediscovering the mystery of their connection.


About Samuel Moyn
Samuel Moyn, author of A Holocaust Controversy: The Treblinka Affair in 
Postwar France, teaches history at Columbia University. more...


From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Mar  5 11:50:07 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 13:50:07 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Fears of a clown
Message-ID: <49B01EDF.1050304@panix.com>

http://egan.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/04/fears-of-a-clown/
March 4, 2009, 10:00 pm
Fears of a Clown

Once upon a time, you could drive to the most remote reaches of the 
United States and escape Rush Limbaugh. But from the Mogollon Mountains 
of New Mexico to the Badlands of South Dakota, where only the delicious 
twang of a country tune or the high-pitched pleadings of a lone lunatic 
came over the AM dial, there is now the Mighty El Rushbo.

As someone who spends a lot of time on the road, I used to find Limbaugh 
to be an obnoxious but entertaining companion, his eruptions more 
reliable than Old Faithful. But now that Limbaugh has become something 
else ? the face of the Republican Party, by a White House that has 
played him brilliantly ? he has been transformed into car-wreck-quality 
spectacle, at once scary and sad.

Behold:

The sweaty, swollen man in the black, half-buttoned shirt who ranted for 
nearly 90 minutes Saturday at the Conservative Political Action 
Conference. He reiterated his desire to see the president of his country 
fail. He misstated the Constitution?s intent while accusing President 
Obama of ?bastardizing? the document. He made fun of one man?s service 
in Vietnam, to laughter.
(J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press) Rush Limbaugh.

David Letterman compared him to an Eastern European gangster. But he 
looked more like a bouncer at a strip club who spent all his tips on one 
bad outfit. And for the Republican Party, Limbaugh has become very much 
a vice.

Smarter Republicans know he is not good for them. As the conservative 
writer David Frum said recently, ?If you?re a talk radio host and you 
have five million who listen and there are 50 million who hate you, you 
make a nice living. If you?re a Republican party, you?re marginalized.?

Polling has found Limbaugh, a self-described prescription-drug addict 
who sees America from a private jet, to be nearly as unpopular as Rev. 
Jeremiah Wright, who damned America in the way that Limbaugh has now 
damned the nation?s newly elected leader. But Republicans just can?t 
quit him. So even poor Michael Steele, the nominal head of the 
Republican Party who dared to criticize him, had to grovel and crawl 
back to the feet of Limbaugh.

Some expected more mettle from Steele. After all, this rare 
African-American Republican won his post after defeating a candidate who 
submitted the parody song from Limbaugh?s show: ?Barack the Magic Negro.?

Race is an obsession with Limbaugh, one of the threads I noticed on 
those long drives on country roads.

When Colin Powell endorsed Obama during the campaign, Limbaugh said it 
was entirely because of race. After the election, Powell said the way 
for the party, which has been his home, to regain its footing was to say 
the Republican Party must stop ?shouting at the world.?

In 2003, Limbaugh said quarterback Donovan McNabb was overrated because 
the media wanted a black to succeed. Over the next six years, McNabb 
threw for nearly 150 touchdowns and went to a Super Bowl.

And Limbaugh launched the current battle when he said of Obama: ?We are 
being told that ? we have to bend over, grab the ankles, bend over 
forward, backward, whichever, because his father was black, because this 
is the first black president.?

Translation: submit sexually to a black man because ?someone? is telling 
us all to. Who? Which leaders of the Democratic Party have made such a 
claim? Which opinion-makers? But therein lies the main tactic of 
Limbaugh, an old demagogue technique: create a straw man, then tear it 
down. The latest example was Saturday, when Limbaugh presented himself 
as the defender of capitalism, liberty and unfettered free markets. 
Obama, he has said since, is waging a ?war on capitalism.?

There is a war, all right. We are witnessing the worst debacle of 
unfettered capitalism in our lifetime brought on by ? you got it, 
capitalism at its worst. It cannibalized itself. Government, sad to say, 
had nothing to do with it ? except for criminal neglect of oversight.

Now that government has been forced to the rescue, just who is insisting 
on taxpayer bailouts? Who is in line for handouts? Who is saying that 
only government can save capitalism? The very leaders of unregulated 
markets who injected this poison into the economy, the very plutocrats 
that Limbaugh celebrates.

And, of course, let us never forget that the bailouts of banks and 
insurance companies were initiated by the Republican president Limbaugh 
defended for eight years.

Of late, Limbaugh has wondered why he has trouble with women. His base 
is white, male, Republican ? people the party has to stop pandering to 
if it hopes to govern soon.

It?s little wonder that the thrice-married Limbaugh, who uses 
?femi-Nazi,? ?info-babe? and ?PMSNBC? (Get it? The network is full of 
women suffering pre-menstrual cramps, ha-ha), among his monikers for 
women, can?t get a date with that demographic.

For Democrats, this is all going to plan. It was James Carville and 
associates who first cooked up associating Limbaugh with the opposition, 
as Politico reported. Then on Sunday, White House Chief of Staff Rahm 
Emanuel said Limbaugh was the ?voice and the intellectual force and 
energy behind the Republican Party.?

Limbaugh played his role, ever the fool. A brave Republican could have 
challenged him, could have had a ?have you no shame? moment with him, 
giving the party some other identity, some spine. Instead, they caved ? 
from Steele, to the leaders in the House, Eric Cantor and Mike Pence, to 
Gov. Bobby Jindal, who would be ridiculed by Limbaugh for his real first 
name, Piyush, were he a Democrat.

You could almost hear their teeth clattering in fear of the all-powerful 
talk radio wacko, the denier of global warming, the man who said Bill 
Clinton?s economic policies would fail just before an unprecedented run 
of prosperity.

But Limbaugh has a fear of his own. If people see him purely as an 
?entertainer,? as Steele suggested, he will be exposed for what he is: a 
clown with a very large audience.


From jbustelo at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 12:15:31 2009
From: jbustelo at gmail.com (Joaquin Bustelo)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 14:15:31 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Fears of a clown
In-Reply-To: <49B01EDF.1050304@panix.com>
References: <49B01EDF.1050304@panix.com>
Message-ID: <D5E7E94AA16746D886A05F4CF769CB15@albanta>

Louis referred to us a blog post which says: 

"Polling has found Limbaugh, a self-described prescription-drug addict who
sees America from a private jet, to be nearly as unpopular as Rev. 
Jeremiah Wright, who damned America in the way that Limbaugh has now damned
the nation's newly elected leader. But Republicans just can't quit him. So
even poor Michael Steele, the nominal head of the Republican Party who dared
to criticize him, had to grovel and crawl back to the feet of Limbaugh."

Not So!!! Polling found him to be even MORE unpopular than the Rev. Wright
AND Bill Ayers, right in the middle of the Republican-inspired media
campaign to lynch them both, and without ANYONE focusing on castigating
Limbaugh. Ayers and Wright's negatives were 50%. Limbaugh's were either 58%
or 68% (depending on who you believe). 

The guy is just naturally hateable. The Repubs REALLY f*cked up when they
had him headline CPAC just AFTER Jindal got through reassuring the country
that the Republicans ARE a bunch of idiots -- even their East Asian guys are
dumb. Limbaugh at least is quick-witted. Too bad he never got past
adolescence. 

BTW, Limbaugh-mania/Limbaugh-gate marks the official end of the
aren't-we-proud-we-as-Americans-elected-a-Black-president (even if we hate
his n****rs guts) meme. Next up: It's been SEVEN WEEKS and the guy STILL
hasn't fixed the economy. 

Joaquin



From jbustelo at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 12:26:18 2009
From: jbustelo at gmail.com (Joaquin Bustelo)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 14:26:18 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Ivory Tower Unswayed by Crashing Economy
In-Reply-To: <49AFDF63.40203@panix.com>
References: <49AFDF63.40203@panix.com>
Message-ID: <646D50C052C743C6990264AAEAF3CD1E@albanta>

A NY Times article referred to us by Louis says: "During the 1960s, he
recalled, nearly all economists believed in what was known as the Phillips
curve, which posited that unemployment and inflation were like the two ends
of a seesaw: as one went up, the other went down. Then in the 1970s
stagflation - high unemployment and high inflation - hit. But it took 10
years before academia let go of the Phillips curve."

This reminds me of one of my favorite Peter Camejo shticks from his 1976
presidential campaign. He would talk about going to college and learning
economics and the Phillips curve, and draw a downward sloping line on a
chalkboard (remember those?) or a sheet of paper, representing the
(supposed) inverse relationship between inflation and unemployment. Then he
would put dots in the upper right hand corner of his graph, way away from
the line representing the inflation-unemployment relationship, and say:

	"Now they're getting points all over here. 

	"You know, they says socialism works on paper, but not in real life.
But capitalism doesn't even work on paper."

Joaquin




From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Mar  5 13:27:31 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 15:27:31 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Columbia teach-in on Israeli apartheid
Message-ID: <49B035B3.6060306@panix.com>

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2009/03/04/panelists-push-divestment-support-gaza
Panelists Push Divestment, Support Gaza
by Elizabeth Scott

A ?teach-in? organized by the Columbia Palestine Forum Wednesday night 
drew a crowd of supporters, dissenters, and interested students and 
faculty that filled the Hamilton classroom and spilled into the hall.

It came to light during the meeting that University president Lee 
Bollinger has agreed to meet with the faculty to discuss the issue.

The group, whose recent formation began with a demand for University 
divestment from companies profiting from the Gaza conflict and for 
protection of Palestinian academic freedom, hosted a discussion with a 
panel composed of four University faculty members, two speakers from the 
Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign, and a Barnard student 
representing the CPF. Supporters and critics of the Forum sounded off in 
a question-and -answer follow-up that mostly took the form of commentary 
on the recent and historic Gaza conflicts.

The faculty members speaking on the potential benefits of Israeli 
divestment were Bruce Robbins, Old Dominion Foundation Professor in the 
Humanities, Gil Anidjar, a professor of religion who also teaches in 
MEALAC, Mahmood Mamdani, Herbert Lehman Professor of Government and 
anthropology professor, and Brinkley Messick, anthropology professor.

Faculty first clarified the terms of CPF?s demands. Robbins said that 
?students don?t have academic freedom, professors do? and that the 
denial of education?a basic human right?rather than academic 
freedom?associated with tenure?is the heart of the matter. He added that 
because academic freedom is not a universal or democratic right, the 
conflict surrounding Gaza becomes more divisive when this terminology is 
used.

During the panel, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was continuously 
compared to the South African and Liberian apartheids, though this 
analogy was met with varying reactions from the audience. It was noted 
that Columbia divested from South African companies during its 
apartheid. In this context, Anidjar advocated boycotting as an 
appropriate ?exercise of freedom? and affirmed the group?s demands as 
?change we can believe in.? Eric Heitner, CC ?05, spoke on behalf of the 
BDS and presented figures indicating how tax dollars and other expenses 
contribute to the profit of companies supporting what he considers the 
Israeli occupation of Gaza.

Messick expressed that an impending meeting between Bollinger and the 
faculty about the letter issued listing the CPF?s demands is an 
?historical moment? for the University.

A lively question-and-answer session allowed attendees to express their 
reactions to the panelists? assertions. Critics condemned the lack of a 
more realistic approach to solving the issue and cited the need to 
incorporate Hamas into the discussion.

Some students felt the event was successful. ?Everyone was calm and it 
was good to have perspectives from professors and activists and 
commentary from the community,? said Edna Bonhomme, MSPH ?10, and a 
member of the CPF. ?A dialogue about the Israel occupation is central 
and people should be able to put their opinion on the table and figure 
out what could be the best option."


From jbustelo at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 14:07:13 2009
From: jbustelo at gmail.com (Joaquin Bustelo)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 16:07:13 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Are we facing the mother of all bubbles?
In-Reply-To: <2fa158550903041004q55d7ce88o75ca6c6e974bf770@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2fa158550903041004q55d7ce88o75ca6c6e974bf770@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <26B000E75B814AEA9274D8002E861FDB@albanta>

Nestor wrote: "Are we not beginning to see the DOLLAR BUBBLE?" 

There's probably a lot of that going on, but when you get right down to it,
how many aircraft carrier groups and nuclear warheads stand behind the Yen,
Pound Sterling or the Euro for that matter? 

Granted, steel, gunpowder and plutonium are not as good as gold, but a lot
better than what anyone else has. It's all fiat money, it has value because
the government says it has value, and the government gets to say it has
value because it has a monopoly of violence within a given territory, that's
what makes it a "sovereign." The U.S. is in a much better position to hold
up the value of its currency with military force than anyone else is in
relation to their currency. A qualitatively, incomparably better position.
Even on the level of, how many military bases and troops do the Brits,
Japanese, and Germans have within the United States and in neighboring
countries? And how many does the U.S. have in/near Great Britain, Germany
and Japan? The Japanese don't even HAVE nukes and the Germans would need to
borrow them from France. Fat chance.

Of course, bourgeois constitutional theory says all sovereigns are equal,
but the reality is that the U.S. is a lot more equal that others. 

But there is more: If/as the depression deepens, the Euro, which is the
dollar's main competitor as a reserve currency, is likely to come under
great strain and may even fall apart as different countries facing different
economic challenges seek to retake control of "their own" monetary policy. 

Apart from the Euro, the economic base of the pound sterling and the yen,
the other reserve currencies, is much narrower than that of the dollar *just
looking at the national economies* of the three countries, and WAY smaller
when you consider that almost all international trade in oil takes place in
dollars, that most foreign currency reserves are currently held in dollars,
etc.

Joaquin



From sartesian at earthlink.net  Thu Mar  5 14:16:13 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 16:16:13 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Missed providing this to the list
Message-ID: <1968C16872CC46D085669761F439AE9D@dmsthinkpad>

for those interested:


The Federal Reserve Board on Monday launched a new section of its website expanding the information provided about the policy tools the Federal Reserve has employed to address the financial crisis and simplifying access to that information.  

The website section--"Credit and Liquidity Programs and the Balance Sheet"--presents a wide range of material, including a detailed explanation of the Federal Reserve's balance sheet; descriptions of all of the Federal Reserve's liquidity and credit facilities; discussion of the Federal Reserve's risk-management practices; information on the types and amounts of collateral being pledged at the various lending facilities; and an extensive set of links to congressional reports and other resources.

"This new section of our website is one of a series of significant steps we have taken to improve the public's understanding of our actions during this extraordinary period," said Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke.

"We are continuing to review our disclosure policies relating to our balance sheet and lending policies. Our goal is to be as transparent as possible, both to ensure that the Federal Reserve is accountable to the Congress and the public, and because many of the Board's policies are likely to be more effective if they are well understood by the markets and the public."

The new section of the Board's website can be accessed at: http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst.htm

From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 14:36:19 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 13:36:19 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Are we facing the mother of all bubbles?
Message-ID: <49B045D3.50501@gmail.com>

Well, that's a twist I hadn't thought about "military backed currency". 
I'm not sure 'value' is established that way. However, clearly the value 
has gone up in recent months, *especially* against weaker currencies 
like the Mexican peso, which has dropped about 30% against the USD. 
Still...aircraft carries do not a currency makes, me thinks.

The only think that keeps the USD going big time is petroleum and that 
countries like the PRC and the Saudis keep buying it up (the dollar that 
is) to prop it up. At this point, if the USD to a bbl of oil declines, 
the dollar with tumble quite rapidly and, if other currencies don't fall 
AS rapidly, we may actually see that Euro based oil mercantile exchange 
in Terhan (now "filled" with bored traders standing around not looking 
at each other) and Chavez's rather flaccid threat to accept Euros for 
his country's oil, get some real traction. Then it's "good-by dollar" 
because then there is NOTHING standing behind it, certainly no 
manufacturing or gold. Or oil. BTW...have you'all seen the price of gold 
lately?

Yours for doom and gloom,

David


From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Thu Mar  5 14:38:38 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:38:38 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban "street" curious, questioning,
	and hopeful about govt changes
Message-ID: <1E874D0287D54073973BA4D4DDC62B5C@office1pc>

Some Cubans think they are entitled to know about the charges Fidel Castro
raised in his comments on the changes, which Lage and Perez Roque seeme
acknowledge in their comments. Many are hopeful that it will mean more
concentrated efforts to strengthen -- not overthrow -- the Cuban economy.
Meanwhile, the drift of speculation in the US media seems to be shifting
from victory for the "Chinese current" over Fidel to victory of "hardliners"
Fidel and Raul over the realistic and non-ideological "Chinese current."
Raul must be getting used to being proclaimed the leader of this perhaps
nonexistent "current" one day, and unceremoniously expelled from it as a
traitor the next.

The shift in interpretation toward a "hardliner" victory may be seen as a
way of more effectively defending the politically weakening US blockade of
Cuba

By the way, the idea that secrecy or delays in revealing information about
changes in government posts is a unique characteristic of Stalinist regimes
is simply a fantasy.  This is characteristic to one degree or another of all
states and governments to one degree or another, and that includes the
Bolshevik regime when Lenin was really in command.
Fred Feldman
m 
Crawling with Speculation
Inter Press Service - March 4

By Patricia Grogg

HAVANA, Mar 4 (IPS) - While the staff of the cabinet ministries set to
undergo major reforms are gearing themselves for what lies ahead, the people
of Cuba, from academics to pensioners, are speculating about the extent of
the recently announced changes and hoping they will bring improvements to
their lives and to living standards in general.

Meanwhile, the official daily of the Communist Party, Granma, published an
article Wednesday in which former president Fidel Castro clarified that the
major cabinet shakeup announced Monday has his full support.

The column also set off new conjecture as to why powerful figures like
former foreign minister Felipe P?rez Roque and former cabinet chief Carlos
Lage were unexpectedly removed from those posts.

Referring to them only as "the two most frequently mentioned," the
convalescent Castro wrote that "the honey of power, for which they had made
no sacrifices, awoke in them ambitions that led them to play an undignified
role. The external enemy was filled with illusions for them."

By contrast, the statement in which the Council of State announced the
ministerial shuffle Monday consistently used the respectful term "compa?ero"
and the verb "released" from their posts, rather than "dismissed."

"I told you yesterday that this was a `truene'," one neighbour remarked to
another. Leaning out of their windows, the two women lowered their voices as
a group of tourists walked by.

In Cuban slang, a public employee who has been "tronado" has been
"thunderously" sacked and put on the "pajama plan" ? in other words, sent
home.

"Fidel's reflection reveals that there were problems with Lage and P?rez
Roque, but provides no real explanations. We will have to wait for things to
be clarified further," an academic source who asked not to be identified
told IPS.

Less cautious, a young university professor commented that the removals came
as a big surprise because "many people in Cuba thought they (the officials
in question) were set to govern in the future."

"Now, all of us would like more information," said another professor.
"Fidel's accusation is very serious."

The 57-year-old Lage is a member of the governing Communist Party's powerful
Politburo and was reelected as vice president of the Council of State in
February 2008. P?rez Roque, 43, is a member of the Council of State and of
the Central Committee of the Communist Party.

In the past, both officials formed part of the "Commander-in-Chief's
Coordination and Support Group", a government team made up of younger
Communist Party leaders that was in charge of overseeing and implementing
projects and initiatives considered top priority by Fidel Castro, who due to
his failing health was permanently replaced as president in February 2008 by
his younger brother Ra?l.

The special group functioned parallel to the cabinet of ministers.

Observers suppose that as part of Ra?l Castro's process of streamlining the
government's institutions, such parallel structures no longer have a raison
d'etre. And it is in that light that the restructuring of the cabinet -
which includes the merging of several ministries, to concentrate efforts and
resources and boost efficacy - should be understood, they say.

In the view of the younger Castro brother, Cuba's institutions are one of
the "pillars of invulnerability of the revolution, in the political
terrain." In that sense, one of the decisions that was most widely welcomed
was to "release" Otto Rivero from his responsibilities as vice president of
the Council of Ministers.

Rivero was in charge of the so-called "battle of ideas", a plan created to
"perfect" Cuban socialism in a number of areas, which included programmes
that have now been put under the aegis of the "respective investing bodies,"
according to the official statement.

"The new government wants the ministries to truly fulfill their roles. These
parallel bodies created a dangerous duality of power, concentrated in people
who did not have to answer to the Council of Ministers - not to mention the
fact that they opened a door to the chaotic use of funds," an academic with
experience in the matter commented to IPS.

While some researchers were somewhat sceptical about the government reforms
put into motion by Ra?l Castro on Monday, the source who spoke at length
with IPS expressed enthusiasm, and said he hoped that under the new Minister
of Economy and Planning, Marino Murillo, Cuban state enterprises would
become more competitive, face fewer hurdles and receive greater incentives.

He also applauded the merging of the Ministries of Foreign Trade and Foreign
Investment, under Minister Rodrigo Malmierca.

The academic described Malmierca, who up to Monday was at the helm of the
Ministry of Foreign Investment, as "a person with `frequent flier miles',
who knows how the economy and world politics work."

The source, who asked to remain anonymous, said "Cuba is betting on real
insertion into the global economy," and for that reason it must overcome
internal problems and eliminate, for example, regulations and laws that lead
to "the constant undersupply of the country's stores" and that stand in the
way of the export of domestically produced goods by Cuban companies.

And while some analysts have criticised the appointment of several armed
forces officers to the cabinet, arguing that it will usher in a degree of
"militarisation" of the government, he said he disagreed.

With respect to the naming of army general Salvador Pardo Cruz ? the former
head of the Military Industry Union ? as Minister of the Steel Industry, he
said it was a good decision, pointing out that the military managed to
upgrade and modernise their equipment based on local initiative, resources
and organisation, with a strategy that could be transferred to the steel
industry, which he said is currently "undercapitalised" due to a lack of
coherence in the ministry's policies.

No less strategic was the appointment of Jos? Miyar at the head of the
Ministry of Science, Technology and the Environment, along with the transfer
of the "scientific pole" - comprised of Cuba's main scientific research
institutions ? to the ministry. (It currently answers directly to the
Council of State). "No one knows more about science in Cuba than he does,"
said the source.

That decision also eliminates the unequal treatment received by the research
institutions grouped on the west side of Havana and other parts of the
"scientific pole" around the country.

"I think Chomi (the name by which people in Cuba know Miyar) will bring
about a shift among scientists and science, a sector that has been called
upon to become a dynamic productive force in the country," the expert said.

Cuba's biotech industry, which began to be developed in 1998, is generating
more than 300 million dollars a year in exports, according to unofficial
reports. And countries that have good relations with Cuba have expressed a
growing interest in joint operations that would allow the sharing and even
the transfer of know-how.

"I think Cuba is making progress towards the creation of conditions to make
the leap forward and pull out of the hole, and that it will become an
efficient country, where work will once again be the source of social
recognition, and which will be inserted in a diverse world, based on its own
diversity, and that Ra?l will have the merit of launching this crusade," the
source added.




From sartesian at earthlink.net  Thu Mar  5 14:41:19 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 16:41:19 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Are we facing the mother of all bubbles?
References: <49B045D3.50501@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F9B71B16922D430F867D9438B28F04D0@dmsthinkpad>

The current strength of the dollar is a reflection of two things,  one 
manifest-explicit, the other latent-- implict.  Manifest--  less dependence 
of US economy on exports vs Europe.  Latent:  greater strength of the US 
ruling class vs. its proletariat  as compared to EU vs those workers.  When 
the bourgeoisie talk about safe haven, they explicitly refer to collapse and 
bankruptcy, implicitly, they are talking about revolution and expropriation.

Don't think we will ever, ever, ever see a euro based oil bourse.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "nada" <dwaltersMIA at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Are we facing the mother of all bubbles?


> 



From nmgoro at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 14:43:21 2009
From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 18:43:21 -0300
Subject: [Marxism] Solidarity requested (in Spanish, short intro in English)
Message-ID: <2fa158550903051343m6534eaf5md304810b8974c16c@mail.gmail.com>

The Mauricio Macri regime in Buenos Aires City is launching an ethnic
and social cleansing campaign by means of illegal gangs of thugs,
hooligans on pay by the local government,  who "clean away" settlers
in non-owned nor rented buildings.

Drug dealing is one of the pretexts used.

Comrades of Patria y Pueblo and the Aukache Social Organization are
confronting this extreme right wing Ayn Randian despot. Every support
will be welcome. Some of our comrades, and other comrades, have been
accused of dealing in drugs while they defended 130 families from
these illegal evictions. Once in the Police Station, they were
released immediately but the Macri Chief of Cabinet has been claiming
on TV that they were sellers of  "paco", a most mortal and cheap form
of cocaine designed for children...

Films and photographs are available upon request at AgrupAukache en gmail.com

Those who can help, please send your signature to the following
statement of solidarity to lorenaaukache en yahoo.com.ar

****************************

La VERDAD sobre el DESALOJO de SAN TELMO (Av. Paseo Colon)


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Los abajo firmantes nos solidarizamos con la Agrupaci?n Aukache,
patoteada por los grupos de tareas de Macri/Michetti ?y calumniada por
el Jefe de Gabinete de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Horacio Rodr?guez
Larreta. M?s de diez a?os de trayectoria y lucha por los desamparados
del barrio de La Boca constituyen un historial de dignidad que
dif?cilmente pueda esgrimir uno solo de los ministros del actual
gobierno de la Ciudad.

VIOLENTO DESALOJO DE M?S 100 FAMILIAS EN PASEO COLON 1588

QUE NADIE SE EQUIVOQUE: LOS BARRABRAVAS DE MACRI Y MICHETTI
SE PREPARAN PARA ARREMETER CONTRA LA POBLACION DE LA CIUDAD

El macrismo mostr? sus intenciones el viernes 27 de febrero en la
violenta y arbitraria expulsi?n de los residentes de Paseo Colon 1588.
Los barrabravas de la UCEP, ?fuerza de choque anticirujas? como la
defini? ?Perfil?, irrumpieron a las 5 de la ma?ana aduciendo una orden
administrativa de su jefe, el Ministro de Espacio P?blico Juan Pablo
Piccardo, y del Ministerio de Justicia y Seguridad. La instrucci?n no
los habilitaba para matonear ni expulsar a nadie, pero cumplieron a
las trompadas el designio del ni?o bien de Barrio Parque y su ladero
Horacio Rodr?guez Larreta: ?limpiar? de pobres una vivienda ocupada,
sin ofrecer alternativa habitacional ni, mucho menos, un plan oficial
de promoci?n del empleo productivo para terminar con la indigencia.

Esta brutal violencia se inicia con una campa?a de amedrentamiento y
extorsi?n, acompa?ada de amenazas de muerte telef?nicas. Ya el
mi?rcoles, personal del Ministerio de Desarrollo Social empez? a
difundir entre las familias la falsa noticia de que exist?a una orden
judicial de desalojo, que se har?a efectiva el viernes. Los gestores
del macrismo ofrec?an una rid?cula e insuficiente suma a condici?n de
retirarse del lugar donde estaban viviendo.

El apriete se fue endureciendo con el paso de las horas, pero enfrent?
resistencia masiva. Solo cedieron a la extorsi?n menos de 20 familias.
El resto exigi? la orden judicial para permitir el ingreso del
funcionariado municipal. Por medio de una cadena medi?tica
sugerentemente uniforme, el gobierno municipal, a trav?s de ?Despacito
y en Silencio? Horacio Rodr?guez Larreta intent? difamar a sus
victimas y a los apresados, acus?ndolos de vender drogas.

Si el objetivo era terminar con el tr?fico, que las familias
denunciaban como v?ctimas que eran, ?por qu? no termin? el operativo
el mi?rcoles, cuando se meti? presos a los pocos malvivientes que todo
el mundo identificaba salvo, notablemente, las autoridades municipales
y del orden? Porqu? Rodr?guez Larreta acusa de traficantes a
integrantes de Aukache y a vecinos del lugar? Porqu? finge ignorar que
en realidad Aukache, como tantas organizaciones sociales del barrio,
se opone rotundamente al tr?fico de drogas? Porqu? omite decir que los
apresados salieron en libertad en menos de seis horas, con el solo
cargo -falso por lo dem?s- de ?atentado y resistencia a la autoridad??

Rodr?guez Larreta miente e injuria por televisi?n para justificar lo
injustificable. Miente tambi?n, y a sabiendas, el Subsecretario de
Desarrollo Social, Acevedo, cuando afirma que los compa?eros de
Aukache y los integrantes de la Asamblea de San Telmo manten?an como
rehenes a las familias. Quienes toman rehenes son los funcionarios de
un gobierno que coloca a los humildes entre el fuego que calcina
criaturas en Su?rez y Brown, y las patotas que los agreden en las
calles.

Miente la Ministra de Desarrollo Social Mar?a Eugenia Vidal cuando
felicita a sus funcionarios por el ?ejemplar operativo?. Mienten ante
todo Mauricio Macri y Gabriela Michetti. A la infamia suman la
hipocres?a. Incre?blemente, la infanter?a de la Polic?a Federal en
determinado momento reparti? golpes sin interesarse por los gritos de
ni?os, beb?s y reci?n nacidos. Para colmo, meti? presos a ocho
compa?eros.

Ante la resistencia popular frente a sus pol?ticas procesistas, el
macrismo recurre al chantaje, la injuria, la mentira y, si el caso lo
hace necesario, a sus barrabravas, n?cleo futuro de la polic?a que
desea dirigir. Esta banda ven?a entren?ndose ya con pateaduras y
violencias diarias contra los sin techo que viv?an en las plazas
p?blicas, y llegaron a la cumbre del hero?smo apu?eteando a los
docentes en las movilizaciones del a?o pasado. Esta vez volvieron a
demostrar su ?eficacia? como patota oficial de los privilegiados.

El resultado final, hasta este momento, es sencillo: m?s de 300
habitantes de la ciudad de Buenos Aires ya no tienen hogar; pibes y
pibas no saben si podr?n seguir acerc?ndose a los clubes donde, desde
hace a?os, ven?an integr?ndose a la sociedad; a dos d?as del inicio de
las clases; no saben a qu? escuela asistir?n. Macri y sus acompa?antes
sonr?en satisfechos.

Ahora, m?s all? de las acciones judiciales que corresponda, pondremos
en juego todos los recursos legales y recurriremos a la movilizaci?n
de los ciudadanos contra un gobierno decidido a tratarlos como
animales. Se adjuntan im?genes identificatorias, y otro material est?
disponible a pedido, y ser? presentado ante las autoridades y
magistrados pertinentes.

Si se permite que el macrismo siga desplegando sus alas, pronto la
Ciudad de Buenos Aires ser? un infierno matoneril. Hoy solo lastiman.
Ma?ana podr?n matar. Si alguien piensa que las bandas se detendr?n en
los m?s pobres, es mejor que se desenga?e. El macrismo es el Proceso
con careta humana.

Adhesiones:
Multisectorial de La Boca - Asoc. Artistas Pl?sticos de Caminito - PC.
Congreso Extraordinario - PC la Boca - AG. Vecinos de La Boca - UB
Orgullosamente Peronista - Asoc. Gente del Sur - Movimiento Libres del
Sur - Movimiento Barrios de Pie - Frente Transversal - Partido de la
Victoria - Movimiento Unidad Popular / MUP - Centro de Actividades
Sociales / CAS - Asoc. Manos Solidarias - Vecinos autoconvocados del
barrio - Cte. Pol?tica 17 de Agosto - Coop. Grafica Patricios -
Partido Patria y Pueblo - M.T.L. La Boca - Peronismo 26 de Julio Cap.
Fed. - P. Sol - Comedor Los Pibes - Comedor Copitos - Peronismo
Militante - UTE - Daniel Portas - Luis D'Elia / FTV - Horacio Gonz?lez
- Norberto Galasso - Diputado Nacional Jorge Coscia - Diputado
Nacional Hector Recalde - Edgardo Mu?oz / Srio. de Org. del Sind.
Dragado y Balizamiento CGT - Luis Farinello - Juventud de UTE -
Juventud de la CTA Nacional - Frente Barrial 19 de Diciembre -
Agrupaci?n Nacional
?Mart?n Fierro - CTERA Capital - Movimiento Evita Capital - Ana Agulla
- JP Evita Capital - C?tedra Nacional de Econom?a Arturo Jauretche -
Espacio Social y Comunal COMUNArte - Centro Social y Cultural Rodolfo
Puiggros - Agrupaci?n Universitaria La Vertiente - Teatro Catalinas
Sur - Centro de Estudios Nacionales Arturo Jauretche - Carolina
Listeri / ?FTV Cap. Fed. - Lista de Discusi?n Reconquista Popular - La
Vallese / Consejo Directivo de la Fac. de Cs. Sociales - Asociaci?n
Juntas y Juntos Somos Mas - Cooperativa El Sol - Cooperativa CAS Ldta.
- Cooperativa Manzanas de las Luces - Sec. de Rel. Obrero estudiantil
de la FUA - Secretar?a de Extensi?n del CeCSO / UBA - Agrupaci?n
Universitaria DEMOS - Agrup. Univ. La Scalabrini ?Fac. de Filosof?a y
Letras - Organizaci?n Popular Los Fogoneros - Radio Gr?fica - Marcelo
Saravia / Uruguay - Gabriel Fern?ndez / Dir. Se?al Medios y Question
Latinoam?rica - Mart?n Garc?a - Eduardo Dimas Berrozpe
?/ Srio. Nac. de Prensa: Asoc. Bancaria (S.E.B.) - Militancia
Comunista - Alejandro Fagiani / Srio. de Cultura de la seccional Bs.
As. S.E.B. - Radio Ahijuna 94.7 / Quilmes - Alberto Ferraresi - Srio.
Gral. de la Asoc. ?Arg. de Farmacia CGT - Mat?as Rodeiro / Docente UBA
- Causa Popular / Cordoba - Nora Palancio Zapiola / Periodista -
Biblioteca Popular de Barracas - Daniel Sandoval / Pte.: Circulo
Bolivariano Jaime Nevares (Neuqu?n) - Agrup. Territorial German Abdala
CTA - Foro Permanente por el Derecho a una Vivienda Digna - Centro
Comunitario Madre Esperanza - Peronismo Independiente - FAETS (Fed.
Arg. Estudiantes de Trabajo Social) - Movimiento Universitario Evita -
UES - Enrique Arrosagaray - Dir. Gral. de DDHH- Municipalidad de
Avellaneda - Ricardo Forster - Soberan?a y Liberaci?n / Alberto
Lapolla, Marcelo Arbit, Jorge Rachid, Ana Lorenzo - Agrupaci?n Causa
Nacional - Gabriel H. Rubinstein - Hugo Carpenzano / C?rdoba - Mario
Alberto Gurioli
?/ C?rdoba - Soledad Signetto / Rosario - Cecilia Litichever -
Jaquelina Anapo - Jos? Mar?a Cavalleri / Salta - Ra?l Isman / Docente
- Julieta Guerberof - Juan Francisco Natalizio - Maximiliano Gustavo
Vieites - Dora de la Vega / C?rdoba - Creactivar Redes Comunitarias -
Diego Oliveira, Fabi?n Cabanellas / Agrupaci?n Juan Jos? Valle
(Ensenada) - Sergio Andr?s Traversi / Sindicato Empleados de Comercio
- Fernando Adri?n Cosentino / Movimiento Peronista de Base (Alte
Brown)

Contin?an las firmas?

Si Ud. desea expresar su solidaridad env?enos:
Nombre completo institucional o nombre y apellido.

Contactos:
Agrupaci?n Aukache: 4307-1010
Rub?n Rosmarino: 15-6-247-2071
Lorena Vazquez: 15-6-247-5077





? ? ?Yahoo! Cocina
Recetas pr?cticas y comida saludable
http://ar.mujer.yahoo.com/cocina/

________________________________________

SI RECONQUISTA-POPULAR LE RESULTA ?TIL, CONSIDERE LA POSIBILIDAD DE
BRINDARLE APOYO FINANCIERO. HAGA UN DEP?SITO EN LA CUENTA 3-72081/5
DEL BANCO FRANC?S, O CONT?CTESE CON recpopad en gmail.com

________________________________________
INFORMACI?N SOBRE LA LISTA Y SUSCRIPCIONES POR V?A INTERNET:
?http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/reconquista-popular.

SUSCRIPCI?N POR CORREO ELECTR?NICO:
env?e un mensaje escribiendo 'help'
<sin comillas> en el asunto (no escriba nada en el cuerpo del mensaje)
a reconquista-popular-request en lists.econ.utah.edu

EL CORREO ELECTR?NICO DE LA PERSONA QUE ADMINISTRA LA LISTA ES:

reconquista-popular-admin en lists.econ.utah.edu

TODOS LOS MENSAJES DE ESTA LISTA QUEDAN ARCHIVADOS Y PUEDEN CONSULTARSE EN:

http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/reconquista-popular/
________________________________________

Lista de correo electr?nico Reconquista-Popular
Reconquista-Popular en lists.econ.utah.edu
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/reconquista-popular



-- 

N?stor Gorojovsky
El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a


From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 15:08:45 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 17:08:45 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban "street" curious, questioning,
	and hopeful about 	govt changes
In-Reply-To: <1E874D0287D54073973BA4D4DDC62B5C@office1pc>
References: <1E874D0287D54073973BA4D4DDC62B5C@office1pc>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903051408x6a42ebbfv3115da06b390de0a@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 4:38 PM, Fred Feldman <ffeldman at bellatlantic.net> wrote:
>
>
> By the way, the idea that secrecy or delays in revealing information about
> changes in government posts is a unique characteristic of Stalinist regimes
> is simply a fantasy. ?This is characteristic to one degree or another of all
> states and governments to one degree or another, and that includes the
> Bolshevik regime when Lenin was really in command.

But that doesn't make it desirable. The people need to be taken into
confidence (unless there are security reasons preventing it). The more
transparency, the better.


From jbustelo at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 15:19:34 2009
From: jbustelo at gmail.com (Joaquin Bustelo)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 17:19:34 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban government changes and imperialist and
	otherspeculations
In-Reply-To: <77E75788-7025-45C2-B352-753A731467A7@pipeline.com>
References: <4E501DB4D26F4AEA97980C221C76E262@office1pc>
	<77E75788-7025-45C2-B352-753A731467A7@pipeline.com>
Message-ID: <5585319420DD4A1E95D96F84AD112988@albanta>

Carlos Lage and Felipe P?rez Roque have letters published in today's Granma
(at least the online edition) assuming responsibility for mistakes --though
they don't specify what they were-- and resigning not just their government
positions but party posts as well, in Perez Roque's case, the Central
Committee, in Lage's, the CC and Politburo. 

Almost certainly, these changes in government personnel represent not just
the alleged personal failings of individuals, but also a political
differentiation, at least an incipient one. For nearly two decades Lage has
been closely identified with what is perceived or described as economic
"liberalization" in Cuba -- greater openness to foreign investment, etc. But
there is also a generational differentiation. He was the most prominent
leader from the generation that came of age immediately after the victory of
the revolution.

Perez Roque has had no particular political coloration attributed to him
that I am aware of. He was of the generation following Lage's, born in the
baby boom of the first years of the revolution. He has been closely
identified with Fidel, having served as his chief of staff before becoming
foreign minister, replacing Roberto Robaina, another younger leader who was
removed in disgrace in 2002. Later it was revealed that Robaina had had
close dealings with a Mexican government official accused of being in the
pay of drug cartels, and having accepted gifts from him, although to remodel
the foreign ministry, not for personal gain. Three years after his removal
from power, Robaina told CNN's (now Al Jazeera's) Lucia Newman that his
failing had been not being transparent with his comrades.

As for the failings of Lage and Perez Roque, all we know is what Fidel said
in his comment -- "La miel del poder por el cual no conocieron sacrificio
alguno, despert? en ellos ambiciones que los condujeron a un papel indigno.
El enemigo externo se llen? de ilusiones con ellos."

"The honey of power for which they had not known any sacrifice awakened in
them ambitions which led them to an undignified role. The external enemy
became full of illusions in relation to them."

The word "indigno" which I have translated as "undignified" is a funny word.
It can mean as little as awkward and as much as outrageous. Fidel's comment
--by referring to the "external enemy"-- explicitly suggests a political
dimension to the changes in government personnel, but doesn't really go
beyond suggesting.

The rest of Fidel's comments provide no obvious guidance to his exact
meaning, as he appears to suddenly switch from discussing government affairs
to discussing baseball. 

Perhaps there is a link there, but as someone who became allergic to sports
in my teenage years, it eludes me. 

Fidel is confident that the Cuban team will be victorious over American and
other competitors in an upcoming "Basball Classic," precisely because they
are not professional ball players. He adds that Chavez still doesn't
understand why the Cubans will beat his wonderful pitchers and batters.
Fidel throws a change-of-pace pitch if ever there was one, from suggestive
hints about the enemy's illusions evoked by mistakes of two of the most
prominent Cuban government officials to needling Hugo Chavez about the
Venezuelan baseball team. And he adds that he will accept full
responsibility whatever the outcome: the Cuban Team's victories will belong
to all, but "defeat will never be an orphan."

It is a shame that Walter Lippmann is no longer on this list, as he may have
some insight --or at least a report on the Havana vox populi-- on these
matters.

But then again Fidel followed up his column on government changes and
baseball with one about his meeting with Dominican President Leonel
Fernandez, the interlinked struggles of Cuban and Dominican patriots, and
Fernandez's appreciation of the failings of the free market and
neoliberalism.

Perhaps Fidel has already explained what was really involved politically in
all this, it will just take some time for us to understand.

Joaquin



From sartesian at earthlink.net  Thu Mar  5 15:30:20 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 17:30:20 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban government changes and imperialist
	andotherspeculations
References: <4E501DB4D26F4AEA97980C221C76E262@office1pc><77E75788-7025-45C2-B352-753A731467A7@pipeline.com>
	<5585319420DD4A1E95D96F84AD112988@albanta>
Message-ID: <A6619A8C78A44DFF8539D2BF20460FB9@dmsthinkpad>

Yeah, anybody can be victorious of the US amalgam-- but Japan won the last 
classic.  Did Fidel make any predictions about beating Japan?

Line on Fidel when being scouted by the US:  good fastball, no curveball. 
No curveball, no chance.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joaquin Bustelo" <jbustelo at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 5:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Cuban government changes and imperialist 
andotherspeculations




From jbustelo at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 15:40:42 2009
From: jbustelo at gmail.com (Joaquin Bustelo)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 17:40:42 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Why the Red Army Faction Matters
In-Reply-To: <49AEEE59.9070708@kersplebedeb.com>
References: <49AE841C.9080806@kersplebedeb.com><49AE9161.8020106@panix.com>	<49AEE27D.5090309@kersplebedeb.com><49AEE5D1.3010302@panix.com>
	<49AEEE59.9070708@kersplebedeb.com>
Message-ID: <734D74C89FFC449788CA30807BEE015C@albanta>

kers-something or other writ: "Finally, even the 1977 campaign to free the
prisoners, which is viewed by everyone as having been a catastrophe not only
for the left, but also for the RAF, was not an unmitigated defeat. By
pushing Schmidt to lurch to the right the tiny guerilla organizations
managed to help lay the basis for breaking leftists away from the SPD, which
in turn contributed to the breakthrough of the Greens. Of course, some of
these folks ended up integrated into the system, so if like me one starts
the discussion with the a priori judgment that that's a dead end, then i
guess this isn't a good thing. But that's a point i've stated, but am not
going to argue here." 

Which reminds me of another Peter Camejo joke, this wasn't part of his stump
speeches, he told it to me one night when I was telling him some of the
jokes I'd picked up in Cuba when I went on the Antonio Maceo Brigade in
1979.

He said back in the 1930's there were two Soviet functionaries who had been
the closest of comrades during the Civil War but hadn't seen each other
since. One was traveling from Minsk to Pinsk, the other from Pinsk to Minsk,
and as fate would have it, their trains met at a watering station between
the two cities. They saw each other, embraced, started talking about the old
days what they'd done since, their wives and children, and eventually
hearing the whistle blow got back on one of the trains together and
continued talking. Eventually one of them asked the other, where are you
going? "To Minsk," he said. "And you?"

"To Pinsk" said the other.

To which the first one replied, "Ah, comrade, aren't dialectics amazing?"

Joaquin



From jbustelo at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 16:08:33 2009
From: jbustelo at gmail.com (Joaquin Bustelo)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 18:08:33 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] New York City: Protest a Region-Wide Foreclosed
	HomeAuction!
In-Reply-To: <b0eece200903050927o64d0151eq8077baf3820e8408@mail.gmail.com>
References: <b0eece200903050927o64d0151eq8077baf3820e8408@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <EEB46FA03CF84AB099B961889FBAAFAE@albanta>

PL writes: "I received this alert and thought it might be of interest to
marxism-list subscribers in the New York City area."

Anyone else involved in this besides whichever flavor of Marcyites is in
control of the IAC? As Far as I can see the list of endorsers is just "the
usual suspects" -- and not too many of those. 

Joaquin



From jbustelo at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 16:11:54 2009
From: jbustelo at gmail.com (Joaquin Bustelo)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 18:11:54 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban government changes and
	imperialistandotherspeculations
In-Reply-To: <A6619A8C78A44DFF8539D2BF20460FB9@dmsthinkpad>
References: <4E501DB4D26F4AEA97980C221C76E262@office1pc><77E75788-7025-45C2-B352-753A731467A7@pipeline.com><5585319420DD4A1E95D96F84AD112988@albanta>
	<A6619A8C78A44DFF8539D2BF20460FB9@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <01F67F2A57904F9D85CE705B86205AAA@albanta>

S Artesian reports: "Line on Fidel when being scouted by the US:  good
fastball, no curveball.  No curveball, no chance." 

I think by now we know Fidel has the wickedest curve ball seen in the last
half century. Even the Yankees when they were much more dominant than today
couldn't score against him.

Joaquin



From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 16:15:06 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 18:15:06 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Obama's spy ruffles hawks' feathers
In-Reply-To: <9e2acadd0903050944j3c44e35au51a5fd28d5f0701d@mail.gmail.com>
References: <9E782AD31BC642BDAFAFD619F7F0F77F@Rigg>
	<9e2acadd0903050944j3c44e35au51a5fd28d5f0701d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903051515m7cf8c2b6u271926408f1fedaa@mail.gmail.com>

Obama's spy ruffles hawks' feathers
By Daniel Luban and Jim Lobe

Full: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/KC06Ak01.html

WASHINGTON - The appointment of a top-ranking retired diplomat and
vocal critic of Israel to a key intelligence post has triggered an
intense backlash from hawkish Israel supporters in Congress and the
media who are pressing the administration of President Barack Obama to
reconsider.

Critics have seized on retired ambassador Charles "Chas" Freeman's
ties to Saudi Arabia and views on human rights in China to argue
against his appointment as chairman of the National Intelligence
Council (NIC), but Freeman's defenders charge that their real aim is
to impose an ideological litmus test on top government officials and
ensure a continued policy of reflexive US support for Israel.

Observers are watching the campaign against Freeman, who enjoys strong
support among intelligence professionals and realists in the
national-security bureaucracy, as an early test of how much influence
the so-called "Israel lobby" will be able to exert on the new
administration. [...]

Jim Lobe's blog on US foreign policy can be read at
http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/.


From jbustelo at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 16:17:01 2009
From: jbustelo at gmail.com (Joaquin Bustelo)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 18:17:01 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Are we facing the mother of all bubbles?
In-Reply-To: <F9B71B16922D430F867D9438B28F04D0@dmsthinkpad>
References: <49B045D3.50501@gmail.com>
	<F9B71B16922D430F867D9438B28F04D0@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <7C6E7C2D69934E2ABF038DA49EFEF20E@albanta>

S Artesian opines: "The current strength of the dollar is a reflection of
two things,  one manifest-explicit, the other latent-- implicit.  Manifest--
less dependence of US economy on exports vs. Europe.  Latent:  greater
strength of the US ruling class vs. its proletariat  as compared to EU vs.
those workers."

Not just vis a vis the U.S. working class, but the strength of US ruling
class against "all enemies foreign and domestic," i.e., working and
oppressed people the world over. Hence the importance of Aircraft Carrier
Groups, Marine Expeditionary Forces, etc.

Unfortunately, the U.S. working class is, at most, thus far a minor worry,
"latent" as S Artesian says. Not so working people everywhere. 

Joaquin



From sartesian at earthlink.net  Thu Mar  5 16:47:22 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 18:47:22 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban government changes
	andimperialistandotherspeculations
References: <4E501DB4D26F4AEA97980C221C76E262@office1pc><77E75788-7025-45C2-B352-753A731467A7@pipeline.com><5585319420DD4A1E95D96F84AD112988@albanta><A6619A8C78A44DFF8539D2BF20460FB9@dmsthinkpad>
	<01F67F2A57904F9D85CE705B86205AAA@albanta>
Message-ID: <6555E332DF8B42F9A28E1A8BEA2EE8C6@dmsthinkpad>

Shows you how scouts can be wrong... but  I think he's relied mostly on his 
high hard one, throwing it in on the hands-- chin music, maestro, if you 
please.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joaquin Bustelo" <jbustelo at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 6:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Cuban government changes 
andimperialistandotherspeculations


>
> I think by now we know Fidel has the wickedest curve ball seen in the last
> half century. Even the Yankees when they were much more dominant than 
> today
> couldn't score against him.
>
> Joaquin



From shmage at pipeline.com  Thu Mar  5 16:57:40 2009
From: shmage at pipeline.com (Shane Mage)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 18:57:40 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban government changes
	andimperialistandotherspeculations
In-Reply-To: <6555E332DF8B42F9A28E1A8BEA2EE8C6@dmsthinkpad>
References: <4E501DB4D26F4AEA97980C221C76E262@office1pc><77E75788-7025-45C2-B352-753A731467A7@pipeline.com><5585319420DD4A1E95D96F84AD112988@albanta><A6619A8C78A44DFF8539D2BF20460FB9@dmsthinkpad>
	<01F67F2A57904F9D85CE705B86205AAA@albanta>
	<6555E332DF8B42F9A28E1A8BEA2EE8C6@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <A2D352EE-DF30-4725-A909-F97ACE1D983C@pipeline.com>


On Mar 5, 2009, at 6:47 PM, S. Artesian wrote:
> ....I think he's relied mostly on his
> high hard one, throwing it in on the hands-- chin music, maestro, if  
> you
> please.


That's not "chin music:" a fastball on the hands is a *jam job* ("jam  
yesterday, jam tomorrow, never jam today"--Red Queen)


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 sartesian at earthlink.net  Thu Mar  5 17:02:38 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 19:02:38 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban government
	changesandimperialistandotherspeculations
References: <4E501DB4D26F4AEA97980C221C76E262@office1pc><77E75788-7025-45C2-B352-753A731467A7@pipeline.com><5585319420DD4A1E95D96F84AD112988@albanta><A6619A8C78A44DFF8539D2BF20460FB9@dmsthinkpad><01F67F2A57904F9D85CE705B86205AAA@albanta><6555E332DF8B42F9A28E1A8BEA2EE8C6@dmsthinkpad>
	<A2D352EE-DF30-4725-A909-F97ACE1D983C@pipeline.com>
Message-ID: <B2B9741E84914BDC8D98B398A9F58496@dmsthinkpad>

That is correct.  Two distinct locations for throwing inside-- in on the 
hands-- Mariano to lefties,  and the high hard one under the chin-- Bob 
Gibson to anyone leaning over the plate.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Shane Mage" <shmage at pipeline.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 6:57 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Cuban government 
changesandimperialistandotherspeculations


>
> On Mar 5, 2009, at 6:47 PM, S. Artesian wrote:
>> ....I think he's relied mostly on his
>> high hard one, throwing it in on the hands-- chin music, maestro, if
>> you
>> please.
>
>
> That's not "chin music:" a fastball on the hands is a *jam job* ("jam
> yesterday, jam tomorrow, never jam today"--Red Queen)
>



From elishastephens at hotmail.com  Thu Mar  5 17:35:13 2009
From: elishastephens at hotmail.com (Eli Stephens)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 16:35:13 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban government changes and imperialist and
 otherspeculations
Message-ID: <COL112-W74658C139651FC08FC0D9AD7A50@phx.gbl>


JB: "Carlos Lage and Felipe P?rez Roque have letters published in today's Granma (at least the online edition) assuming responsibility for mistakes"

I actually didn't see it in the online edition, although I had it emailed to me from some anti-Cuban group on whose listserve I have inexplicably found myself on (and hence had no particular confidence that it wasn't a hoax, whatever the official look of the thing). However at looking at the Granma Diario website (http://www.granma.cubaweb.cu/) I notice that there is now a link I've never noticed before (so I don't know if it's been there for ages or just appeared recently) for the "Edici?n impresa" which takes you to this page:

http://www.granma.cubaweb.cu/pdf/index.html

where there is a PDF file for every page of the paper. The statements in question are on p. 5.



Eli Stephens
 Left I on the News
 http://lefti.blogspot.com


_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live? Contacts: Organize your contact list. 
http://windowslive.com/connect/post/marcusatmicrosoft.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!503D1D86EBB2B53C!2285.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_UGC_Contacts_032009

From mqduck at sonic.net  Thu Mar  5 18:03:10 2009
From: mqduck at sonic.net (Jeffrey Thomas Piercy)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 17:03:10 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Israel and the Nazis
In-Reply-To: <49AFFF78.8030000@panix.com>
References: <49AFFF78.8030000@panix.com>
Message-ID: <49B0764E.8000505@sonic.net>

Louis Proyect wrote:

> ?willfully sensationalistic and deliberately repellent.?

I'm down with the other criticisms, but I'm a strong defender of things 
that are willfully sensationalistic and/or deliberately repellent. John 
Waters, Andy Warhol, GG Allen... Where would the world be without them? 
(Answer: Better off but much less interesting)


-Jeff


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


From markalause at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 18:35:26 2009
From: markalause at gmail.com (Mark Lause)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 20:35:26 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Why the Red Army Faction Matters
In-Reply-To: <734D74C89FFC449788CA30807BEE015C@albanta>
References: <49AE841C.9080806@kersplebedeb.com> <49AE9161.8020106@panix.com>
	<49AEE27D.5090309@kersplebedeb.com> <49AEE5D1.3010302@panix.com>
	<49AEEE59.9070708@kersplebedeb.com>
	<734D74C89FFC449788CA30807BEE015C@albanta>
Message-ID: <b16d8daf0903051735l24cef61bwf08bfb9431e1f18e@mail.gmail.com>

Joaquin and others who knew Peter well should take on the task of
compiling some of these gems.  He was a brilliant speaker and these
sorts of humorous stories were really a vital part of that.  They
should be preserved...

ML


From lnp3 at panix.com  Thu Mar  5 19:00:44 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 21:00:44 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Why the Red Army Faction Matters
In-Reply-To: <b16d8daf0903051735l24cef61bwf08bfb9431e1f18e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <49AE841C.9080806@kersplebedeb.com>
	<49AE9161.8020106@panix.com>	<49AEE27D.5090309@kersplebedeb.com>
	<49AEE5D1.3010302@panix.com>	<49AEEE59.9070708@kersplebedeb.com>	<734D74C89FFC449788CA30807BEE015C@albanta>
	<b16d8daf0903051735l24cef61bwf08bfb9431e1f18e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <49B083CC.5040500@panix.com>

Mark Lause wrote:
> Joaquin and others who knew Peter well should take on the task of
> compiling some of these gems.  He was a brilliant speaker and these
> sorts of humorous stories were really a vital part of that.  They
> should be preserved...

My favorite was Peter describing life under communism, when you would go 
to a grocery store and take whatever you need. If you were seen walking 
out the door with dozens of rib roasts, they wouldn't call the cops. 
They'd send you to a shrink.


From fred.fuentes at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 19:48:18 2009
From: fred.fuentes at gmail.com (Fred Fuentes)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 13:48:18 +1100
Subject: [Marxism] Lula suggests Communist Manifesto to overcome crisis
Message-ID: <b5a2a8180903051848h15f19fc3r7d49daf1808e92cd@mail.gmail.com>

Sorry cant find mention of this in english news wires. I would be
interested to know which parts of the manifesto are the ones that Lula
thinks should be applied......

UN FANTASMA RECORRE BRASIL

Lula aconsej? usar el Manifiesto Comunista para superar la crisis

El presidente brasile?o, Luiz Lula da Silva, reiter? sus cr?ticas a
los pa?ses industrializados por la generaci?n de la crisis
internacional, y aconsej? adoptar algunas ideas del marxismo para
superarla, al tiempo que reclam? a los grandes empresarios a ayudar a
restablecer el cr?dito.



Durante la apertura de la primera reuni?n del a?o del Consejo de
Desarrollo Econ?mico y Social, integrado por ministros, empresarios,
sindicalistas y economistas, el mandatario afirm? que en el Manifiesto
Comunista, publicado por Karl Marx y Federico Engels a mediados del
siglo XIX, hay algunas "recetas ?tiles" e "ideas audaces" para hacer
frente a la crisis internacional.

"Lleg? la hora de la verdad y de hacer pol?tica, no se puede ser
contemporizador, esta crisis fue generada en el coraz?n de los pa?ses
de aquellos que antes sab?an todo", dijo Lula, seg?n inform? la
Agencia Estado, citada por la agencia de noticias ANSA.

Lula inst? a "aprovechar esta crisis para hacer lo que no tuvimos el
coraje de hacer hace 20 a?os".

En ese sentido, se refiri? a la falta de cr?dito para la producci?n, e
increp? por ello al empresario Jorge Gerdau, presidente de una de las
mayores empresas sider?rgicas de Am?rica Latina.

"?Gerdau, d?nde est? todo el dinero que circulaba antes de la crisis?
?desapareci??", indag? Lula.

Por ?ltimo, el presidente sostuvo que para superar la crisis no es
suficiente regular el sistema financiero y los para?sos fiscales y que
tambi?n es necesario "restablecer el cr?dito en el planeta porque sin
cr?dito la econom?a no funciona".


?Permalink:
http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/ultimas/20-121004-2009-03-05.html



-- 
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 ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 19:55:46 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 21:55:46 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban government changes and imperialist and
	otherspeculations
In-Reply-To: <COL112-W74658C139651FC08FC0D9AD7A50@phx.gbl>
References: <COL112-W74658C139651FC08FC0D9AD7A50@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903051855s5203570el4729d5904fdb82e9@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 7:35 PM, Eli Stephens <elishastephens at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> JB: "Carlos Lage and Felipe P?rez Roque have letters published in today's Granma (at least the online edition) assuming responsibility for mistakes"
>
> I actually didn't see it in the online edition, although I had it emailed to me from some anti-Cuban group on whose listserve I have inexplicably found myself on (and hence had no particular confidence that it wasn't a hoax, whatever the official look of the thing). However at looking at the Granma Diario website (http://www.granma.cubaweb.cu/) I notice that there is now a link I've never noticed before (so I don't know if it's been there for ages or just appeared recently) for the "Edici?n impresa" which takes you to this page:
>
> http://www.granma.cubaweb.cu/pdf/index.html

Cuba ex-ministers 'admit errors'

<http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2009/03/200935173519519381.html>

Raul Castro, the Cuban president, has carried out
a major government reshuffle [AFP]

Two of Cuba's most prominent politicians have resigned from their
Communist party and government posts after they were sacked from the
cabinet, according to letters published by the Cuban media.

Carlos Lage and Felipe Perez Roque were apparently accused by Fidel
Castro, the former president, of being seduced by the "honey of power"
after they were sacked as part of a government reshuffle.

 Lage, a former cabinet chief, said: "I recognise the errors committed
and I assume the responsibility. I consider that the analysis made in
the past meeting with the political bureau [of the party] was just and
profound."

Lage said in his letter, which was dated as being written on Tuesday,
that he would also leave his more important post of vice-president on
the Council of State, Cuba's top policy body.

He also resigned from the Communist party's central committee and
political bureau, effectively removing himself from political life in
Cuba.

Perez Roque, the former foreign minister, said he would also quit the
Council of State, the National Assembly and the party central
committee.

"I fully recognise that I committed errors that were broadly analysed
in a meeting [with the political bureau]. I assume my full
responsibility for them," he said in the letter, also dated on
Tuesday.

Major reshuffle

At least 20 officials were moved, demoted or promoted by Raul Castro,
the Cuban president, on Monday, in a move the government said was
intended to make Cuba's government more compact and functional and to
work towards "perfecting" the Cuban system.
In an apparent reference to Perez Roque and Lage, Fidel Castro said in
an article on a government website on Tuesday the two had developed
ambitions that led them to "an undignified role".

Castro, who resigned the Cuban presidency last year due to ill health,
also said the men were removed as "the external enemy filled itself
with expectations for them," although it was not clear who this
referred to.

Perez Roque, who had been Havana's chief diplomat since May 1999, was
replaced by Bruno Rodriguez, his deputy.

And Lage was replaced as cabinet secretary by General Jose Amado
Ricardo Guerra, a former top military official.

Lage had been credited with helping to save Cuba's economy by
implementing economic reforms after aid from the Soviet Union ended in
the early 1990s, while Perez Roque was once personal secretary to
Fidel and a former leader of the Communist party's youth organisation.


From HUMANECO at hsph.harvard.edu  Thu Mar  5 19:55:49 2009
From: HUMANECO at hsph.harvard.edu (Richard Levins)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 21:55:49 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban government changes and
	imperialist	andotherspeculations
Message-ID: <49B04A6B0200002C0003808F@hsph.harvard.edu>

=========================
Richard Levins
>>> "Joaquin Bustelo" <jbustelo at gmail.com> 03/05/09 5:20 PM >>>
Carlos Lage and Felipe P?rez Roque have letters published in today's Granma
(at least the online edition) assuming responsibility for mistakes --though
they don't specify what they were-- and resigning not just their government
positions but party posts as well, in Perez Roque's case, the Central
Committee, in Lage's, the CC and Politburo. 

Almost certainly, these changes in government personnel represent not just
the alleged personal failings of individuals, but also a political
differentiation, at least an incipient one. For nearly two decades Lage has
been closely identified with what is perceived or described as economic
"liberalization" in Cuba -- greater openness to foreign investment, etc. But
there is also a generational differentiation. He was the most prominent
leader from the generation that came of age immediately after the victory of
the revolution.

Perez Roque has had no particular political coloration attributed to him
that I am aware of. He was of the generation following Lage's, born in the
baby boom of the first years of the revolution. He has been closely
identified with Fidel, having served as his chief of staff before becoming
foreign minister, replacing Roberto Robaina, another younger leader who was
removed in disgrace in 2002. Later it was revealed that Robaina had had
close dealings with a Mexican government official accused of being in the
pay of drug cartels, and having accepted gifts from him, although to remodel
the foreign ministry, not for personal gain. Three years after his removal
from power, Robaina told CNN's (now Al Jazeera's) Lucia Newman that his
failing had been not being transparent with his comrades.

As for the failings of Lage and Perez Roque, all we know is what Fidel said
in his comment -- "La miel del poder por el cual no conocieron sacrificio
alguno, despert? en ellos ambiciones que los condujeron a un papel indigno.
El enemigo externo se llen? de ilusiones con ellos."

"The honey of power for which they had not known any sacrifice awakened in
them ambitions which led them to an undignified role. The external enemy
became full of illusions in relation to them."

The word "indigno" which I have translated as "undignified" is a funny word.
It can mean as little as awkward and as much as outrageous. Fidel's comment
--by referring to the "external enemy"-- explicitly suggests a political
dimension to the changes in government personnel, but doesn't really go
beyond suggesting.

The rest of Fidel's comments provide no obvious guidance to his exact
meaning, as he appears to suddenly switch from discussing government affairs
to discussing baseball. 

Perhaps there is a link there, but as someone who became allergic to sports
in my teenage years, it eludes me. 

Fidel is confident that the Cuban team will be victorious over American and
other competitors in an upcoming "Basball Classic," precisely because they
are not professional ball players. He adds that Chavez still doesn't
understand why the Cubans will beat his wonderful pitchers and batters.
Fidel throws a change-of-pace pitch if ever there was one, from suggestive
hints about the enemy's illusions evoked by mistakes of two of the most
prominent Cuban government officials to needling Hugo Chavez about the
Venezuelan baseball team. And he adds that he will accept full
responsibility whatever the outcome: the Cuban Team's victories will belong
to all, but "defeat will never be an orphan."

It is a shame that Walter Lippmann is no longer on this list, as he may have
some insight --or at least a report on the Havana vox populi-- on these
matters.

But then again Fidel followed up his column on government changes and
baseball with one about his meeting with Dominican President Leonel
Fernandez, the interlinked struggles of Cuban and Dominican patriots, and
Fernandez's appreciation of the failings of the free market and
neoliberalism.

Perhaps Fidelall this, it will just take some time for us to understand.

Joaquin


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/humaneco%40hsph.harvard.edu



From HUMANECO at hsph.harvard.edu  Thu Mar  5 19:58:30 2009
From: HUMANECO at hsph.harvard.edu (Richard Levins)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 21:58:30 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban government changes and
	imperialist	andotherspeculations
Message-ID: <49B04B060200002C00038093@hsph.harvard.edu>

In our country, the deposed ministers would either say "I didn't do anything wrong" or" I want to spend more time with my family". In the course of 50 years, Fidel has often withheld information but never to my knowledge has he lied to the people. So why not give the benefit of the doubt until fuller information is available?



=========================
Richard Levins


From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 20:09:21 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 22:09:21 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cuban government changes and imperialist
	andotherspeculations
In-Reply-To: <49B04A6B0200002C0003808F@hsph.harvard.edu>
References: <49B04A6B0200002C0003808F@hsph.harvard.edu>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903051909w3049037cn47945a18e714692@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 9:55 PM, Richard Levins
<HUMANECO at hsph.harvard.edu> wrote:
> =========================
> Richard Levins
>>>> "Joaquin Bustelo" <jbustelo at gmail.com> 03/05/09 5:20 PM >>>
> As for the failings of Lage and Perez Roque, all we know is what Fidel said
> in his comment -- "La miel del poder por el cual no conocieron sacrificio
> alguno, despert? en ellos ambiciones que los condujeron a un papel indigno.
> El enemigo externo se llen? de ilusiones con ellos."
>
> "The honey of power for which they had not known any sacrifice awakened in
> them ambitions which led them to an undignified role. The external enemy
> became full of illusions in relation to them."

<http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ha2f_SYHHd5bA8SI5LgWG4-Z3wqQD96NF9580>

By WILL WEISSERT
HAVANA (AP)

[...] Fidel Castro hinted in an essay published Tuesday that Perez
Roque and Lage failed to do enough to quiet whispers that they could
emerge on top in a post-Castro Cuba.

"The central sin at play here is to have ambition," said Ann Louise
Bardach, author of the book "Cuba Confidential."[...]

More soldiers at the top could make a key player of 67-year-old Gen.
Ulises Rosales del Toro, the former sugar minister who in November
took over the long-vacant post of agricultural minister.

Rosales del Toro has held a series of high-ranking military posts,
including head of Cuba's Western Army. Also, while his name and face
are well-known to the Cuban public, his personality seems low-wattage
enough to avoid drawing the Castros' ire for being too ambitious.
[...]


From billyoc at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 20:18:56 2009
From: billyoc at gmail.com (Bill O'Connor)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 22:18:56 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] My (belated) review of Naomi Klein's Shock Doctrine
In-Reply-To: <bee7ff780903042305m531f0458p582fcf04a0eefdc7@mail.gmail.com>
	(Bhaskar Sunkara's message of "Thu, 5 Mar 2009 02:05:56 -0500")
References: <bee7ff780903042305m531f0458p582fcf04a0eefdc7@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <87d4cvz6cf.fsf@t22.Belkin>

I think you're spot on with this review.  

You may have a typo with the phrase "We don?t someone to invent a
?multitude? to carry out historic tasks", is it supposed to be "We don't
_need_ someone..."?


From billyoc at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 20:40:40 2009
From: billyoc at gmail.com (Bill O'Connor)
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 22:40:40 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Fears of a clown
In-Reply-To: <D5E7E94AA16746D886A05F4CF769CB15@albanta> (Joaquin Bustelo's
	message of "Thu, 5 Mar 2009 14:15:31 -0500")
References: <49B01EDF.1050304@panix.com>
	<D5E7E94AA16746D886A05F4CF769CB15@albanta>
Message-ID: <878wnjz5c7.fsf@t22.Belkin>

"Joaquin Bustelo" <jbustelo at gmail.com> writes:

> Louis referred to us a blog post which says: 
>
> "Polling has found Limbaugh, a self-described prescription-drug addict who
> sees America from a private jet, to be nearly as unpopular as Rev. 
> Jeremiah Wright, who damned America in the way that Limbaugh has now damned
> the nation's newly elected leader. But Republicans just can't quit him. So
> even poor Michael Steele, the nominal head of the Republican Party who dared
> to criticize him, had to grovel and crawl back to the feet of Limbaugh."
>
> Not So!!! Polling found him to be even MORE unpopular than the Rev. Wright
> AND Bill Ayers, right in the middle of the Republican-inspired media
> campaign to lynch them both, and without ANYONE focusing on castigating
> Limbaugh. Ayers and Wright's negatives were 50%. Limbaugh's were either 58%
> or 68% (depending on who you believe). 

In a wonderfully related poll, Communist China is also polling more
favorably than congressional Republicans.

That's right, Gallup reports that the Communists are more popular than
the Republicans!

http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=12017


From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 21:48:50 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 23:48:50 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Cornelius Cardew
In-Reply-To: <731850.11406.qm@web50106.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
References: <731850.11406.qm@web50106.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903052048j1731d2c2o7c7fddebb288dfd5@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 1:39 PM, Angelus Novus

<fuerdenkommunismus at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> A nice Marxist appreciation of the English composer
> Cornelius Cardew:
>
> http://www.solidarity-us.org/node/1558

Liberation Music

Richard Gott

Review of : _Cornelius Cardew: A Life Unfinished_ by John Tilbury

LRB 12 March 2009
<http://www.lrb.co.uk/v31/n05/gott01_.html>

[...] Cardew had by now taken up the Maoist cause with enthusiasm,
influenced by Keith Rowe, a fellow ?Scratcher? and member of AMM who
had become an ardent and persuasive member of a Maoist groupuscule,
originally known as the Communist Party of England (Marxist-Leninist).
In the obscure and largely forgotten interstices of the British left
during the upheavals of the 1970s, when hundreds of actors, artists
and musicians took up the cudgels (usually Trotskyist) in support of
what they hoped was an imminent revolution, there were few more
perverse and irrelevant political groupings than this particular sect.
Cardew was to devote the last ten years of his life to promoting its
interests.

The CPE(ML)?s prophet was a Punjabi-born Communist called Hardial
Bains, one of the first Communists anywhere to set up a ?revisionist?
Party in the early 1960s, designed at the time of the Sino-Soviet rift
to support the pro-Chinese cause. From his base in Canada, Bains
helped to establish pro-Chinese parties in India and the United
States, as well as in Britain and Ireland. A flavour of Bains?s
uncompromising stand can be gleaned from the title a Maoist study
group at London University gave to a meeting held in November 1971:
?Alan Sillitoe and David Mercer: Traitors to the English Working
Class?. Further meetings, with more innocuous titles like ?Seek Truth
to Serve the People?, were held in December that year, and Cardew and
Tilbury, with other members of the Scratch Orchestra?s ?Ideological
Group?, were persuaded by Rowe to go along. Soon the Ideological Group
began to criticise the inadequacies of the Scratch Orchestra itself.
?The message of Yenan? is clear, Cardew wrote in his journal in
January 1972: ?We must associate with, talk to, study, know deeply,
live with, make intimate friends amongst, work with, the working
class.? In practice, he went on, we have regarded ?our petty bourgeois
comrades and friends as more important than workers?.

Obsessed with the Maoist command ?to serve the people?, Cardew now
began to condemn avant-garde and ?elitist? music ? his own and
others?. The main focus of his attack was Stockhausen, his old friend
and mentor. [...]


From bhaskar.sunkara at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 22:06:32 2009
From: bhaskar.sunkara at gmail.com (Bhaskar Sunkara)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 00:06:32 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] My (belated) review of Naomi Klein's Shock Doctrine
In-Reply-To: <87d4cvz6cf.fsf@t22.Belkin>
References: <bee7ff780903042305m531f0458p582fcf04a0eefdc7@mail.gmail.com>
	<87d4cvz6cf.fsf@t22.Belkin>
Message-ID: <bee7ff780903052106h3946113ew4f38a72bf5b07c4a@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks, and "You may have a typo with the phrase", is a nice way of saying
"You have a typo with the phrase" :)

Thanks, I'll correct it


Best,

B

From ratbagradio at gmail.com  Thu Mar  5 22:29:02 2009
From: ratbagradio at gmail.com (Ratbag Media)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 15:29:02 +1000
Subject: [Marxism] Will socialists support socialists in Queensland state
	election?
Message-ID: <57b410090903052129g26a3a309i528d2bff920cf156@mail.gmail.com>

Anna Bligh's ALP government in Queensland Australia, goes to the polls
on March 21st. The Socialist Alliance has endorsed two candidates.

SAM WATSON: One of the most prominent indigenous campaigners in
Brisbane, longtime social justice activist.  He will contest
Queensland Premier Anna Blighs seat of South Brisbane.

MIKE CROOK: ALP member for 20 years who before joining the SA last
year was a Your Rights At Work activist and campaigner for on the job
workers health and safety.  Crook is standing for the seat of
Sandgate.

Both candidates are socialists. Both stand on the same platform.

But what will be the response by the rest of the far left ? Will they,
as they have chosen to do in the past, endorse the Greens
unconditionally  and totally  ignore the existence of these Socialist
Alliance candidates? Will they instead of backing Sam and Mike,
preference the Greens in Queensland  -- one of the most conservative
Greens branches in the country?


We can but ask....

dave riley


Campaign info: http://www.socialist-alliance.org/queensland


From ratbagradio at gmail.com  Fri Mar  6 01:44:41 2009
From: ratbagradio at gmail.com (Ratbag Media)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 18:44:41 +1000
Subject: [Marxism] Will socialists support socialists in Queensland
	state election?
In-Reply-To: <57b410090903052129g26a3a309i528d2bff920cf156@mail.gmail.com>
References: <57b410090903052129g26a3a309i528d2bff920cf156@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57b410090903060044m36a4d25fl5f1d7efeb483cb5b@mail.gmail.com>

 Perhaps not:

http://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/826mw/a_message_from_mike_crook_socialist_alliance/

glparramatta 1 point 1 day ago[-]

Keito, you can go to http://www.socialist-alliance.org/queensland/ to
find out more.

A question: Are Solidarity and Socialist Alternative standing in the
state elections, and if not who will they call on Queenslanders to
vote for? Surely, they would call for a vote for socialists above
others?

Autoeroticrat 1 point 17 hours ago[-]

Isn't Solidarity a part of Socialist Alliance?

And why would Socialist Alternative call a vote for "socialists" (a
term I disagree should be applied to any group who supports ruling
classes) when a much larger party can be voted for which can have some
possibility of showing a real discontent with Labour policy, and from
the Left no less- namely the Greens?

keitopop 0 points 1 day ago* [-]

I know for certain that Solidarity isn't, its too small to pull
something like that off, even as a political excersize. Socialist
Alternative isn't either, in part by choice, and in part because the
SA profile isn't high enough for them to receive any positive
feedback.

I'm uncertain when it comes to Solidarity who they call on people to
vote for, I know that SA calls on people to vote for someone with a
decent pro-worker programme, to send a clear message to the two major
parties.

As far as I know, in the past it has been the Greens.

glparramatta 1 point 1 day ago[-]

The Greens BEFORE the Socialist Alliance? what's the logic behind that?

Autoeroticrat 2 points 19 hours ago* [-]

Because the vote will register rather than merely be squirreled away
into a micro-party.

EDIT: To clarify to those without some knowledge of Australian
politics, Socialist Alliance receives some 0.5% of the vote where it
runs usually.


glparramatta 1 point 5 hours ago* [-]

Keito, you really should stop pretending you know so much. In this
years Victorian local elections Socialist Alliance candidates' votes
ranged from 3% to 18%, outpolling the Greens in several areas. Voting
for the Greens registers what? It deliberately reduce the explicitly
socialist vote by calling on your supporters NOT to vote for
socialists, and boost the impression that the Greens are the best left
force. You know that the preferential system allows socialist to do
both, call for an explicitly socialist vote that then can transfer to
the Greens or other progressive candidates, and not flow to the
conservatives. Not calling for a first preference vote for socialist
candidates but for a liberal capitalist party like the Greens makes no
sense, but is more of sign of SAlt's extreme sectarianism -- putting
your dogmas and competition with other socialist groups ahead of the
overall advance of the socialist movement as a whole. In practice,
there is no reason why all Australia's socialist groups could not be
in a single organisation. Our ideological differences are minor in the
big picture. Working together -- whether in campaigns or in the
electoral arena whould strenghten the left pole of attraction.

keitopop 0 points 17 hours ago[-]

Well, specifically, as far as I know it was on the Federal level.

That aside, as Autoeroticrat has stated, it is only the basis of who
will get votes enough to be noticed.

ratbagradio 1 point 1 hour ago[-]

"it is only the basis of who will get votes enough to be noticed"

So that's it? Politics can only be ruled by that one principle? That's
it? That's the ruling? The Marxian tenet? Program and politics,
activism and commitment; that they are socialists, movement leaders --
have not one iota to do with it?

It is enough that a party be lefty liberal -- like the Qld Greens --
and pick up a few " noticeable " votes for them to get the nod.

Strange isn't it, that until 2004 those that are now governed by this
rule of thumb, backed the ALP RATHER THAN THE GREENS religiously. The
Greens didn't matter , where "left liberals", "petti bourgeois",
etcetera while the ALP was the supposed font of the working class --
but now because the Greens have pulled in a few percentiles everything
to their left should slavishly be ignored.

That is until they "get votes enough to be noticed"


From glparramatta at greenleft.org.au  Fri Mar  6 02:31:31 2009
From: glparramatta at greenleft.org.au (glparramatta)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 20:31:31 +1100
Subject: [Marxism] Pamphlet: Comrades in arms: Women in the Russian
	Revolution | Links
Message-ID: <49B0ED73.7010401@greenleft.org.au>

To mark International Women's Day, /Links International Journal of 
Socialist Renewal/ is publishing an excerpt from Resistance Books' 
/Comrades in arms: Women in the Russian Revolution/, by Kathy Fairfax, 
and making available the entire pamphlet to download in PDF format.

By *Kathy Fairfax*

The popular image of the Russian Revolution is of a revolution made by 
men. Ask the person in the street to name a figure from the Russian 
Revolution and most could come up with Lenin, Stalin, maybe Trotsky. A 
few might have heard of Zinoviev, Kamenev or Bukharin. But how many 
would name Kollontai, Armand or Krupskaya? How many know of the women 
who helped make revolution in Russia? How many know about the thousands 
of female Bolsheviks who marched through the streets of Petrograd in 
1917 or shouted revolutionary speeches to cheering crowds or wrote and 
distributed pamphlets calling for revolution? In fact, women 
revolutionaries inspired the working class the world over and 
inaugurated a new era in world history.

Excerpt and download at http://links.org.au/node/934

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





From sartesian at earthlink.net  Fri Mar  6 04:29:40 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 06:29:40 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Manufacturers' Shipments, Orders, Inventories
Message-ID: <55D8470A7A00498589D5EFC835D0DB32@dmsthinkpad>

at:  http://www.census.gov/indicator/www/m3/prel/pdf/s-i-o.pdf

From gary.maclennan1 at gmail.com  Fri Mar  6 05:29:09 2009
From: gary.maclennan1 at gmail.com (Gary MacLennan)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 04:29:09 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Fears of a clown
In-Reply-To: <D5E7E94AA16746D886A05F4CF769CB15@albanta>
References: <49B01EDF.1050304@panix.com>
	<D5E7E94AA16746D886A05F4CF769CB15@albanta>
Message-ID: <b77157fa0903060429q6c1719b0y17d88f7c424d16c0@mail.gmail.com>

> BTW, Limbaugh-mania/Limbaugh-gate marks the official end of the
> aren't-we-proud-we-as-Americans-elected-a-Black-president (even if we hate
> his n****rs guts) meme. Next up: It's been SEVEN WEEKS and the guy STILL
> hasn't fixed the economy.
>
> Joaquin
>
> Well it has been Seven Weeks weeks and the guy STILL hasn't changed the
> Bush policy in Iraq and he is heading down the road of a terrible disaster
> in Afghanistan.   Jon Stewart, an honest liberal,  nailed this pretty well.
>
>


>  I nearly puked when Obama said to the Marines "Let me make this
> absolutley clear" - I just knew the spin was on. Plus ca change....
>

regards

Gary

>
> ________________________________________________
> 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/gary.maclennan1%40gmail.com
>

From jayroth6 at cox.net  Fri Mar  6 06:16:21 2009
From: jayroth6 at cox.net (J Rothermel)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 08:16:21 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Tariq Ali: Pakistan's Drift
Message-ID: <49B12225.1000303@cox.net>

 
Tariq Ali
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 3 March 2009

Pakistan's drift into the hands of extremists

The intention of the attack on Sri Lanka's cricket team was to send a 
clear message to Washington: Pakistan is ungovernable


The appalling terrorist attack on the Sri Lankan cricketers 
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/03/sri-lanka-cricket-shooting> 
in Pakistan had one aim: to demonstrate to Washington that the country 
is ungovernable. This is the first time that cricketers have been 
targeted in a land where the sport is akin to religion. It marks the 
death of international cricket in Pakistan for the indefinite future, 
but not just that, which is bad enough. The country's future is looking 
more and more precarious. We do not know which particular group carried 
out this attack, but its identity is hardly relevant. The fact is that 
it took place at a time when three interrelated events had angered a 
large bulk of the country and provided succour to extremist groups and 
their patrons.

The first is undoubtedly the foolish decision by Washington (backed by 
Britain) to send more troops to Afghanistan 
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/03/taliban-pakistan-afghanistan-us-surge>, 
which has now united all those resisting them in that country and the 
North-West Frontier province of Pakistan. Instead of searching for a 
viable exit strategy, Obama has gone for a surge. On several occasions, 
I have warned that escalating the war in Afghanistan could seriously 
destabilise Pakistan and its army.

Second, Senator Dianne Feinstein's revelation 
<http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-uspakistan13-2009feb13,0,4776260.story> 
that the US drones being
used to target "militants" and "terrorist havens" inside Pakistan were, 
in fact, being despatched by the US from military and air-force bases 
inside Pakistan (obviously, with the approval of the Pakistani military 
and civilian leaders) created mayhem in the country. The shock and 
dismay should not be underestimated. Half-hearted government denials 
further fanned the flames. Since many in the country regard Zardari and 
his cronies running the country as US drones, the anger was multiplied.

Domestically, the country is a mess. The People's party has learnt and 
forgotten nothing. Corruption is rife and stories circulate linking the 
money being paid by bankers directly to the president's house. Add to 
this Zardari's refusal to honour an election pledge restoring an 
independent judiciary 
<http://in.reuters.com/article/southAsiaNews/idINIndia-38297520090302>, 
and his decision to manipulate tame judges to disqualify his opponents 
has not gone down well. The controversy was aggravated by Zardari's move 
to dismiss the elected government 
<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123555032830769401.html> in the 
country's most populous and strategically important province, the Punjab 
(capital: Lahore), and impose direct rule, after its chief minister 
apparently refused to accept a bribe in the shape of a lucrative 
business deal in return for abandoning the fight to restore the chief 
justice fired by the military leader over a year ago.

The failures of this government and its inability to defend the 
country's interests or its population from drones or terrorist attacks 
are paving the way for the return of the army to power as a way of 
avoiding a serious split within its own ranks. All that is awaited is a 
green light from the US embassy in Islamabad. Not that this would solve 
anything, but it might create the illusion of stability for a few 
months. It's no good Pakistani politicians mumbling that this is "our 
Mumbai". The fact is that, over the last year, the Zardari government 
has done a great deal for itself and its clients, but nothing for the 
people or the country. The more Pakistan drifts, the more opportunities 
offer
themselves to the extremists.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/mar/03/pakistan-srilanka







From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Mar  6 06:59:32 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 08:59:32 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Obama's timid liberalism
Message-ID: <49B12C44.3020507@panix.com>

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/03/06/neoliberalism/
Obama's timid liberalism
Once, even Republican presidents like Eisenhower and Nixon believed in 
the public sector. Now, during a national crisis, a Democrat opts for 
inadequate, neoliberal, private-sector remedies. What happened?

By Michael Lind

Mar. 06, 2009 |

Barack Obama's bold, ambitious budget plan proves that he is the true 
heir of Franklin Roosevelt and the New Deal. Consider Obama's 
Rooseveltian energy plan. In 1939, President Roosevelt decided to 
mobilize Americans to create a new source of energy: atomic power. 
Although he was urged to focus on government-funded R&D, FDR chose a 
different route. He wisely encouraged private capital to invest in 
atomic energy research by a variety of tax incentives. To make atomic 
power investment more palatable to private capital, FDR boldly chose to 
make all other forms of energy in the U.S. uneconomical, by slapping 
high taxes on kerosene and coal. With the money from the new federal 
Kerosene Cap and Trade system, President Roosevelt and Congress funded a 
small-scale federal research program, in the hope of attracting much 
greater private investment ...

Wait. What's that you say? FDR didn't do that? He poured federal money 
into the all-public Manhattan Project and created the first atomic bomb 
in a couple of years? He didn't tax kerosene to make it uneconomical and 
to encourage private investment in atomic power?

Oh. OK. Never mind.

But what about Social Security? In 1935, FDR signed the historic Social 
Security Act. It created a complex "retirement mandate" system, forcing 
all elderly Americans to buy expensive annuities from private insurance 
companies, without, however, imposing price controls on the insurance 
companies ...

What? FDR didn't force the elderly to subsidize private annuity brokers? 
He imposed a single, simple, efficient tax to pay for a single, simple, 
efficient public system of retirement benefits?

All right, then, forget FDR. He was a socialist, anyway. Let Dwight 
Eisenhower serve as a model for the Obama administration. President 
Eisenhower authorized the biggest infrastructure program in American 
history, when he signed the National Interstate and Defense Highways Act 
of 1956. The interstate highway act created an elaborate system of 
private tax incentives and public-private partnerships (PPPs) to 
encourage private corporations to build national highways. To begin 
with, all U.S. highways were leased to domestic and foreign corporations 
for a period of decades. Second, all U.S. highways were set up with toll 
booths, so that American drivers would be forced to repay the corporate 
owners of the national highways every few dozen miles. Finally, a system 
of high-speed lanes with higher tolls was created, so that the rich 
could whiz down the road while middle-class and poor Americans were 
stuck in traffic jams ...

All right, what now, wise guy? So that's wrong, too? Eisenhower's 
national highway system wasn't based on tolls, leases to foreign 
companies, income-based pricing, and tax credits for private 
corporations? It used gasoline taxes to fund free public highways?

Free highways without toll booths, owned by the public, paid for out of 
taxes? My God. So the John Birch Society was right after all. Dwight 
Eisenhower was as much of a socialist as Franklin Delano Roosevelt!

The point of this imaginary monologue is simple. Once upon a time in the 
United States, public goods -- from retirement security and energy 
research to public roads -- were provided by the government and paid for 
by taxes. As late as the Nixon administration, the provision of public 
goods by government was considered perfectly compatible with a robust 
market economy by so-called Modern Republicans like Eisenhower and Nixon 
as well as New Deal Democrats like Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy and 
Johnson. In the intervening 40 years, however, free-market 
fundamentalists of the Chicago School have managed to change the debate, 
redefining "socialism" to mean not only public ownership of the means of 
production, but also public provision of public goods.

Rather than fight back, most Democrats in the last generation adapted to 
this hostile conservative political climate by jettisoning New Deal "big 
government" liberalism for "market-friendly" neoliberalism. Neoliberals 
shared the right's enthusiasm for deregulating industries that New Deal 
Democrats had regulated in the public interest. Jimmy Carter and Ted 
Kennedy supported the deregulation of trucking and airlines, while Bill 
Clinton presided over the dismantling of the New Deal era's banking 
regulations and declared: "The era of big government is over." 
Neoliberals and conservatives agreed that public goods should be 
provided by private, for-profit or nonprofit entities, rather than 
government agencies. If private corporations or universities had no 
motivation to provide public goods, well, then, they would be bribed 
with tax credits or other government subsidies.

Neoliberals are liberals in one sense -- they fret about unequal 
outcomes. But rather than help middle- and low-income Americans by 
regulating the prices of privately provided public goods, as the crude 
and direct New Dealers would have done, neoliberal Democrats have argued 
for allowing the "market" (translation: the publicly subsidized 
entities) to set prices and then promised to provide tax subsidies or 
grants to help middle- and low-income Americans pay for the expensive, 
privately provided public goods.

You might have thought that the Crash of 2008 would have led Democrats 
to reconsider this neoliberal approach to providing public goods by 
private means. But to judge from President Obama's budget, the White 
House is still living back in the neoliberal era, when the diminutive 
Milton Friedman cast a giant shadow.

Consider Obama's education proposals. The problem with higher education 
is that it costs way too much. Tuition costs at private universities and 
some state universities have been growing far more rapidly than 
inflation. A crude, old-fashioned, old-thinking New Deal liberal would 
see the problem as one of excessive prices demanded by universities, not 
insufficient funds on the part of the students whom the universities 
gouge. The hypothetical New Deal liberal would threaten to deny 
universities their privileged tax-exempt status unless they spend more 
of their endowments on tuition and keep their prices affordable.

The neoliberal alternative is to avoid impolite and divisive inquiries 
into the reasons for skyrocketing tuition costs. That would entail the 
government concluding that prices in a particular industry (in this 
case, a nonprofit industry) are too high, something that government 
should not do. Instead, the taxpayer will be forced to cough up money to 
help students meet the exorbitant fees. Thus Obama's first budget calls 
for maintaining the $2,500 New American Opportunity Tax Credit for 
middle-class students, while converting Pell Grants up to $5,550 into a 
permanent government entitlement. If I were a university, I'd raise my 
tuition by ... oh ... let's say $5,550 a year. Government subsidies 
without government price controls would encourage cost inflation, one 
might think, but this possibility appears not to bother the brilliant 
economists on Obama's team.

Then there's energy. The problem with alternative energy sources like 
solar power and wind power is that they are still too expensive, 
compared to coal, natural gas and nuclear energy. The answer, according 
to a minority of enviromentalists like Ted Nordhaus and Michael 
Shellenberger, should be massive, Manhattan-style public sector R&D to 
discover ways to bring alternative energy prices down -- in absolute, 
not just relative, terms, to maintain cheap electricity for American 
industry and American households. That would be the Roosevelt approach. 
But the Obama approach is to use a cap-and-trade system to artificially 
raise the prices of conventional energy, in the hope that private 
capital (with modest help from public capital) will pay for efforts to 
invent a cheaper solar cell or wind turbine. The fact that most of the 
left embraces cap-and-trade should not blind us to the fact that 
cap-and-trade is a classic example of an indirect, overly complicated, 
"market-friendly" neoliberal approach, touted originally by 
conservatives and neoliberals as an alternative to the allegedly 
discredited "top-down, command-and-control" approach that gave us, among 
other things, the TVA, the Manhattan Project and the Internet.

And healthcare? The Obama administration deserves credit for trying to 
reduce prescription drug costs and to promote electronic medical 
records. Obama's budget director Peter Orszag in particular deserves 
praise for pointing out that escalating economy-wide healthcare costs, 
not the Social Security and Medicare costs associated with the aging of 
the boomer generation as such, represent the real long-term threat to 
the U.S. economy. Even so, it seems likely that whatever ultimately 
emerges as the consensus Democratic healthcare plan will be yet another 
Rube Goldberg scheme for massively subsidizing employers, private health 
insurers, or both.

I'm sympathetic to the argument that the public, after nearly half a 
century of conservative anti-government propaganda, will oppose the 
direct provision of public goods paid for out of straightforward 
taxation -- the "socialistic" old Eisenhower-Roosevelt approach. It was 
the conviction that a single-payer healthcare system was politically 
impossible that led me to endorse the individual mandate system as the 
next best alternative, in "The Radical Center," a book I co-authored 
with Ted Halstead in 2001.

But a lot has changed since Wall Street imploded last fall. The great 
investment banks are gone, the U.S. has nationalized much of the 
financial system, and appears to be on the way to effectively 
nationalizing the automobile and housing sectors as well. In this 
environment, we need to consider some heresies, like the idea that the 
best way to provide a public good is not necessarily to pour subsidies 
on middlemen, and then bail them out with more subsidies when they fail 
at their public function.

The fundamental barrier today is the way that the issues are framed, by 
Democrats and Republicans alike. Thus the problem is defined not as 
making credit available for individuals and businesses, but as saving 
the banks and the shadow banking system. The goal is not to provide 
healthcare to all citizens, but to enable all citizens to purchase 
private health insurance. The objective is not to ensure universal 
access to higher education; it is to insure universal access to colleges 
and universities. In these and other cases, the means is confused with 
the end. The ultimate goal -- providing credit, healthcare or education 
-- is identified with the interests of non-governmental for-profit or 
nonprofit providers of that service. If these private institutions fail 
to provide the public service in a low-cost, effective and equitable 
way, then they must be subsidized even more. The idea of achieving the 
same public goals through simpler, more direct and efficient means that 
would cut out the middleman appears to be heresy to the Obama 
administration.

It's not necessary to nudge the Obama administration leftward until it 
arrives at socialism. When it comes to the public provision of public 
goods, Eisenhower Republicanism would be just fine.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Mar  6 07:04:20 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 09:04:20 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Pro-Palestinian activism on the rise on campuses
Message-ID: <49B12D64.9000701@panix.com>

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/03/06/israel
On Israel, Shifted Ground
March 6, 2009

The ground seems to have shifted, activists on all sides say. What they 
make of it varies.

A shift toward more visible pro-Palestinian or anti-Israel sentiment has 
been profound on some campuses, prompted, in part, by the winter war in 
Gaza. Where some describe a corresponding disintegration of civil 
discourse or a scapegoating of Israel for a complex set of problems, 
others celebrate a newfound space in which to be critical of Israel -- 
to mount a challenge to what they see as a dominant discourse, so to speak.

The two perspectives don't have to go hand in hand, but at times, they 
seem to.

Take Emory University, for example, where about a third of 
undergraduates are Jewish. ?The situation?s very interesting because in 
the past Emory was not a political school at all,? said Jessica 
Fraidlin, a sophomore involved with several Israel advocacy 
organizations, including Emory Students for Israel. ?We?ve always had a 
very strong Jewish community, but we?ve never had an opposing side.?

For the first time this year, Emory hosted several events as part of 
"Israeli Apartheid Week," an annual, international campaign that ends 
Sunday. The slate of events included a rally, a talk titled 
?Understanding Apartheid: From South Africa to Israel,? and a lecture 
Thursday by Norman G. Finkelstein, a political scientist known for his 
harsh critiques of Israeli policies and "the Holocaust industry" (and, 
in higher education circles, for being denied tenure at DePaul University).

Saba Khalid, a junior involved with Israeli Apartheid Week and a member 
of Emory Advocates for Justice in Palestine, said the group has not been 
well-received since its founding last spring. ?We?ve actually had a lot 
of opposition, which is understandable, but very negative opposition,? 
Khalid said. Last semester, for instance, the group?s chalkings to 
promote ?Week against the Apartheid Wall? were crossed out and replaced 
with anti-Arab scrawls like ?Arabs Go Home," she said.

?If there?s an open forum and we go it turns into a shouting match,? 
said Khalid, adding that it's a small handful of students who get the 
rest going.

?We don?t mind that there?s not discussion. What we really mind is the 
fact that they target us and they come after us specifically. We don't 
come after them. We stick to our events," Khalid said.

Fraidlin, while agreeing that the climate is ?not so good,? otherwise 
disputed that characterization of pro-Israel students at Emory. ?We 
don?t put down the other side ever. We?re just pro our side.?

Of the chalking-related incident, she said, ?I?m not going to say it?s 
not true. There are radicals on both sides. But we have condemned the 
people who did it, and EAJP continues to highlight those people and say 
they?re representative of the Jewish community, and they?re not 
representative of the Jewish community.

?It?s become a propaganda war; it?s kind of who can scream the loudest. 
EAJP wants their voices heard and it doesn?t matter how they get their 
point across. They?re going to get it across and to me that?s not 
academic. You need facts, figures, you need intelligent conversations. 
... I'll even hand it to them, Norman Finkelstein coming to campus, at 
least they're bringing a scholar to campus. To me, that's OK,? said 
Fraidlin, who on Wednesday was wearing a blue shirt with white lettering 
that read, ?Stand for Israel.?

She added that students on all sides are still in an adjustment period. 
?We haven?t really sorted out our feelings yet. We know that we don?t 
agree with their side and we don?t know how to handle it, really. Both 
sides are really at fault.?

Student Activism

?I think it?s safe to say that we?ve seen a more shrill tone to much of 
the criticism of Israel. Whether it?s in the campus quad, whether it?s 
rallies with signs, whether it?s blog postings to articles in the campus 
press, whether it?s question and answer sessions at academic fora about 
Gaza or about American policy toward Israel, it?s safe to say in all of 
these things we?ve noticed a trend ? a reduction of civility of this 
dialogue, and that?s deeply troubling,? said David A. Harris, executive 
director of the Israel on Campus Coalition (which is affiliated with 
Hillel: The Foundation for Jewish Campus Life).

For example, Harris said, ?We see dozens and dozens of examples of 
'die-ins' and [displays of] tombstones and public displays that are 
intimidating to some and don?t exactly foster an understanding of what 
is happening in the Middle East, or any kind of dialogue.?

He continued, however: ?There?s plenty of not civil dialogue and 
dialogue that?s not what you'd want as the hallmark of academic 
discussion ? but the clear majority of those cases are ones in which 
students on either side, neither of them feel that they are threatened 
or that they cannot express their views.?

Even relatively innocuous campus displays have caused tensions. At 
Cornell University last month, students involved with the Islamic 
Alliance for Justice lined pathways with 1,300 black flags to 
commemorate the violence in Gaza. The display was later vandalized, and 
hundreds of flags were rearranged into a Star of David, according to 
university police.

Cornell announced on Tuesday that two students had been charged with 
disorderly conduct and criminal mischief in connection with the 
incident. ?There was no indication they were acting under the guise of 
any group?s motivations,? the deputy police chief, Kathy Zoner, said in 
a statement. ?Groups were blamed for the action. They were the easiest 
and most convenient target for blame, but apparently that wasn?t the 
truth of the matter.?

The Palestinian cause has also risen to the top of many student groups' 
agendas. Students for a Democratic Society at the University of 
Rochester recently demanded that the institution divest from companies 
that "profit from war"; provide "necessary academic aid" and organize a 
day of fund raising for Gaza; and set up scholarships for Palestinian 
students. (University officials declined on the scholarships and direct 
aid, but promised to provide the group the same fund raising advice it 
would any registered student organization and forward the divestment 
request to the Board of Trustees' investment committee. That's standard 
protocol for such requests.)

At New York University last month, the "Take Back NYU" protesters 
presented a litany of 11 demands, including tuition stabilization, 
collective bargaining for student workers, public release of NYU's 
budget and endowment -- and scholarships for Palestinians and the 
donation of excess supplies for the rebuilding of Islamic University of 
Gaza, which came under attack by Israel during the recent war. The 
group's building take-over ended with suspensions and without any of the 
student demands being met.

Take Back NYU's frequently asked questions Web page offers a response to 
"What does Gaza have to do with NYU and transparency?" A protest 
organizer wrote: "I demanded that our surpluses be donated to the 
Islamic University of Gaza (as opposed to any other impoverished school) 
because our school very likely helped destroy it. Although we obviously 
can?t say for certain where our money is invested while the endowment 
holdings remain secret, it?s a fair bet that some of it is invested in 
companies that support the Israeli military."

This week, NYU has also been a site of Israeli Apartheid Week events. 
However, Arthur Samuelson, executive director of the Bronfman Center for 
Jewish Student Life at NYU, said that he hasn't seen an erosion of 
support for Israel on campus. "It is a marginal voice which has gotten 
some attention and the other is a much bigger and not changing base of 
support for Israel," he said.

'Forceful Push'

At Columbia University on Thursday, the Columbia Palestine Forum held a 
rally to present what's by now a familiar set of demands, including that 
Columbia provide scholarships for Palestinians and academic aid for a 
partnering Palestinian university. The group called too for an open 
forum on investments to initiate a "[u]niversity-wide conversation about 
divestment."

Meanwhile, the University of Massachusetts' Student Government 
Association took up (but tabled) the divestment question on Wednesday, 
according to the student newspaper. The movement to divest from Israel 
has been gaining rhetorical momentum at least among student and faculty 
activists (although not among administrators -- despite student claims 
to the contrary, no college has divested).

An organized campaign for an academic boycott of Israel also emerged in 
the United States in January. Proponents of the boycott argue that it 
will put non-violent pressure on Israel to respect international 
humanitarian law. However, the idea of boycotting Israeli academics 
raises questions of academic freedom and has many opponents, among 
college presidents but also among some liberal, even (self-identified) 
"radical" faculty. On the "Tenured Radical" blog, for instance, Claire 
B. Potter, a professor of history and American Studies at Wesleyan 
University, wrote she is "profoundly opposed to boycott and divestment" 
for a number of reasons. Among them: "It does not address the real 
problem in the region, which is that states -- primarily the United 
States, Russia, and former Soviet-bloc countries -- continue to 
cynically pour weapons into the Middle East, as if it is possible to arm 
resistance fighters and the Israeli government to the teeth and also 
negotiate for 'peace,' " she wrote.

?Where we?ve really seen some of the more heated kinds of discussion and 
debate has been around attempts to pressure universities into really 
examining their own support for the occupation ? so the different 
divestment and boycott campaigns,? said Bruce Braun, an associate 
professor of geography at the University of Minnesota and a member of an 
organization that started this semester, Teachers Against Occupation, 
which now is assembling and developing pedagogical materials for use in 
high school and college classrooms. (Although individual members are 
involved with the boycott campaign, Teachers Against Occupation as a 
group has not taken a stand.)

?One of the things that?s really interesting on campuses right now is 
students are beginning to ask, ?How are we connected to what?s happening 
in the Middle East? How do we transform our institutions?? ? Braun said. 
?Having a debate on those kinds of questions is going to be emotional 
and it?s going to be one that raises uncomfortable questions. Sometimes 
we can point to civil dialogue as a way of sort of domesticating any 
kind of protest. And I think people feel very strongly that there?s an 
ongoing injustice that needs to be addressed and that continuously 
having a dialogue about this without taking steps to transform the 
institutional framework that allows what is perceived to be an unjust 
situation to be continued is something that people simply aren?t willing 
to abide with any longer.

?To put something on the agenda,? Braun explained, ?actually takes 
sometimes a sort of forceful push. And I think that?s what we?re seeing 
at different points on campuses right now.

"I think there's a much stronger sense that sort of an unquestioned 
support of Israeli policy by the American government is something that 
we can no longer simply follow blindly or support," Braun continued, 
adding that the shift he sees isn't limited to college campuses. "I'm 
seeing that expressed at all kinds of different levels, among students, 
among faculty."

Questions of the faculty role in all of this have been at the forefront. 
Members of Teachers Against Occupation, for instance, ?take quite 
seriously the fact that we are teachers. ?As teachers, how do we respond 
by thoughtfully bringing these ideas into the classroom in ways that are 
constructive, or at least putting together materials for that?? Braun asked.

Meanwhile, Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, a pro-Israel 
organization, recently asked professors to report anti-Israel or 
anti-Semitic events or propaganda on their campuses, for a compendium of 
sorts. ?We?re the people on campus. We?ve got our fingers on the pulse, 
we?re stakeholders, we?re faculty members. We live on campus longer than 
students, longer than most administrators and longer than most Hillel 
directors or Jewish education professionals,? said Edward S. Beck, 
president emeritus of the organization and professor in Walden 
University's School of Social and Behavioral Sciences.

?It?s our feeling that nothing is going to happen to reverse this trend 
of anti-Israelism [on campus] until the faculty absolutely say, ?Look, 
some of these behaviors are unacceptable and inconsistent with 
behavioral codes on campus and some of what?s being taught here is 
incitement as opposed to free speech,' " Beck said.

Scholarship and Balance

One sub-strand of debate has been the faculty role when it comes to 
convening scholarly panels on Middle Eastern matters. As one 
high-profile example, a recent panel on "Human Rights and Gaza" 
organized by the Center for Near Eastern Studies at the University of 
California at Los Angeles, attracted attention for its perceived 
one-sidedness. Judea Pearl, a computer science professor at UCLA and 
father of the killed Wall Street Journal reporter, wrote in the Jewish 
Journal of the panel of "four long-time demonizers of Israel" who bashed 
the Jewish state, "portray[ed] Hamas as a guiltless, peace-seeking, 
unjustly provoked organization," and encouraged the audience in a 
"Zionism is Nazism" chant.

"Many people have contacted me ? and some have even written news 
articles ? to express profound disappointment over what they believe was 
the panel's unbalanced presentation and a lack of decorum during the 
question-and-answer period," Chancellor Gene Block said in a statement, 
which referenced a number of talks at UCLA that involve Israeli 
representatives and stressed a need for civil discourse. "The UCLA 
campus, with its diverse population and many points of view, is one of 
the most invigorating intellectual campuses in the world, and the 
university strives overall for scholarly balance."

"I guess what I would say is what we try and do is present a varied 
program on issues related to the central themes of our centers," said 
Nick Entrikin, acting vice provost of UCLA's International Institute, 
which is comprised of more than 20 centers, programs and research 
institutes (including an Israel Studies Program and the Center for Near 
Eastern Studies). "I think the argument that every program has to 
represent all sides of an issue, although it's something that we work 
towards in the aggregate, I just don't think we can really say we can do 
that for every particular event."

Tammi Rossman-Benjamin, a lecturer in Hebrew at the University of 
California at Santa Cruz who has written on these topics, said that when 
it comes to scholarly endeavors, the issue of balance "is a smokescreen."

But that doesn't mean she's not concerned by events like the one at 
UCLA, which she thinks are "nearing epidemic proportion" on campuses. 
It's not balance but the possibility of indoctrination -- which she 
believes represents an abuse of academic freedom -- that concerns her. 
"Scholarship is not about balance, scholarship is about truth. The 
antithesis of scholarship is political indoctrination. You don't balance 
political indoctrination with equal and opposite indoctrination," she said.

"If a course or if a conference has clear political motivations and 
calls to political action ... the question is, 'Is this scholarship?' Is 
it scholarship to call on people to divest from Israel? Is that 
considered a scholarly statement?" Rossman-Benjamin asked.

In the case of the UCLA panel, Sondra Hale, a professor of anthropology 
and women's studies and one of the organizers of the U.S. Campaign for 
the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, wrote a letter to the 
student newspaper, The Daily Bruin, defending the quality of scholarship 
presented (Hale did not respond to an e-mail request for an interview).

"Clearly, these are scholars who are very well-informed on the subject 
of the symposium and whose scholarship is beyond repute," Hale wrote. 
"They are scholars who bring pride to the University of California. This 
was a group of highly informed and qualified Jews, Israelis, Arabs and 
Arab Americans examining and trying to make sense of the human disaster 
of Gaza and criticizing the state policies that have lead to this calamity.

"Simply because some in the audience (from all perspectives) were out of 
line in some groups? sloganeering, the problems should not reflect on 
the excellent symposium itself. No one on the panel exempted Hamas or 
suicide bombers from charges of human rights abuses or violations of 
international law. All clearly condemned the Hamas rocket attacks. ... 
No one on the panel chanted 'Zionism is Nazism,' " Hale wrote.

Of course it is the validation of fellow scholars that determines what 
scholarship is in the academy. More broadly, Rossman-Benjamin argued 
that academic senates need to do a better job of protecting the 
professoriate from indoctrination masquerading as scholarship.

"Things can deteriorate rapidly and come to a place where there really 
is a hostile environment for some students and faculty and staff because 
people aren't doing their jobs, because there are abuses that are not 
being routed out and taken care of," she said.

When Questions Can't be Asked or Answered

Student-sponsored events run on different rules. But at San Jose State 
University in early February, one event, open to the public and 
featuring an Israeli consul general, Akiva Tor, deteriorated rapidly. 
While it was an atypical incident, the case is described by some as a 
warning sign of sorts.

?During Mr. Tor?s speech he was, I guess you could say, heckled. People 
in the audience were not polite. They didn?t sit and politely listen. 
They catcalled and booed and one woman kept making remarks, but other 
audience members actually tried to deal with those people. Members of 
the pro-Palestinian faction got up and talked to these folks. I think 
that the pro-Palestinian faction, most of the people there had an 
interest in hearing what he had to say,? recalled Frances Edwards, 
director of San Jose State?s master's of public administration program 
and the moderator for the event.

It was during the question and answer session that things disintegrated. 
A woman read from a statement for several minutes before finally getting 
to her question: "Why do you lie?"

Tor began to answer but some audience members stood up and cat-called; 
one woman yelled, ?Why did you kill my family?? Edwards related.

?He said, ?mistakes were made in war,? and they erupted. They absolutely 
erupted," Edwards said. Police escorted Tor out of the room, cutting the 
question and answer session short. (The student newspaper, The Spartan 
Daily, also published a video account.)

?I?m kind of neither on one side or the other, if you want to look at in 
terms of sides,? Edwards said. ?My concern is for the university and 
what the university means to a community. We?re not intending to be an 
advocate for any particular point of view but rather to serve as a 
speaker?s corner, a common ground, where people of different opinions 
can get together and at least hear each other.?

Jon Whitmore, San Jose State's president, sent a letter of apology to 
Akiva Tor on Feb. 23, and another letter expressing regrets to a faculty 
adviser involved with the event.

A university spokeswoman, Pat Lopes Harris, said that she?s not aware of 
anyone being disciplined as a result of the event. ?The approach that we 
have taken is that we understand that the event was less than ideal. To 
go back and to try to pull apart what happened and to start to try to 
blame one party or another doesn?t seem like it?s going to help us move 
forward,? she said.

She added, too: ?One of the reasons the story has come to light ? well 
there are many reasons, it was a significant event no doubt about that ? 
but it has been utilized by some parties as an example of perhaps an 
increase in anti-Semitic activity on college campuses nationwide. And 
that concerns me a little bit because I haven?t seen a really 
comprehensive set of data that shows that is in fact the case. There are 
a lot of anecdotes, certainly anecdotes that pertain to our campus.?

Sue Maltiel, executive director of Hillel of Silicon Valley, said that 
at San Jose at least, the climate has shifted. ?There are a lot of 
Jewish students who are really afraid now, who are afraid to identify as 
Jewish,? Maltiel said, who recalled hearing a faculty member threatened 
at the Akiva Tor event, as well as the chant, "Two, four, six, eight, we 
don't want your racist state."

?I don?t think I?ve ever seen the level of so many students being 
afraid. I?ve never heard a faculty member threatened before.?

After winter break and the start of war in Gaza, ?We went to school, the 
atmosphere was really tense,? said Diana Nguyen, a San Jose State junior 
and vice president of Spartans for Israel. ?I would be tabling and there 
would always be someone who had to ask me loaded questions or try to 
make me answer for what Israel did, which was fine. ? Toward the [Akiva 
Tor] event I started getting anti-Semitic comments. I?m not sure those 
people knew I was Jewish,? said Nguyen, who heard, for instance, ?Jews 
are murderers."

She added, "Everyone?s reluctant to call out any anti-Semitic comment 
when it?s anti-Semitic because it?s like the new race card or something. 
They?re out there.?

Omar Mutwakil, president of the Muslim Students' Association at San Jose 
State, agreed that the Akiva Tor talk ?just went out of control; it 
wasn?t too civilized at the end.? But he objected to the notion that it 
heralded a broader break-down in civil dialogue.

Though he has heard people say that ?this is why things like this can?t 
be held on campus," Mutwakil strongly disagreed. "Come on, that?s bogus. 
There are debates all over the place and there?s nothing wrong with 
this. This thing [the Akiva Tor event] was opened to people who aren?t 
on campus and that?s part of the problem. It was open to everyone," said 
Mutwakil.

?In general, yeah, I think discussions can be held. I don?t see why not. 
We?re all humans. We?re not animals.?

San Jose?s Muslim Students' Association sponsored a couple of talks on 
the Middle East this semester -- a forum on ?The U.S.-Backed Israeli War 
on Gaza? and a talk by Barbara Lubin, director of the Middle East 
Children?s Alliance, in Berkeley.

As of this week, the group had no more events planned on these issues, 
said Mutwakil. "Unless something else happens again in the news. Maybe 
something else would occur due to that."

They?re a religious organization, he explained; all this is not really 
what they're about.

? Elizabeth Redden


From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Mar  6 07:15:34 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 09:15:34 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Darfur
Message-ID: <49B13006.1090500@panix.com>

(Saw this on Lenin's Tomb)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/mar/06/sudan-war-crimes
To put justice before peace spells disaster for Sudan

The overzealous pursuit of Omar al-Bashir could ruin years of diplomatic 
progress. The human cost will be massive

After seven months' deliberation, the judges of the international 
criminal court finally issued an arrest warrant for Omar al-Bashir, the 
Sudanese president, this week. Their appeal for retributive justice, in 
the form of charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed 
in Darfur, was solemnly echoed in European and US capitals, and 
universally by rights organisations and activist groups. Within hours, 
however, the Sudan government showed that the court and its backers were 
powerless to defend or feed the millions of Darfurians in whose name 
justice is being sought. It summarily expelled the biggest international 
aid agencies, seized their assets, and closed down Sudanese human rights 
organisations at gunpoint.

As fuel to run the water pumps in Darfur's massive displaced camps runs 
low and the worst meningitis epidemic in a decade spreads with lethal 
speed, the Sudan government will be responsible for the deaths and 
suffering that will result - not only in Darfur, but in other parts of 
Sudan where relief work is now curtailed, including the drought-stricken 
eastern region.

But it was the ICC prosecutor who set the match to the dry tinder that 
is Sudan. It is quite extraordinary that Luis Moreno-Ocampo and a host 
of diplomats and activists were capable of condemning the government for 
the most hideous crimes with one breath and asserting with the next that 
it would tamely change its spots when threatened with standing trial in 
The Hague.

In truth, no one knew what the arrest warrant would mean. Rights groups 
who had supported an independent, permanent court kept their concerns 
private. Activist commentators and lawyers, often with little knowledge 
of Sudan, cleaved to the mantra that there is no peace without justice. 
Warrants against Slobodan Milosevic and Charles Taylor (the former 
presidents of Yugoslavia and Liberia) had contributed to their speedy 
overthrow, Geoffrey Robertson argued, and would do the same to Bashir. 
But Milosevic and Taylor were weak, and the west wanted them gone. 
Bashir has fought off all challenges for 20 years, and the west has been 
supporting a fragile and hard-fought peace agreement that kept him in 
power as the quid pro quo of a transition to democracy.

All this now hangs by a thread. The risks were real, and they were 
inflated by the way in which Moreno-Ocampo insisted on pursuing Bashir 
for "ongoing genocide" with, he claimed fantastically, 5,000 people 
dying a month.

One of our reasons for opposing an arrest warrant when the application 
was made last year was that the case for genocide was based on flimsy 
evidence and weak argument. He repeatedly said, with no evidence 
whatsoever, that the government was orchestrating "systematic" attacks 
on the camps to "eliminate African tribes" there. In an encouraging 
indication that the ICC judges took their job seriously, and had a 
better command of the facts, they rejected his three charges of 
genocide, finding that he had failed to demonstrate that Bashir had a 
case to answer there. This was a stunning rebuff to Moreno-Ocampo, who 
has insisted in public more than once that Bashir is guilty of genocide 
and must be removed from office.

Worse, the prosecutor hinted - again repeatedly - that he got his 
information from humanitarian agencies. The damage done by this is 
incalculable. Sudanese security believes international agencies have 
been passing information to the ICC. So far, 11 agencies have been 
ordered out. Their humanitarian infrastructure has been dismantled and 
their assets seized. The UN agencies are still there. For the moment. 
But the World Food Programme relies on two now absent NGOs - Care and 
Save the Children - to distribute 80% of its rations. Will Khartoum 
allow the WFP to build a new food distribution infrastructure - a task 
of many months? Or will it simply insist on doing the job itself? Most 
likely the latter. Meanwhile, in addition to epidemics and a hunger 
season, Darfur faces the likelihood of violence as rebels and government 
militias respond to the new uncertainties by tearing up the local peace 
agreements that have kept much of Darfur stable for three years.

Last year, according to UN figures, about 150 Darfurians died every 
month in violence. Fewer than half were civilians; the others were 
soldiers, militiamen, bandits and rebels. Things could get worse, much 
worse. There is good reason to believe the aid agency expulsions are 
only the beginning. Those who have argued that the Sudan government 
responds to pressure make a critical mistake. Pressure works if the 
party under pressure can agree with the end point. If that is life 
imprisonment, pressure only generates counter-pressure. For Khartoum, 
Moreno-Ocampo's ultimatum is not negotiable. It is a fight to the death.

International justice is a virtuous enterprise, but not risk-free. 
Sudanese people are already paying a high price for the abandonment of 
the diplomatic approach that has yielded such benefits over the last 
four years. We fear there is more to come: NGO expulsions, actions 
against UN staff members and, worst of all, a go-slow or reversal of 
commitment to elections and self-determination for Southern Sudan. There 
will be no justice in Sudan without peace. When peace and justice clash, 
as they do in Sudan today, peace must prevail.

? Julie Flint and Alex de Waal are the co-authors of Darfur: A New 
History of a Long War



From nmgoro at gmail.com  Fri Mar  6 07:28:53 2009
From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 15:28:53 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Throwers, pitchers, and cognitive dissonances
Message-ID: <2fa158550903060628xeb6fb06mb34056f24a4f1ad1@mail.gmail.com>

At last I have had a clear feeling of how does it sound when you know
nothing of soccer and try to extrincate any meaning from a
conversation between two soccer fans.

Speak of cognitive dissonances!!!!


Re: the whole metaphorical (I guess) exchange on baseball, Japan,
Venezuela, Cuba and Us.

And I thought that I understood the basics of baseball!

Will have to go for some crash course at DAOM, _the_ baseball club in
Buenos Aires...

-- 

N?stor Gorojovsky
El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a


From nmgoro at gmail.com  Fri Mar  6 07:38:52 2009
From: nmgoro at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?N=C3=A9stor_Gorojovsky?=)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 15:38:52 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] Lula suggests Communist Manifesto to overcome crisis
In-Reply-To: <b5a2a8180903051848h15f19fc3r7d49daf1808e92cd@mail.gmail.com>
References: <b5a2a8180903051848h15f19fc3r7d49daf1808e92cd@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2fa158550903060638x37516445kace9c4cfd689d4c1@mail.gmail.com>

Fred, will try with Gustavo Battistoni, who sent the piece of news to
Reconquista Popular.

El d?a 6 de marzo de 2009 3:48, Fred Fuentes <fred.fuentes en gmail.com> escribi?:
> Sorry cant find mention of this in english news wires. I would be
> interested to know which parts of the manifesto are the ones that Lula
> thinks should be applied......
>
> UN FANTASMA RECORRE BRASIL
>
> Lula aconsej? usar el Manifiesto Comunista para superar la crisis
>
> El presidente brasile?o, Luiz Lula da Silva, reiter? sus cr?ticas a
> los pa?ses industrializados por la generaci?n de


From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Mar  6 07:42:28 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 09:42:28 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Steffie Brooks memorial meeting
Message-ID: <49B13654.5030201@panix.com>

Dear comrades and friends,

Attached is an invitation to the memorial/celebration of the life of 
Steffie Brooks. (http://www.marxmail.org/SteffieBrooks.pdf) It will be 
held on Saturday, March 14, beginning at 2 PM at the Inn at Great Neck. 
A buffet luncheon will follow directly. The Inn is within a few minutes 
walk from the LIRR railroad station in Great Neck and easily accessible 
by car. Also attached is an information sheet with directions to the Inn 
at Great Neck. 
(http://www.marxmail.org/SteffieMemorialDirectionsByCar&LIRR.pdf)

Steffie and I met through our common political backgrounds. We became 
good friends, coming together at important crossroads in each other's 
lives. In the past few weeks I have been deeply moved by the range of 
people from myriad activities and interests that touched and were 
inspired by Steffie's life: her political commitments, her personal 
endeavors, and her many friendships.

Together, we have the opportunity to participate in a fitting tribute to 
Steffie's life.

Please see the attached flyer, print it as needed, and circulate it to 
others. Please respond with any questions, ideas, or if you have 
difficulty opening the attachment. Also attached is a sheet with 
directions to the Inn at Great Neck.

Once again, in solidarity and with fond remembrance of Steffie, Linda Loew




From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Mar  6 07:44:53 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 09:44:53 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Fear of nationalization exacerbates financial crisis
Message-ID: <49B136E5.5050708@panix.com>

NY Times, March 6, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist
The Big Dither
By PAUL KRUGMAN

Last month, in his big speech to Congress, President Obama argued for 
bold steps to fix America?s dysfunctional banks. ?While the cost of 
action will be great,? he declared, ?I can assure you that the cost of 
inaction will be far greater, for it could result in an economy that 
sputters along for not months or years, but perhaps a decade.?

Many analysts agree. But among people I talk to there?s a growing sense 
of frustration, even panic, over Mr. Obama?s failure to match his words 
with deeds. The reality is that when it comes to dealing with the banks, 
the Obama administration is dithering. Policy is stuck in a holding pattern.

Here?s how the pattern works: first, administration officials, usually 
speaking off the record, float a plan for rescuing the banks in the 
press. This trial balloon is quickly shot down by informed commentators.

Then, a few weeks later, the administration floats a new plan. This plan 
is, however, just a thinly disguised version of the previous plan, a 
fact quickly realized by all concerned. And the cycle starts again.

Why do officials keep offering plans that nobody else finds credible? 
Because somehow, top officials in the Obama administration and at the 
Federal Reserve have convinced themselves that troubled assets, often 
referred to these days as ?toxic waste,? are really worth much more than 
anyone is actually willing to pay for them ? and that if these assets 
were properly priced, all our troubles would go away.

Thus, in a recent interview Tim Geithner, the Treasury secretary, tried 
to make a distinction between the ?basic inherent economic value? of 
troubled assets and the ?artificially depressed value? that those assets 
command right now. In recent transactions, even AAA-rated 
mortgage-backed securities have sold for less than 40 cents on the 
dollar, but Mr. Geithner seems to think they?re worth much, much more.

And the government?s job, he declared, is to ?provide the financing to 
help get those markets working,? pushing the price of toxic waste up to 
where it ought to be.

What?s more, officials seem to believe that getting toxic waste properly 
priced would cure the ills of all our major financial institutions. 
Earlier this week, Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve chairman, was asked 
about the problem of ?zombies? ? financial institutions that are 
effectively bankrupt but are being kept alive by government aid. ?I 
don?t know of any large zombie institutions in the U.S. financial 
system,? he declared, and went on to specifically deny that A.I.G. ? 
A.I.G.! ? is a zombie.

This is the same A.I.G. that, unable to honor its promises to pay off 
other financial institutions when bonds default, has already received 
$150 billion in aid and just got a commitment for $30 billion more.

The truth is that the Bernanke-Geithner plan ? the plan the 
administration keeps floating, in slightly different versions ? isn?t 
going to fly.

Take the plan?s latest incarnation: a proposal to make low-interest 
loans to private investors willing to buy up troubled assets. This would 
certainly drive up the price of toxic waste because it would offer a 
heads-you-win, tails-we-lose proposition. As described, the plan would 
let investors profit if asset prices went up but just walk away if 
prices fell substantially.

But would it be enough to make the banking system healthy? No.

Think of it this way: by using taxpayer funds to subsidize the prices of 
toxic waste, the administration would shower benefits on everyone who 
made the mistake of buying the stuff. Some of those benefits would 
trickle down to where they?re needed, shoring up the balance sheets of 
key financial institutions. But most of the benefit would go to people 
who don?t need or deserve to be rescued.

And this means that the government would have to lay out trillions of 
dollars to bring the financial system back to health, which would, in 
turn, both ensure a fierce public outcry and add to already serious 
concerns about the deficit. (Yes, even strong advocates of fiscal 
stimulus like yours truly worry about red ink.) Realistically, it?s just 
not going to happen.

So why has this zombie idea ? it keeps being killed, but it keeps coming 
back ? taken such a powerful grip? The answer, I fear, is that officials 
still aren?t willing to face the facts. They don?t want to face up to 
the dire state of major financial institutions because it?s very hard to 
rescue an essentially insolvent bank without, at least temporarily, 
taking it over. And temporary nationalization is still, apparently, 
considered unthinkable.

But this refusal to face the facts means, in practice, an absence of 
action. And I share the president?s fears: inaction could result in an 
economy that sputters along, not for months or years, but for a decade 
or more.


From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Fri Mar  6 07:44:47 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 09:44:47 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Reminder: Steffie Brooks memorial, Sat., March 14, 2p?Fo
Message-ID: <7C24D28909FE4FAF8C9267C08945082A@office1pc>

For meeting details and travel instructions, see:
http://www.marxmail.org/SteffieBrooks.pdf






From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Mar  6 07:49:10 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 09:49:10 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Putting the fox in charge of the henhouse
Message-ID: <49B137E6.5050706@panix.com>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/05/AR2009030503762.html
U.S. to Invite The Wealthy To Invest in The Bailout

By David Cho
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 6, 2009; A01

The government is seeking to resuscitate the nation's crippled financial 
system by forging an alliance with the very outfits that most benefited 
from the bonanza preceding the collapse of the credit markets: hedge 
funds and private-equity firms.

The initiative to revive the consumer lending business, outlined by 
officials this week, offers these wealthy investors a new chance to make 
sizable profits -- but, thanks to the government, without the risk of 
massive losses.

The idea is to entice them to put their huge cash piles to work to 
stimulate the financial system. They would be invited to buy up recently 
issued, highly rated securities. These securities finance consumer 
lending, such as credit cards and student and auto loans.

The program, which could involve the government lending nearly $1 
trillion to these investors, exceeds the size of every other federal 
effort to address the crisis so far. The initiative's approach could be 
the model for future federal efforts to aid the credit markets, sources 
familiar with government planning said. Officials call this strategy a 
"public-private partnership," but in essence the government is offering 
good deals to private investors to draw them into its rescue efforts.

Architects of this initiative have long been sensitive to the political 
challenges of teaming up with hedge fund managers and private-equity 
firms. But officials see these private investors as among the few who 
have ample cash available. In public statements, officials have sought 
to focus attention on the ultimate goal of freeing up credit for consumers.

The Treasury Department and Federal Reserve will continue to lean on 
these private investors as officials expand their aid to more segments 
of the lending markets each month, moving from consumer credit possibly 
on to commercial mortgages and financial derivatives, the sources said. 
But there is vigorous debate between the Treasury and the Fed and within 
them over how the program should evolve and at what speed.

This approach will culminate in a separate program that aims to relieve 
banks of toxic assets, backed by distressed loans, that are clogging the 
firms' balance sheets, sources said. This second initiative, which 
officials are hoping to unveil in the coming weeks, is also expected to 
reach at least $1 trillion. It may create multiple investment funds, 
financed by wealthy investors with matching dollars from the Treasury 
and loans from the Fed, to buy toxic assets, sources said.

These two programs, focused on reviving consumer credit and clearing 
troubled assets, each exceed the size of the other elements in the 
financial rescue package being developed by Treasury Secretary Timothy 
F. Geithner. These also include a $75 billion effort to aid homeowners 
and an effort to inject capital into banks, which has already involved 
hundreds of billions of dollars in public funds.

In the past, hedge funds and private-equity firms have not been major 
buyers of the securities that provide financing for credit cards and 
other consumer loans.

But the government is turning to these investors in part because 
traditional buyers, such as retirement funds, mutual funds and 
university endowments, have fled the markets. Many are deep in the red 
and reeling from past forays into buying complicated debt securities. 
Moreover, many pension funds have rules that ban them from borrowing 
money to make investments, which is an essential ingredient in the 
government's program. So many pension funds will not be able to participate.

Federal officials, however, have not given up on the traditional 
investors and are considering setting up investment entities that would 
allow pension funds to get a piece of the profits. Officials said 
pension officials have expressed strong interest in this idea.

The consumer credit revival program, formally known as the Term 
Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility, or TALF, has been welcomed by a 
range of hedge funds and private-equity firms as well as some lenders 
who issue assets that finance consumer loans.

"Our members have significant interest," said Richard Baker, president 
of the Managed Funds Association, the leading association for hedge 
funds. "The plan recognizes that our industry can bring significant 
resources to bear."

Here's how a typical TALF deal would work: A hedge fund uses $1 million 
of its own money and gets a $9 million loan from the Fed, payable after 
three years, to buy a $10 million asset-backed security, which finances 
consumer loans. Hoping that the market for these assets recovers, the 
hedge fund would hold the asset for three years.

If the security rises in value to $11 million, the investor would keep 
the profit, essentially doubling the initial investment. The government, 
meanwhile, would consider the deal a success because consumer lending 
was spurred.

If the value fell below $9 million, the hedge fund would lose its down 
payment but nothing more. The Treasury, using bailout funds approved by 
Congress, would cover the next set of losses, with the Fed ultimately on 
the hook for anything more.

Steven Schwartzman, chief executive of private-equity giant Blackstone, 
said the program is "highly attractive" because of the government financing.

The TALF's primary aim is to get the "shadow banking system" running 
again. A vast portion of the financing for loans issued in the United 
States comes not from traditional banks but from other enterprises.

Some firms that issue consumer credit questioned the program's 
limitations. Executives at one leading bank said restricting the program 
to securities backed by only the highest-quality loans would be too 
constraining.

For example, many loans taken out by auto dealerships to stock their 
inventory do not have the highest ratings. Government officials, who 
want to make sure dealers can get these loans, are considering expanding 
the TALF to slightly lower-quality assets, sources said.

Some officials are concerned there may not be enough highly rated loans 
that can be combined into securities to sell to investors.

Another matter of discussion among federal officials is whether to 
lengthen the term of the financing extended by the government to 
investors, sources said. With securities backed by auto loans, for 
example, a relatively short period was deemed appropriate because these 
loans mostly carry three-year terms. But when the TALF expands in the 
coming months to aid other segments of the credit market, such as 
commercial real estate loans, the Fed may have to lengthen the time 
because such loans carry 10-year terms or longer.

If Fed and Treasury officials decide to extend the TALF model to the 
purchase of toxic assets, this would require expanding the approach from 
recently issued loans to those that are years old.

Each step away from the original target of the TALF -- recently issued, 
highest-quality assets -- may force the government to protect itself, 
which would involve offering less to private investors, officials said. 
But if the government goes too far in shielding itself, it may fail to 
generate interest by private investors. Striking the right balance -- 
among lenders who issue loans, investors who buy them and taxpayers who 
are facilitating the transactions -- has been one of the greatest 
challenges in developing the program, officials said.

Staff writers Neil Irwin and Binyamin Appelbaum contributed to this report.


From Jscotlive at aol.com  Fri Mar  6 07:59:30 2009
From: Jscotlive at aol.com (Jscotlive at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 09:59:30 EST
Subject: [Marxism] End Sanctions Against Zimbabwe
Message-ID: <c3d.51804dee.36e29452@aol.com>

 
Open Letter Signed By African Academics and Activists 
More than 3000 deaths and nearly 70 000 people affected by cholera in  
Zimbabwe, with risks of epidemic spreading to neighbouring countries, have not  been 
enough to end the economic sanctions Great Britain and its allies have  
imposed on this country since the end of the 90?s. That?s how the European  
Council, during its session on 26th January 2009, decided ?to extend for another  
year the Common Position on restrictive measures against Zimbabwe?. Of extreme  
gravity, such a decision can only exacerbate a situation which is already  
characterised by the highest unemployment (94%) and inflation rates in the  
world, by food shortage which 7 million people suffer from, by a lack of  schooling 
for children as well as brain drain and labour outflow among which  many 
teachers and medical staff members. 
Full: _http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=3695#comment-119903_ 
(http://www.socialistunity.com/?p=3695#comment-119903)   


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Fri Mar  6 08:53:40 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 10:53:40 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Throwers, pitchers, and cognitive dissonances
References: <2fa158550903060628xeb6fb06mb34056f24a4f1ad1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <B963C40E0E10476C9D19040EEBD6090D@dmsthinkpad>

Well, as a diehard baseball fan, I must admit candidly, but only when using 
a pseudonym, that baseball is only the second greatest sport-- after soccer. 
There it is.

And as the second greatest sport, the game is practically ruined by the 
demands of television for frequent and extended interruptions to allow for 
commercials.



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "N?stor Gorojovsky" <nmgoro at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 9:28 AM
Subject: [Marxism] Throwers, pitchers, and cognitive dissonances


> At last I have had a clear feeling of how does it sound when you know
> nothing of soccer and try to extrincate any meaning from a
> conversation between two soccer fans.
>
> Speak of cognitive dissonances!!!!
>
>
> Re: the whole metaphorical (I guess) exchange on baseball, Japan,
> Venezuela, Cuba and Us.
>
> And I thought that I understood the basics of baseball!
>
> Will have to go for some crash course at DAOM, _the_ baseball club in
> Buenos Aires...
>
> -- 
>
> N?stor Gorojovsky
> El texto principal de este correo puede no ser de mi autor?a
>
> ________________________________________________
> 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 sabocat59 at mac.com  Fri Mar  6 09:21:17 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 16:21:17 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Modern Slavery In America By Stephen Lendman
Message-ID: <1623931767-1236356586-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1006482684-@bxe1258.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

http://www.countercurrents.org/lendman060309.htm

 Farmworker Slavery 

In a March 2004 report, Oxfam America highlighted the growing problem in a report titled "Like Machines in the Fields: Workers without Rights in American Agriculture." It's a shocking account of how "Behind the shiny, happy images promoted by the fast-food industry with its never-ending commercials, there is another reality:" -- nearly two million overworked farmworkers living in "sub-poverty misery, without benefits, without the right to overtime," a living wage, or other job protections, including for children; -- in Florida, it's not uncommon to find instances of workers chained to poles, locked in trucks, physically beaten, and cheated out of pay; it's pervasive enough for a federal prosecutor to have called the state "ground zero for modern-day slavery" in a New Yorker magazine article; 

-- John Bowe, author of "Nobodies: Modern American Slave Labor and the Dark Side of the New Global Economy," calls Florida agriculture "an unsavory world" where workers like Adan Ortiz fear talking about their bosses because he has nightmares that they might "come after me with machetes and stuff;"

 -- basic US labor laws exclude farmworkers, including the right to organize; laws like the 1935 National Labor Relations Act (NLRB) and 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA); also OSHA protections are lacking; the 1983 Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (AWPA or MSPA) provided modest but inadequate relief and none at all when it isn't enforced; Oxfam reported that, except in California to a modest degree, "state laws perpetuate inequality," especially in Florida and North Carolina; 

-- overall, enforcement at both federal and state levels is lax and has weakened in recent years; most notable are the lack of investigations, prosecutions, and resources allocated for either; in the case of undocumented workers, nothing in the law protects them; -- many serve as forced labor against their will in a modern-day version of slavery: terrorized by violent employers, watched by armed guards under conditions of near-incarceration, living overcrowded in "severely inadequate" barracks or trailers, often plagued with rust, mildew, filth, broken appliances, sagging or leaky roofs, non-working showers, and multiple occupants being over-charged up to $200 a week by unscrupulous employers; yet workers put up with it because in the words of one: "If we don't work, we don't eat;" 

-- the commercial power of giant buyers and retailers like Wal-Mart (selling 19% of US groceries) and Yum Brands (the world's largest fast-food company) squeeze growers and suppliers for the lowest prices; -- increased competition from imports have had a similar effect, especially in winter months; -- yet while wages and prices to producers are squeezed, profits are passed up the distribution chain to corporate giants at the top. Farmworkers have been punished as a result and are perhaps the poorest and most abused laborers in America. Around half of them earn less than $7500 annually. Lucky ones earn up to $10,000, in either case it's far below the federal poverty threshold, and their wages have been stagnant since the 1970s. Doing some of the worst and most dangerous jobs in America (from exposure to toxic chemicals and workplace accidents), poverty has forced them into sub-standing housing, temporary jobs, increased migrancy, and family separation.  

Besides sub-poverty wages, around 95% get no Social Security, disability, or medical insurance benefits (let alone vacations or pensions) for themselves or their families. Women farmworkers face other abuses like male dominance, sexual harassment, or worse, while at the same time remain primary family caregivers.  Crop and livestock agricultural jobs exist throughout the country, but over half are concentrated in California, Florida, Texas, North Carolina, and Washington. 

Most farmworkers are young (between 18 - 44 or younger), male (about 80%), and Latino. They have little education, and many are recent undocumented immigrants (mostly from Mexico) forced north because of destructive trade laws like NAFTA. Organizing efforts have won important victories but not enough to increase workers' bargaining power under a fundamentally unfair system. 

So while achievements of organizations like the Coalition of Immokalee Workers in Florida (with over 2000 members) are impressive, they're no match against agribusiness giants or Wal-Mart. Nor can they ameliorate conditions in one of the country's most hazardous occupations. Farmworker disability rates are three times than for the greater population. Around 300,000 laborers suffer pesticide poisoning annually, and many others endure accidents, musculoskeletal, and other type injuries (some chronic). A 1990 North Carolina study found only 4% of workers had access to drinking water, hand-washing, and toilet facilities, a particularly dangerous situation for children and pregnant women. 

Oxfam calls farmworker conditions today the equivalent of a "19th century plantation-style" model relying on field hands, rudimentary equipment, long hours, little pay, no benefits, under a basically "inhumane, anachronistic (system crying) out for reform." But how when all levels of government turn a blind eye to the worst of abuses, and for the undocumented blame them for their own plight.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

From jim.ferguson1917 at gmail.com  Fri Mar  6 09:33:47 2009
From: jim.ferguson1917 at gmail.com (Jim Ferguson)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 11:33:47 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] The Republican march toward oblivion?
Message-ID: <181b16100903060833i5e6d51ccy69bca0d2635a5ce2@mail.gmail.com>

http://socialistworker.org/2009/03/05/republican-march-to-oblivion

The Republican march toward oblivion

The Republican Party is hoping its screeds against "big government"
will catch fire as patience with Obama's attempts to fix the crisis
runs out. But that strategy may not work out the way the GOP hopes.

March 5, 2009

PERHAPS ALL we need to know about modern conservatism and its party,
the Republicans, was captured in Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal's
nationally televised response to President Barack Obama's February 24
address to a joint session of Congress.

While Obama made one of the most forceful appeals in generations for
government action to address economic crisis and declining
working-class living standards, Jindal centered his response on a
folksy story about government bungling during the Hurricane Katrina
disaster in 2005.

As he told the story, he and Jefferson Parish Sheriff Harry Lee
bravely risked arrest to back down boneheaded government bureaucrats
who were refusing permission for private-citizen boaters to rescue
hurricane survivors.

It only took a day or two for liberal bloggers, and then the
mainstream media, to show that Jindal's story was not only inaccurate,
but most likely a fish story. Later, his press office had to admit
that the incident he described never really happened. Every subsequent
attempt that Jindal's office made to explain away the governor's tall
tale just ended up making him look like an even bigger putz than he
did during the speech itself.

It's hard to figure what Jindal was thinking when, in the age of
Google, it would take only five minutes of clicking to discover that
his story was phony. But it also illustrated the through-the-looking
glass take on the world that conservatives have today.

David Brooks, the conservative New York Times columnist, scathingly
reviewed the content of Jindal's speech on the PBS NewsHour with Jim
Lehrer: "To come up in this moment in history with a stale,
'Government is the problem, you can't trust the federal government,'
is just a disaster for the Republican Party. It's not where the
country is, it's not where the future of the country is."

No wonder opinion polls placed Obama's popularity around 67 percent,
while the Republicans in Congress wallow somewhere in the 30s. Obama
has staked his presidency on a break with the conservative-dominated
politics of the last generation. So far, he has had support from a
business elite that's depending on Washington to save its skin.

The Obama administration inherited a mound of crises that are the
legacy of decades of neoliberal economic policies and the position of
the U.S. as the world's only superpower following the Cold War. Given
this, the sense has grown, even among business circles and their
political representatives in Washington, that laissez-faire politics
are in need of an overhaul.

The challenge for the elites that have benefited so much from the
neoliberal era is to support a change in U.S. politics that will
address the parts of these crises that impinge on their ability to
reap profit and power, while containing popular demands for reforms to
health care, workplace rights or military spending that would
challenge them.

That's where the Democratic Party has proven its usefulness to the
people who run U.S. society.

All things being equal, big business prefers the Republicans, whose
generally open pro-business stances aren't usually balanced against
appeals to labor or the poor.

But the current Republican Party--saddled with responsibility for
unpopular policies, mired in corruption and having demonstrated its
incompetence in managing the affairs of state--has run its course as a
vehicle for carrying out, and winning support for, big business'
agenda.

In the language of Madison Avenue, which every pundit seems to have
adopted these days, the Republican "brand" is damaged. And business
knows when it's time to pull a bad brand off the shelf.

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

JUST HOW long the Republicans will stay off the shelf--whether "brand
Obama" can replace them--is a question that will determine mainstream
American politics over the next period, and maybe the next generation.
As Bloomberg News put it on March 1:

By shifting the focus of government policy away from upper- income
Americans and targeting the vast numbers who consider themselves
middle-class, Obama's proposals may yield dividends for the Democratic
Party. Just as Franklin Roosevelt used the New Deal to create a loyal
voter base that endured for four decades, Obama's approach to fixing
the economy offers the president an opportunity to recast political
allegiances among swing voters.

Even though Obama's proposals fall far short of the "class warfare"
and "socialism" that conservatives accuse him of, they are enough in
synch with popular sentiment to suggest that he could succeed in
"recasting political allegiances."

The Republicans, in response, have decided on a strategy of full-scale
opposition to Obama's economic agenda without really offering anything
credible as an alternative. The Republicans are banking on the
two-party system's in-built tendency to make every election a negative
referendum on the party in power--in essence, to give the electorate
the chance to "throw the bums out" in 2010 and 2012, rather than make
a positive endorsement of the party out of power.

Given the current crisis, it's a good bet that economic conditions are
going to be worse for ordinary Americans through most of Obama's four
years. The GOP is hoping that as conditions worsen, its screeds
against "big government" will catch fire as popular patience with
Obama's attempts to fix the crisis runs out. While this isn't a crazy
strategy--in fact, it's the only one they have--it may not work the
way the Republicans hope.

For one thing, as long as Obama is seen as "trying" to address
concerns of ordinary Americans, he will continue to get some benefit
of the doubt from the public. If the GOP thinks that simply railing
against a "big government" that is providing unemployment benefits,
health care and jobs to the unemployed will endear it to working
people, they're even dumber than Jindal made them look.

Second, the Republicans are carrying the baggage of policies
accumulated over three decades in which ordinary Americans have seen
their living standards decline. This is hardly a golden age that
Americans are anxious to return to.

Third, much of the GOP's conservative base was built on a backlash
against the social progress of the 1960s. If anything, the election of
a Black president, and the growing public support for the rights of
LGBT people, among other points, has shown that the social
underpinnings of this sort of backlash politics have eroded.

There is one final factor that would certainly derail the
conservatives' hopes for a comeback. And that is the possibility of a
revived labor and working-class movement from below.

In an interview published in the March/April issue of International
Socialist Review, socialist labor scholar Kim Moody suggests that
economic inequality and the political rejection of the neoconservative
agenda may produce "the next upsurge [of the labor movement] we [i.e.
labor activists] talk about a lot."

Moody lays particular stress on the potential for organizing in the
traditionally anti-union, but economically vital, South. If labor
manages to organize significantly in the South--currently, the
geographic base of the Republican Party--it will strike a blow for
labor. And It will also likely consign American conservatism's main
political institution to the shelf for a long time.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Columnist: Lance Selfa
 Lance Selfa is the author of The Democrats: A Critical History [2], a
socialist analysis of the Democratic Party, and editor of The Struggle
for Palestine [3], a collection of essays by leading solidarity
activists. He is on the editorial board of the International Socialist
Review [4].

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

Material on this Web site is licensed by SocialistWorker.org, under a
Creative Commons (by-nc-nd 3.0) [5] license, except for articles that
are republished with permission. Readers are welcome to share and use
material belonging to this site for non-commercial purposes, as long
as they are attributed to the author and SocialistWorker.org.


From Waistline2 at aol.com  Fri Mar  6 10:20:33 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 12:20:33 EST
Subject: [Marxism] =?utf-8?b?4oCcQ2FzdCBhc2lkZSBpbGx1c2lvbnMh4oCdICBDcmlz?=
 =?utf-8?q?is_deepens?=
Message-ID: <c2d.545bef6d.36e2b561@aol.com>

?Cast aside illusions!? is the indispensable first step in grappling with  
crisis. An illusion is a false impression of reality. No problem can be solved  
that is not accurately described. Illusion prevents an accurate and objective 
 description of a problem. As our nation slips deeper into crisis, the main  
tactic of the ruling class has been to prevent the people from accurately  
describing the problem, offering them one illusion after another. 
 
The first and fundamental illusion is that the current crisis is within the  
system and caused by greed and mismanagement.  The reality is that this is  a 
crisis of the system. It is easier to accept a shallow and superficial  
illusion than to understand complex reality. However, the crisis is at such a  point 
that revolutionaries must master the complex way the system works or they  
cannot describe the problem. 
 
A fundamental characteristic of the capitalist system is that competition  
between capitalists produces more commodities than the market can absorb. If  
there is a market for ten cars, then ten capitalists will produce ten cars each. 
 The ensuing battle for the market compels every capitalist to cut the cost 
of  production. Labor saving machinery, speed-up and wage cuts lower the cost 
of  production, but also lower the purchasing power of the working class, 
increasing  the glut of products on the market. The result is the periodic slowing 
down or  stopping of production until the surplus is purchased or destroyed. 
 
Then the race for the market starts again.  This is crisis within the  
system. 
 
What is different today? 
 
The capitalist system rests on the buying and selling of labor power   ? that 
is what creates value. In the struggle for the market, new electronic  
productive equipment was developed that did not simply make labor more  efficient, 
it replaced it. As more and more capitalists are forced to use  robotics, jobs 
disappear and labor power becomes obsolete. As a result more and  more 
production is carried on with less and less labor. Inevitably more money  flows into 
the hands of fewer and fewer capitalists while the mass of the  workers become 
poorer and poorer as their wages decline and jobs disappear.  Finally the 
point is reached when the people of the world are too poor to  consume what the 
world has produced.  Unsold products pile up, retailers  cut orders, factories 
close down, and bills and mortgages are not paid. Banks do  not dare lend 
money to businesses that might fail or to workers who may become  unemployed.  
Without the grease of credit the gears of the system grind to  a halt. 
 
Conventional wisdom has it that since the drying up of the market caused  the 
depression, then all that is needed is to create a market. This, it is said,  
can be done by guaranteeing business loans and putting spending money in the  
hands of the people.  This was the essence of Roosevelt?s ?New Deal.? 
 
It didn?t work. 
 
It took the destruction and gigantic market of World War II to again grease  
the gears and expand the market.  The Great Depression was the beginning of  
the final stage of the capitalist system. Today, the entire world is capitalist 
 and there is nowhere to expand. The crisis within the system becomes deadly 
as  it is joined by the crisis created by new, labor-replacing means of 
production  that attack the very foundation of the system. 
 
The illusion is we can spend our way out of the crisis. 
 
The reality is that this system, like all those before it, is coming to an  
end. 
 
A new system of social control over finance, production and distribution is  
already forming.  Will the new system be shaped to the benefit of the  
billionaire ruling class or to the benefit of the mass of people? The question  will 
be answered in our favor if millions of people become clear about the  problem 
and their vision. They must become socially active and impose a  democratic 
economy that reflects a democratic political system. The first step  is to cast 
aside illusion and grapple with this difficult and dangerous reality. 
 
_http://www.peoplestribune.org/PT.2009.02/PT.2009.02.03.html_ 
(http://www.peoplestribune.org/PT.2009.02/PT.2009.02.03.html)  
 
 
**************Need a job? Find employment help in your area. 
(http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=employment_agencies&ncid=emlcntusyelp00000005)


From ffeldman at bellatlantic.net  Fri Mar  6 11:17:13 2009
From: ffeldman at bellatlantic.net (Fred Feldman)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 13:17:13 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Alan Benjamin's message to upcoming Steffie Brooks
	memorial
Message-ID: <1A4F0C3985614FEEAEA4606C4399197A@office1pc>

Alan Benjamin is a national leader of Socialist Organizer.
Fred 


Dear Friends and Comrades:


I was very saddened to learn that Steffie had passed away. I learned about
her terrible battle from her and from David W. just after the Trotsky
conference in New York last summer. I had called her to request  help with
fundraising for Cynthia McKinney, only to learn that her political activity
was slowly coming to a close. What a terrible loss!


I had lost touch with Steffie for years and years. We went separate ways
politically, and I moved out to the West Coast in 1984. But we reconnected
in November 2007 around the McKinney campaign and the struggle for
independent Black political action. We talked and talked about the old days
in the SWP in New York, trying to figure out what had gone wrong, why so
many splits -- but mostly we talked about what to do today to advance our
common struggle for independent politics, and on this we saw eye to eye. It
was incredibly rewarding and re-energizing to hear her excitement and to
learn from her.


I feel terribly cheated that just as I was getting reacquainted with
Steffie, she contracted her terminal illness.


I wish I could be with all of you to celebrate her life and all that she
gave to so many of us. Unfortunately I will not be able to make the trip to
New York.


I join with you in recognizing her contributions to our movement and in
recommitting ourselves to the struggle that was her compass throughout her
adult life: the struggle for a socialist future to which she added an
important chapter.


Comradely,


Alan Benjamin
San Francisco






From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Mar  6 14:18:18 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 16:18:18 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Ilan Pappe on histories and historians in Israel
Message-ID: <49B1931A.9070109@panix.com>

http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/TfC/article/view/203/182


From dwaltersMIA at gmail.com  Fri Mar  6 14:18:53 2009
From: dwaltersMIA at gmail.com (nada)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 13:18:53 -0800
Subject: [Marxism]  Throwers, pitchers, and cognitive dissonances
Message-ID: <49B1933D.8060406@gmail.com>

N?stor,
You probably DO understand the "basics" of baseball. It's all the 
baseball-babble that goes along with it, like any sport that is 
difficult. The key 'cult' thing about baseball, anyway, not yet touched 
on (thank the gods) is "The Stats". Statistics is, like, everything, 
about Baseball. You get The Stats and understand them, you are ready to 
converse in the Big Leagues.

David


From adambrichmond at yahoo.com  Fri Mar  6 14:42:27 2009
From: adambrichmond at yahoo.com (Adam Richmond)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 13:42:27 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Interview with Jack Rasmus on Economic Crisis
Message-ID: <459446.50196.qm@web54607.mail.re2.yahoo.com>

http://wercampaign.org/?p=184

An interview with Jack Rasmus, a professor of economics at St.
Mary?s College and Santa Clara University in Northern California. Prof.
Rasmus is a member of the newly formed National Steering Committee of
the Workers Emergency Recovery Campaign (WERC). The interview was
conducted on March 2, 2009, by Alan Benjamin, organizer for the WERC.


      

From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Fri Mar  6 15:15:45 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 17:15:45 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] SHOBAK: Rifles Mutiny in Bangladesh
Message-ID: <908b689f0903061415n593291b1g6014c7bd29f7f079@mail.gmail.com>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Naeem Mohaiemen <naeem.mohaiemen at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 3:04 PM


In an anguished editorial, former communist activist and now head of
largest media house, Motiur Rahman writes: "Which Bangladesh is this?
And where will this end?" His thoughts on our past and ongoing violent
histories.

Last Wednesday, frantic SMS came to mobiles around 10:30 am. There was
a mutiny inside BDR Headquarters (Bangladesh Rifles, which guards the
border with India/Burma), and the Army was moving into the area to
suppress it. First impressions were very misleading. I left my house
in Dhanmondi with my camera and went to BDR Gate (also in Dhanmondi).
The photographs I took were at a remove: people running, empty
streets, and soldiers. I ran into Nic Haque from Al Jazeera, last time
I saw him was during last year's midnight attack on Balaka Stork
Statues. Nic was wearing a PRESS-marked bullet-proof vest, and that
reminded me that I was neither press nor bullet-proof. I went home, to
watch the news. As we watched footage of BDR soldiers shouting into
cameras, with bandannas covering their face, the image and rhetoric
read like "class revolt".

After a botched negotiation (TV drama w/o substance), a panicked
evacuation of Dhanmondi during which mutineers disappeared into
crowds, chaos of conflicting statements and death counts, and delayed
discovery of mass graves, the grisly truth is slowly coming out.
"Class revolt" is replaced with a killing machine that executed army
officers trapped inside the camp. Why did this happen? Rumor-fed
hysteria, mob violence or shadowy conspiracy-- no one knows what was
the cause. Now the "rebel" faces are revealed as banal killers. An
angry debate explodes around the timing of the massacres of army
officers-- in the first hour, or while negotiations dragged on? Leaked
secret recordings of the Prime Minister's closed-door meeting with
army officers reveal high tensions between the new civilian government
and the army-- latter in shock over the deaths of so many officers.
Everything heading towards very unstable, definitely bad times, for
the country. The honeymoon of the "we did it" election victory of last
December now at an end.

I was writing a newspaper op-ed yesterday, but every day brings new
revelations, so I decided to wait. Maybe not write at all for now.

In meantime, here are few photos.
http://unheardvoice.net/blog/author/naeem/

[I didn't take any photos of the dead. But there are lot of those in
the mass media-- graphic, horrifying and on edge of exploitation.]

Liveblogging:
http://unheardvoice.net/blog/


Otondro, Guarding Who, Against What?

A project about security bubbles and cities, shown at the Bangladesh
National Shilpakala Academy. In unfortunate synchronicity-- the title
of the project comes from "Otondro Prohori" (unsleeping guardian),
which is the official slogan of the BDR, the same group of soldiers
that mutinied last week.

http://shobak.org/projects/otondro.shtml


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://idash.org/mailman/listinfo/shobak


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Fri Mar  6 15:48:19 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 17:48:19 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Japan to use Forex Reserves to help corporations
Message-ID: <63B7F5C4B83946069C438489B91BBCE8@dmsthinkpad>


From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Mar  6 15:50:10 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 17:50:10 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Facebook
Message-ID: <49B1A8A2.1050205@panix.com>

What crappy software. I have been following the discussion on the 
Bard/Kovel group but have been frustrated by Facebook's ceiling on the 
number of words per comment. If you have anything to say, you have to 
break your post into segments. I guess the software was initiated to 
handle information like "Does anybody own the latest Coldplay CD?" Also, 
you can't see all the "Friends" on one page. There are over 600 friends 
on this group but you have to scroll through 60 pages to see them all. I 
am very interested to see who is a friend there, but I am not going to 
waste my time scrolling through 60 pages.


From ectoren at sbcglobal.net  Fri Mar  6 16:00:42 2009
From: ectoren at sbcglobal.net (Erik Carlos Toren)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 15:00:42 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Facebook
References: <49B1A8A2.1050205@panix.com>
Message-ID: <595539.11571.qm@web81805.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


Well...you get what you  pay. 

 ??Erik??



----- Original Message ----
From: Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com>
What crappy software.[..] I 
am very interested to see who is a friend there, but I am not going to 
waste my time scrolling through 60 pages.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Mar  6 16:03:43 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 18:03:43 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Facebook
In-Reply-To: <595539.11571.qm@web81805.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <49B1A8A2.1050205@panix.com>
	<595539.11571.qm@web81805.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <49B1ABCF.5070104@panix.com>

Erik Carlos Toren wrote:
> Well...you get what you  pay. 
> 

I don't know. I am using Wordpress for my blog and it is *great*.


From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Mar  6 16:06:01 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 18:06:01 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Michael Lerner battling lung cancer
Message-ID: <49B1AC59.20904@panix.com>

I am no fan of Michael Lerner, but felt sad to read this:

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/525/t/8751/blog/index.jsp?blog_KEY=570


From billyoc at gmail.com  Fri Mar  6 16:45:46 2009
From: billyoc at gmail.com (Bill O'Connor)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 18:45:46 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Facebook
In-Reply-To: <49B1ABCF.5070104@panix.com> (Louis Proyect's message of "Fri, 06
	Mar 2009 18:03:43 -0500")
References: <49B1A8A2.1050205@panix.com>
	<595539.11571.qm@web81805.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<49B1ABCF.5070104@panix.com>
Message-ID: <87d4cucj11.fsf@t22.Belkin>

Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> writes:

> Erik Carlos Toren wrote:
>> Well...you get what you  pay. 
>> 
>
> I don't know. I am using Wordpress for my blog and it is *great*.

Come on, Louis, you don't even have poker or scrabble or a "which
celebrity are you most like" application.  


From ectoren at sbcglobal.net  Fri Mar  6 16:59:47 2009
From: ectoren at sbcglobal.net ( Erik Carlos Toren)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 17:59:47 -0600
Subject: [Marxism] Facebook
References: <49B1A8A2.1050205@panix.com><595539.11571.qm@web81805.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<49B1ABCF.5070104@panix.com>
Message-ID: <B3F3036F4C414418A22792136014FFC4@your4f1261a8e5>

Works great for what?
You are comparing a *free* blogging publishing tool vs a *free* social 
network site.
Better comparison would be MySpace, Hi5, etc

It's Friday, right?

Erik


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Louis Proyect" <lnp3 at panix.com>

> I don't know. I am using Wordpress for my blog and it is *great*.



From lnp3 at panix.com  Fri Mar  6 17:06:00 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 19:06:00 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Facebook
In-Reply-To: <B3F3036F4C414418A22792136014FFC4@your4f1261a8e5>
References: <49B1A8A2.1050205@panix.com><595539.11571.qm@web81805.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<49B1ABCF.5070104@panix.com>
	<B3F3036F4C414418A22792136014FFC4@your4f1261a8e5>
Message-ID: <49B1BA68.1000705@panix.com>

Erik Carlos Toren wrote:
> Works great for what?
> You are comparing a *free* blogging publishing tool vs a *free* social 
> network site.

I was only saying that just because something is free, it is not 
necessarily crappy.

> Better comparison would be MySpace, Hi5, etc

Nobody I know is using MySpace, but I get about an invitation a day to 
join some Facebook group. Hi5, I never heard of.


From holmoff10 at hotmail.com  Fri Mar  6 18:01:46 2009
From: holmoff10 at hotmail.com (Leonardo Kosloff)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 01:01:46 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Marxism convention in Buenos Aires videos
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1.1236366003.24133.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
References: <mailman.1.1236366003.24133.marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu>
Message-ID: <BLU136-W3452F594398CB940132C84A7A20@phx.gbl>


 
A convention organized in Buenos Aires by the Instituto del Pensamiento Socialista (Institute for Socialist Thought) Karl Marx and I think mainly put together by the Partido de los Trabajadores Socialistas (which translates to Socialist Workers Party though they are not affiliated to the SWP here or in Britain, they are part of Fracci?n Trotskista, a coalition of different Trotskyist groupings in Latin America which characterize Ch?vez as a Bourgeois Nationalist) took place November of last year.
 
The convention's talks, however, were mainly composed of Argentine university professors like Claudio Katz, who may be familiar to some here, (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4961886943545911430&hl=en , this one is quite heated and?fun. Katz runs the group Economistas de Izquierda ?economists of the left- and, among the rest of the professors, is the most supportive of Ch?vez), Eduardo Sartelli (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5079885612550556328&hl=en 
  who had interesting things to say, although I found his characterization of Chavez as a ?Bonapartist? a little too facile, though he did add a number of qualifications,) Juan I?igo Carrera (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5440417934736892743&hl=en ), who seems to be a very fine scholar from what I read of him, he contributed an article to Historical Materialism a couple years ago, etc. etc.
 
They are all in Spanish so I?m not sure how much I should write as an introduction, but in case you haven?t seen them (or you want to learn Spanish a la Marx), here they are. There were 5 days of talks, the last one was a commemoration in honor to the historian Alberto Pl?, but you should be able to find the rest of them from the users who posted them.
_________________________________________________________________
Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail?. 
http://www.windowslive-hotmail.com/LearnMore/personalize.aspx?ocid=TXT_MSGTX_WL_HM_express_032009#colortheme

From pt_costello at yahoo.com  Fri Mar  6 18:04:55 2009
From: pt_costello at yahoo.com (Pat Costello)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 17:04:55 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism]  Facebook
Message-ID: <757611.92886.qm@web63106.mail.re1.yahoo.com>


The demographics of Facebook are less "Does anybody own the latest Coldplay CD?", more "My AARP subscription ran out". 

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1879169,00.html


      


From gary.maclennan1 at gmail.com  Fri Mar  6 18:42:42 2009
From: gary.maclennan1 at gmail.com (Gary MacLennan)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 17:42:42 -0800
Subject: [Marxism]
	=?windows-1252?q?=93Cast_aside_illusions!=94_Crisis_dee?=
	=?windows-1252?q?pens?=
In-Reply-To: <c2d.545bef6d.36e2b561@aol.com>
References: <c2d.545bef6d.36e2b561@aol.com>
Message-ID: <b77157fa0903061742u6fd0f572ka3b8346e7a1d2a1a@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks for posting this. As is well known I struggle with Marxist economics
and I think I might be a closet underconsumptionist or something.  I
remember Tom O'Lincoln shaking his head sadly at something I once said on
the economcy and remarking that the crisis (mild then compared to now) was
caused by the tendency of the rate of profit to fall.

But my questions have to do with thiese sentences:



"A new system of social control over finance, production and distribution is
already forming.  Will the new system be shaped to the benefit of the
billionaire ruling class or to the benefit of the mass of people? "

If it benefits the few how will it be new?
 & If the 'new" system benefits the few how will it solve the crisis?

regards

Gary

From Waistline2 at aol.com  Fri Mar  6 19:15:15 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 21:15:15 EST
Subject: [Marxism]
	=?windows-1252?q?=93Cast_aside_illusions!=94_Crisis_dee?=
	=?windows-1252?q?_=3D=3Fwin=2E=2E=2E?=
Message-ID: <c31.507ea05b.36e332b3@aol.com>

"A new system of social control over finance, production and distribution  is
already forming.  Will the new system be shaped to the benefit of  the
billionaire ruling class or to the benefit of the mass of people? "
 
If it benefits the few how will it be new?
& If the 'new" system  benefits the few how will it solve the crisis?
 
regards
 
Gary

Reply
 
1). New refers to a form of finance capital different from finance capital  
outlined in Lenin's imperialism. Lenin speaks of a finance capital -  
imperialism, that was the domination of banking capital over industrial capital  and 
the export of this capital to areas of productive investment; in  
contradistinction from the export of commodities that Marx writes about. 
 
During the time of Marx imperialism exported mass produced commodities that  
battered down the barriers of the local market. Financial imperialism involved 
 the buying up of land and production units and investment in raw materials  
etc.
 
No one today really speaks about finance capital as banking capital  
dominating industrial capital. Some further feel that a sector of capital that  can be 
identified as industrial capital, no longer exists and most certainly not  in 
the industrially advanced countries. Finance capital today is dominated by a  
form of capital that is valueless; living and breathing - expanding, off of  
speculation. This is not the same kind of speculation on the price of physical 
 commodities and physical assets = production. Or gambling - speculation, 
over  paper assets expressing ownership claims over  physical commodities and  
physical assets. 
 
In its outer appearance speculation is speculation is speculation. However,  
in its internal logic what is being gambled over is mathematical equations. 
 
The money made from this new type of speculation is wealth but this wealth  
is not the result of surplus value extraction. Hence valueless wealth. 
 
2). The government "bailout" redistributes wealth from public to private.  It 
shifts trillions of dollars, in the US alone, to those institutions that have 
 been accumulating wealth off of our credit/debt, and off of speculation on  
commodity prices, currency valuations, and interest rates, or the new world of 
 financial instruments; rather than seeking areas for export of capital.into  
areas of production.  . 
 
But this is also more than a bailout. Something new is taking shape.  It is 
the reorganization of the state to protect private property under  new 
conditions. The new condition is the increasing revolution in the productive  forces 
and the grow of valueless wealth.  Although it may seem like the  bailouts are 
throwing good money after bad, there is some method to the madness.  The 
emerging motion is toward the government and the financial sector together  
controlling and directing the whole economy, buying up the once powerful  industrial 
corporations, and putting an end to the good standard of living that  was once 
possible for, at least, a small section of the working  
class.http://www.lrna.org/2-pt/v19ed1art1.html
 
The new form of wealth and methods of control cannot end the crisis, only  
deepen it. 
 
A new system that benefits the mass of people is the call of support for  
revolution; changing the property relations. In day to day living this means  
preparing the fight for socially necessary means of life. 
 
WL. 
**************Need a job? Find employment help in your area. 
(http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=employment_agencies&ncid=emlcntusyelp00000005)


From sabocat59 at mac.com  Fri Mar  6 19:24:25 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 02:24:25 +0000
Subject: [Marxism]
	=?windows-1252?q?=22Cast_aside_illusions!=94_Crisis_dee?=
	=?windows-1252?q?_=3D=3Fwin=2E=2E=2E_=95?=
Message-ID: <1234109361-1236392761-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-941297161-@bxe1191.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

So what wopuld you call this new animal? Global finance corporatism?

Greg McD

Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T


From fred.fuentes at gmail.com  Fri Mar  6 20:05:10 2009
From: fred.fuentes at gmail.com (Fred Fuentes)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 14:05:10 +1100
Subject: [Marxism] (English) Lula suggests Communist Manifesto to
	overcome crisis
Message-ID: <b5a2a8180903061905u796615a2o11968d46218b1fe@mail.gmail.com>

THank you to Walter for these CubaNews translations of some of Lula's
statements

CubaNews translations. Edited by Walter Lippmann
http://www.walterlippmann.com/docs2320.html
======================================================

Communist Manifesto has the key, Lula holds

BRASILIA, 5 (ANSA) ? Brazilian president Luis Lula da Silva said at a
meeting with businessmen and trade unionists that Karl Marx?s
Communist Manifesto provides some useful recipes to overcome the
current international crisis.

Lula quoted the text published by Marx and Friedrich Engels in 1848
to maintain that a world in mid-crisis is the right framework to
embrace ideas what he describes as daring ideas.

"We must make the most of this crisis and do what we lacked the
courage to do 20 years ago", he assured, according to Agencia Estado.

"This is the moment of truth and the time to do politics, and not
precisely of appeasement: this crisis originated at the very heart of
the countries where those who used to know everything were born", he
remarked.

Speaking to Jorge Gerdau, a businessman and C.E.O. of one of Latin
America?s biggest steelworks, lashed out at the lack of production
credits.

"Gerdau, where is all the money that circulated before the crisis?
Did it vanished?", Lula da Silva inquired.

At the opening of the year?s first meeting of the Economic and Social
Development Council, made up of ministers, businessmen, trade
unionists and economists, the Brazilian president pointed out: "Not
only do we have to establish rules for financial systems and tax
havens, we also have to re-establish credit around the world, because
the economy won?t work without credits", he stressed. And to that
end, he recommended the developed countries to have the ?courage? to
nationalize the banks.

A CubaNews translation. Edited by Walter Lippmann.

DOP

05/03/2009 17:26

Ultimas Noticias|Jueves, 5 de Marzo de 2009

Lula suggests Communist Manifesto to overcome crisis

Brazilian president Luiz Lula da Silva kept laying blame on the
industrialized world for the generation of the international crisis,
and suggested the adoption of some of the ideas put forward by
Marxism to get over it while urging the great businessmen to help
re-establish the credit system.

At the opening of the year?s first meeting of the Economic and Social
Development Council, made up of ministers, businessmen, trade
unionists and economists, President da Silva pointed out that the
Communist Manifesto published by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in
the mid-nineteenth century provides some ?useful recipes? and ?daring
ideas? to stand up to the international crisis.

"This is the moment of truth and the time to do politics, and not
precisely of appeasement: this crisis originated at the very heart of
the countries where those who used to know everything were born", he
remarked, according to Agencia Estado, ANSA reported.

Lula urged to "make the most of this crisis and do what we lacked the
courage to do 20 years ago".

In that respect, he referred to the lack of credits for production
and blamed it on Jorge Gerdau, C.E.O. of one of Latin America?s
biggest steelworks.

"Gerdau, where is all the money that circulated before the crisis?
Did it vanished?", Lula da Silva inquired.

"Not only do we have to establish rules for financial systems and tax
havens, we also have to re-establish credits around the world,
because the economy won?t work without credits", he stressed.

Finally, the President held that coming up with regulations for
financial systems and tax havens is not enough to overcome the
crisis, since it is also necessary to "re-establish credit around the
world, because the economy won?t work without credits".

A CubaNews translation. Edited by Walter Lippmann.



-- 
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 fred.fuentes at gmail.com  Fri Mar  6 20:44:34 2009
From: fred.fuentes at gmail.com (Fred Fuentes)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 14:44:34 +1100
Subject: [Marxism] Pakistan: Defending despotic decisions is problematic
Message-ID: <b5a2a8180903061944s3c764e76vd496297874817889@mail.gmail.com>

[Ammar Ali Jan, from the Labour Party of Pakistan, will be one of the key
speakers at the World at a Crossroads conference. See
http://www.worldatacrossroads.org/]

IV Online magazine : IV410 - March 2009

Pakistan

http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article1619

Defending despotic decisions is problematic

Farooq Tariq



The Pakistan People?s Party leadership has a problem on its hands. There are
not many ways to defend the governor of Punjab?s 25 February 2009 ruling,
which imposed a two-month suspension of the Punjab Assembly. While talking
to Kamran Khan on channel Geo, Mian Raza Rabbani most respected and moderate
leader of the PPP and chairman of the Senate?indicated it was necessary to
stop the ?prevailing state of anarchy.?

What was the immediate ?prevailing? anarchy? A few hundred angry Pakistan
Muslim League Nawaz (PMLN) activists protested in cities throughout the
country. They were opposing the Supreme Court?s decision to bar the Nawaz
brothers from participating in general elections. The three-member bench had
upheld the decision of Lahore High Court. All these judges in these courts
had taken the oath of the Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO) on 3
November 2007, when General Musharaf announced the state of emergency. Ever
since, the lawyer?s movement has demanded their removal.

On a small scale the situation was not unlike the upheaval that occurred
following Benazir Bhutto?s murder on 27 December 2007. Yet in this case no
property was burnt; there was no looting of banks or burning of railways as
was the case then. Clearly the situation could have been easily resolved by
the police.

However the PPP leadership was just waiting for an opportunity to remove the
PMLN Punjab government. The governor, a PPP member, had previously made
threatening public statements to that effect.

The removal of Punjab government is a dictatorial measure imposed by the PPP
government. It follows in General Musharaf?s footsteps. It is a despotic
decision difficult for a democratic person to justify. The fact is that the
PPP leadership has implemented many bad decisions during their first year in
power; this is another one. But it represents an end to their deceitful
policy of ?reconciliation.? This is a road to more repressive measures.

The decision to remove the Punjab government is the combined effort of the
PCO judges and the PPP leadership and is a dress rehearsal for dealing with
the proposed Long March of Lawyers, set for 12-16 March 2009. They are
preparing to deal with the lawyers? movement by using an iron first that
will lead to a new round of arrests, detentions, and torture against those
who challenge the remnants of the Musharaf dictatorship.

The current situation is a reminder of what existed following Musharaf?s
imposition of emergency. On 7 November, over 800 lawyers were arrested in
Lahore alone. Then, in a bid to foil the challenge posed by the lawyers?
movement, over 10,000 political activists were sent to jail. Even Benazir
Bhutto was arrested.

The Charges Against Sharif

The Supreme Court judges have now declared Mian Nawaz Sharif ineligible for
contesting elections based on a court sentence imposed under Musharaf?s
dictatorial rule. They also ruled that Mian Shahbaz Shari was likewise
ineligible. Thus he loses his Punjab assembly seat and chief minister ship.
His provincial government had to fall as well.

The judgment of the Supreme Court against Mian Nawaz Sharif is based on an
allegation by General Musharaf, who accused him of hijacking the plane
bringing Musharaf back from Sri Lanka on 12 October 1999. At the time Prime
Minister Nawaz Sharif attempted to remove General Musharaf from his command;
Musharaf opted to take over instead of accepting the order. It is now clear
from all the evidence presented by several eye witnesses that Musharaf had
already planned a military coup in coordination with other generals. But
during the Musharaf period the courts sentenced Mian Nawaz Sharif for this
alleged hijacking.

Then the PPP leadership covered up the Supreme Court unjustified decision by
announcing it is ?a court decision that we must respect.? PPP hawkish
leaders like Fozia Wahab and Qasim Zia presented these views on several news
channels and in the newspapers. Several commentators sarcastically reminded
them that the PPP had always opposed the Supreme Court?s split decision
which resulted in Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto?s hanging. During the Zia military
dictatorship. on 4 April 1979, Benazir Bhutto?s father was hanged on false
murder charges.

What should have been the normal procedure if the chief minister of Punjab
was disqualified? A session of the assembly should have been called to elect
a new leader who enjoys the majority. But despite all their effort, the PPP
leaders were unable to obtain a majority. They tried their best but they
could not succeed; they feared that another PMLN member would become the
leader of the house and eligible to form the next government. Thus, possibly
another unfriendly PMLN government is in the making.

Lurching Toward Dictatorial Methods

The announcement of the Long March and Dharna (sit in) until the demand for
the restoration of the independent judiciary is recognized has baffled,
puzzled and confused the PPP government. Looking for ways to handle this
situation, the PPP finally opted for dictatorial measures. It seems that the
PPP government has removed General Musharaf only to adopt his dictatorial
trends. A dictator is gone but not his policies. Thus the party has thrown
away most of the glorious democratic traditions won through the heroic
struggle of political activists, including the PPP, in fighting against
military dictatorships.

Today the PPP under President Zardari cannot be viewed as party of liberal
democrats. Rather it is party ruled by a feudal and capitalist elite
supported by the most reactionary political trends. Yet like with General
Musharaf, they have earned the hate of the masses.

The Labour Party Pakistan, which will be in the forefront of the lawyers?
Long March as it has in the past, has condemned this dictatorial measure.
Although the LPP does not have much in common with the capitalist politics
of Main Nawaz Sharif?s PMLN, the LPP sees its opposition as taking a
principled democratic stand. Events erupt one after another so taking a
principled position is the only way forward. The LPP had no illusions that
any section of the ruling class can solve the basic problems facing the
working class of Pakistan.

The only way forward is to strengthen an alternative working-class politics
based on socialist ideas, not the politics of the rich. There has to be a
very flexible but firm ideological socialist base to analyze the complex
politics in Pakistan and other under developed countries. This is not a
straight road; there will be many twist and turns.

Farooq Tariq is the general secretary of Labour Party Pakistan.

--
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.


-- 
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 ectoren at sbcglobal.net  Fri Mar  6 21:12:20 2009
From: ectoren at sbcglobal.net ( Erik Carlos Toren)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 22:12:20 -0600
Subject: [Marxism] Facebook
References: <49B1A8A2.1050205@panix.com><595539.11571.qm@web81805.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<49B1ABCF.5070104@panix.com><B3F3036F4C414418A22792136014FFC4@your4f1261a8e5>
	<49B1BA68.1000705@panix.com>
Message-ID: <CF0E2DEF7FE845A4963AF498CC239CD9@your4f1261a8e5>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Louis Proyect" <lnp3 at panix.com>

> I was only saying that just because something is free, it is not
> necessarily crappy.

OK. My bad. It's a free social network service that it's pretty good for 
what it does.


> Nobody I know is using MySpace, but I get about an invitation a day to
> join some Facebook group. Hi5, I never heard of.

I don't think there are many folks of your generation in MySpace. Hell, even 
my generation (Xgeners) are mostly in Facebook. MySpace is mostly teens and 
early 20's.

Hi5 is one of the top social network sites popular among my pips. It's 
probably in the top 5 as in subscribers.

Here is a good list of sites:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_social_networking_websites

Erik




From rohanger at yahoo.com.au  Fri Mar  6 21:34:23 2009
From: rohanger at yahoo.com.au (rohanger at yahoo.com.au)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 20:34:23 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] When Facebook Isn't Fun, or...
Message-ID: <989065.8588.qm@web90505.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



"When Facebook Isn't Fun, or, Why iLife Isn't My Life: Immaterial
Labor in the Age of Web 2.0"

***DRAFT OUTLINE***

I. It Is Your Patriotic Duty to Consume
?
[snip]
?
?
Very interesting.? May I suggest that under Section II you take up explicitly the commodification of culture - that is all cultural forms: music, entertainment,.. domestic artifacts.? This is evidenced very clearly in Australia.? When Australians are questioned?about what is "Australian culture" EVERY answer not related to indiginous Australians is a consumer commidity (Victor lawn-mower, Vegemite, Hills Hoist clotheslines,?etc, etc) or at the least highly consumption related (eg organised sport).??The reason is that "Austrialian" cultural development (I mean mainstream) has not been pre-capitalist.? Countries with strong pre-capitalist cultural forms have cultural phenomena like festivals in which financial transactions are not a?main focus.? Mainstream Australian cultural life?has none of these.? In this situation?the working class?has largely been?relegated to?spectatorship rather than being participants in culture life.? Music
 culture means buying CD's to listen to on your expensive hi-fi?or?paying to watch a band, not getting together with friends to play instuments, unless you are unusually talented**.? With the commodification of culture it becomes increasing about passive consumption rather than active participation.? But?paradoxically, the internet - itself a commodity - facilitates, at least in part, a reversal of the trend.? Blogs and other internet?facilities allow for increased participation by?non specialists?- even if this does represent unpaid labour as you say.
?
?
"Consumption, far from being an exercise of individual freedom, is in capitalism a duty and a form of unpaid work which is essential to the ongoing survival of the system."
?
I think maybe you over-generalise here.? Or are you saying that lying on the deckchair of a luxery ocean liner?(leisure consumption) is a form of work? ?: )
?
Cheers
Rohan G
?
?
**Karoke is a highly interesting music culture penomenom.? The transition over time has been:
1 pre-feudal: Get together with fellow community members to produce music.
2?capitalist: Pay?capitalists for the opportunity to hear the specialist musician "labourers".
3 capitalist: Pay capitalists for the opportunity to perform along with prefabricated music that has been produced by specialist musician "labourers".
?


      Stay connected to the people that matter most with a smarter inbox. Take a look http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/smarterinbox

From ratbagradio at gmail.com  Fri Mar  6 22:01:46 2009
From: ratbagradio at gmail.com (Ratbag Media)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 15:01:46 +1000
Subject: [Marxism] Will socialists support socialists in Queensland
	state election?
In-Reply-To: <57b410090903060044m36a4d25fl5f1d7efeb483cb5b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <57b410090903052129g26a3a309i528d2bff920cf156@mail.gmail.com>
	<57b410090903060044m36a4d25fl5f1d7efeb483cb5b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57b410090903062101v45c8318rab4992c6343c6675@mail.gmail.com>

And the rationalisations continue:

[NOTES for offshore observers: The question of the Royal Commission
relates to the death in police custody of an Aboriginal man Mulrunji
Doomadgee after a cop was acquitted of killing him, the cop's history
of violence against Murris was disallowed in court,  and Lex Wotton
was sent to jail for leading a "riot" against the police station on
Palm Island where it occurred in 2004.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Palm_Island_death_in_custody
[Sam Watson has been the leader of the protest campaign since that
murder  as well as being an activist for Indigenous Rights in
Queensland over the past 40 years.
[Unlike a large section of the Indigenous leadership he has not  been
coopted.In this instance his crime is of course that he is  a loyal
member of the Socialist Alliance -- by definition, an 'alliance of
socialists'..And loyal members of the Socialist  Alliance aren't
supposed to exist .
[Sam's most recent involvement has been in support of St Marys parish
priest Peter Kennedy who has run a sort of 'liberation theology'
ministry in the electorate-- focusing on the homeless, aboriginines
and poor -- before the Vatican aligned bishop of Brisbane sacked him
last month.This has led to a groundswell protest campaign  among
parishioners and local Murris have set up a 'tent embassy' in the
church grounds.

[The Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody (1987-1991)
studied and reported on the high level of deaths of Aboriginal people
whilst in police custody after being arrested or convicted of
committing crimes. Its' findings and recommendations have set a
benchmark for protecting indigenous people while in police custody but
hardly any of its recommendations have been put into place anywhere in
Australia. In the case of Mulrunji such procedures on Palm were
completely  absent and a lie-ing conspiracy set in the moment Mulrunji
died alone on the floor of the police cell.

[As for the QLD Greens:The Qld Greens primary focus this election has
been to get Ronan Lee re-elected . Lee, a member of state parliament
for the state seat of Indooroopilly , left the ALP in October last
year and joined the Greens. While Lee has been vocal on environment
issues -- esp the Mary River Dam --  he has made it very clear that he
opposes gay rights and abortion law reform.The Greens have no other
representation at any level of government aside from Lee. However as
pointed out before the preferential system of voting in Australia
allows voters to rank their votes to flow down the card so a vote for
the SA can flow to the SA's second preference  or third as primary
votes are registered. So normally a vote (1) SA is also a vote for the
Greens (which normally get the SA's 2nd preference]   and the SA
usually puts the ALP ahead of the rest of the ticket.So a vote for the
SA gets counted twice: once until the SA  falls out of the race  and
again on the basis of its preference flow. At the last federal
election for example , aside from the Alliance itself,  only two small
far left groups called for a vote for other socialists -- and one of
these  could not bring themselves to mention the Alliance by name. --
dave riley]
------

 As I said, the strained rationalisations on the question of
"socialists NOT supporting socialists" continue:
-----
http://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/82hyd/sam_watson_socialist_allliance_\candidate_for/

-------

dammitdoll 2 points 22 hours ago* [-]

I've seen Sam Watson speak at rallies, and he's awesome to listen to. He's so
angry yet thoughtful and inspiring at the same time.

The only problem I think is that he has the view that change can come through
parliament, that the state is a neutral entity, which kind of contradicts a lot
of the things he says about it and his anger toward it (justified anger). But
there's reformism for you.

All in all though, he's a strong voice for indigenous people, and is completely
against the northern territory intervention, so I think it'd be cool to see him
be elected, even though I don't think it'd change anything.

glparramatta 1 point 21 hours ago[-]

Sam Watson knows that change cannot come simply through parliament of that the
state is neutral. How can you claim that he does? He regularly leads mass demos
of Indigenous people against the governments of both parties and was at the
forefront of the campaign against the killer cop on Palm Island. Hardly a sign
he thinks the state is neutral. I suggest you get in touch with Socialist
Alliance and help Sam's campaign (and talk to him). P.S. please vote Sam's link
up.

keitopop 2 points 21 hours ago[-]

In regard to "how can you claim that he does?" Well, just by sitting there, and
numerous demonstrations, and listening to him.

"A royal commission!" he calls loudly. As if the Royal Commission had ever
helped the Aboriginal people. On the contrary, it was a stall, something that
delayed the process of justice for the Aboriginal people, and in the end made
mere recommendations with no follow up.

That is one example. I agree with dammitdoll, Sam is an inspiring person, but to
someone who has clarity in their politics, and knows the Capitalist State at all
levels is not an agent for change, and would rather concentrate movement on the
ground in opposition to the state, he can come off as being quite contradictory
at times.

Letter writing, appeals to your ministers and electorates, things of that nature
are what makes him contradictory. We should be organising demonstrations,
talking to the people on the streets in Brisbane city, calling in support on the
ground.

glparramatta 0 points 21 hours ago[-]

Keito, That is just ultraleft abstentionism. A royal commission won by a mass
movement is a gain. Even SAlt has called for royal commissions. It is an
achieveable demand that can mobilise people

Is SAlt going to call for its members and supporters to vote for the Greens
rather than Sam Watson?

keitopop 0 points 16 hours ago[-]

Yes, but its been done already, and one of the things we as Socialists should be
advocating is learning from the movements and achievements of the past. We know
we can mobilise people behind the Aboriginal Rights issue, so we should be
calling for something other than a Royal Commission. Again, that was also only
one example. His rhetoric is rittled with contradictions, if I had a tape of one
of his speeches I'd point each of them out to you, but I do not.

I havn't a clue at this time what Socialist Alternative will be calling on its
members to do in the upcoming election, I'm not a member of the National
Executive. I'm guessing they will choose a route that will send a clear message
to the two major parties, that will also be taken notice of. So it could very
well be the Greens.

ratbagradio 0 points 20 hours ago[-]

So rather than vote for or work for Sam Watson -- the political preference has
to be to endorse the Qld Greens?Is that rule written down some where where we
can see it in chapter and verse? The rule that says you have to turn your back
on the Murri struggle for representation, turn your back on committed activists
and movement leaders like Sam for the sake of playing up to the Greens and
denigrating elections as an arena to advance a political perspective? OK --
let's assume you manage to find it in your scheme of things to endorse Sam and
call for a vote for him. You may even decide to contribute to his campaign -- as
Socialist Alternative has done before for the Greens. (But hey aren't those
Greens supposed to be really fooled by parliament?Aren't they totally
electoralist? Don't they believe absolutely that change begins and ends in
parliament? So you think they should be preferenced ahead of Sam?). That then
opens the complication that Sam is one SA candidate among two at this poll. He
may be kosher but no one else in the Socialist Alliance apparently is allowed to
be according to what may be the strange laws you rule your politics by. If Sam
can be supported as an Alliance candidate, why can't other SA candidates?

Take Mike Crook-- the SA candidate for Sandgate. He was in the ALP for 20 years
and was a leading figure in his community Your Rights at Work campaign which
mobilised hundreds across Brisbane's northern suburbs. They even expelled him
from the ALP Socialist Left for not buckling under Laborist pressures! So while
Sam may get a look in, Mike's not worth it, right? Both are socialists. Both
stand on the same platform. Both are committed to Murri rights...Both are
dedicated and respected activists... So if push comes to shove, why endorse Sam
but not Mike?

I'm certain we'd all like to know.


From rohanger at yahoo.com.au  Fri Mar  6 23:05:04 2009
From: rohanger at yahoo.com.au (Rohan Gaiswinkler)
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 22:05:04 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Facebook
Message-ID: <872097.86557.qm@web90501.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

> I was only saying that just because something is free, it is not
> necessarily crappy.

OK. My bad. It's a free social network service that it's pretty good for 
what it does.
?
?
?
Personally I consider having to put up with advertising a form of payment. (Especially those loathsome?bloody sing-song talking "smilies"?during Facebook Scrabble!) 



      Stay connected to the people that matter most with a smarter inbox. Take a look http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/smarterinbox

From Waistline2 at aol.com  Fri Mar  6 23:09:14 2009
From: Waistline2 at aol.com (Waistline2 at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 01:09:14 EST
Subject: [Marxism]
	=?windows-1252?q?=22Cast_aside_illusions!=94_Crisis_dee?=
	=?windows-1252?q?_=3D=3Fwin=2E=2E=2E?=
Message-ID: <bbf.46f7a815.36e3698a@aol.com>

In a message dated 3/6/2009 9:26:34 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
sabocat59 at mac.com writes:

So what wopuld you call this new animal? Global finance  corporatism?

Greg McD
 
 
Reply
 
I tend to shy away from attaching the word corporate to this new animal,  
because corporate implies surplus value. Or rather this animal with a new skin.  
Corporations and monopoly most certainly exists but the idea is to try and  
capture the spirit of the new world of financialization. 
 
Speculative capital as dominator of the financial capital regime. 
 
Dominator implying a decisive sector/form of capital writing the  economic, 
social and political agenda for the world total capital. At each  juncture of 
the development of capitalism and the industrial system a form of  capital 
dominates and its corresponding political representatives write the  agenda for 
capital . . . the country. 
 
Speculative capital is not a "separate category" to be treated as so fixed  
rigid entity. 
 
Had industrial capital continued to dominate America politically after the  
Civil War, rather than Wall Street finance capital, Wall Street Imperialism,  
political shift in the country would have probably been delayed into the early  
1900's. The domination of Wall Street finance capital over industrial capital 
 took place on the basis of financing the Civil War and did not mean the  
abolishing of "industrial" or productive capital. 
 
Another example of the shift in the form of capital and the  political/social 
consequence was the transition from the agrarian  bourgeoisie (capital) to 
the industrial bourgeoisie, which in the last instance  was case of the Civil 
War. 
 
This is not to say I am hung up on a name as long as we inch closer to  
capturing reality and concepts that mirror this moment of time. 
 
WL. 
**************Need a job? Find employment help in your area. 
(http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=employment_agencies&ncid=emlcntusyelp00000005)


From michael at ecst.csuchico.edu  Fri Mar  6 23:43:35 2009
From: michael at ecst.csuchico.edu (michael perelman)
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 22:43:35 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Request for comments on the new intro for my book
Message-ID: <49B21797.90009@ecst.csuchico.edu>

I just completed a nearly final version of The Invisible Handcuffs of 
Capitalism: How Market Tyranny Stifles the Economy by Stunting Workers. 
  I have put out earlier versions, but this one is very different.  The 
second half is totally new.

I would very much appreciate any comments.  Thanks in advance.

http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com/2009/03/07/request-for-comments-on-new-introduction-for-my-new-book/

-- 
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA
95929

530 898 5321
fax 530 898 5901
http://michaelperelman.wordpress.com



From lueko.willms at t-online.de  Fri Mar  6 23:05:37 2009
From: lueko.willms at t-online.de (=?iso-8859-1?q?L=FCko_Willms?=)
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 07:05:37 +0100 (MEZ)
Subject: [Marxism] Are we facing the mother of all bubbles?
In-Reply-To: <2fa158550903041004q55d7ce88o75ca6c6e974bf770@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2fa158550903041004q55d7ce88o75ca6c6e974bf770@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <000.a03e0d00b10eb249.003@lws-media.de>

On Wed, 4 Mar 2009 19:04:37 +0100, N?stor Gorojovsky wrote:

> Against anything received economic knowledge would suggest, the
> currency of the USofAm is increasing its value.

  I disagree. The USA is issuing government bonds amounting to many 
hundredthousands of millions of USD for all the bank bailouts, and somebody 
has to shell out their good money for those bonds. And that somebody is the 
world. So the flow of money into the USofA is increasing. 

  The richer imperialist nations try to solve the world economic crisis on the 
back of the poorer nations. 

  On the other hand, the USD/EUR exchange rate moves ina reverse 
proportion to the price of oil. 

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

From johnedmundson at paradise.net.nz  Sat Mar  7 00:04:18 2009
From: johnedmundson at paradise.net.nz (John)
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 20:04:18 +1300
Subject: [Marxism] When Facebook Isn't Fun, or...
In-Reply-To: <989065.8588.qm@web90505.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <989065.8588.qm@web90505.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1236409458.8808.22.camel@john-desktop>

On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 20:34 -0800, rohanger at yahoo.com.au wrote:

> **Karoke is a highly interesting music culture penomenom.  The
>   transition over time has been:
> 1 pre-feudal: Get together with fellow community members to produce music.
> 2 capitalist: Pay capitalists for the opportunity to hear the specialist musician
>  "labourers".
> 3 capitalist: Pay capitalists for the opportunity to perform along with
>  prefabricated music that has been produced by specialist musician
>  "labourers".

Actually there are 2 parts to 2 above; paying to attend a performance
and later, paying to buy a recording.

But I agree that karaoke is a really interesting development. I've
always been a non-singer, the exception being that since my daughter
discovered the Pogues at about age 12, raucous singalongs to the car
stereo have been obligatory every time we go anywhere! Still I would
never have dreamed of singing in front of anyone else. But a couple of
(Asian) friends have managed to convince me to have a go at karaoke and
I have to admit I've had a great time. New Zealand is a country where
the white population at least - me included - don't have a culture of
performing music at social gatherings. Music is totally commodified. So
I wonder whether karaoke, where the atmosphere is much more about
participation and enjoyment than judgement will see a shift in the
musical culture. And of course there are free downloadable versions of
karaoke available on the net now, and these support the addition of new
song files too, so maybe it's another case of information wanting to be
free.
Cheers,
John



From sabocat59 at mac.com  Sat Mar  7 02:40:28 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 09:40:28 +0000
Subject: [Marxism]
	=?windows-1252?q?=22Cast_aside_illusions!=94_Crisis_dee?=
	=?windows-1252?q?_=3D=3Fwin=2E=2E=2E?=
Message-ID: <1667055770-1236418944-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1277990986-@bxe1137.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

Corporatism is not long for corporation.  It is rather a more polite or neutral term for the original fascism of the Mussolini variety implying a total merger between the state and big business.  

So finance corporatism would mean that capital is in the hands of that economic sector subsuming industrial capital.  Not that we are in any way post industrialist, not by a long stretch 

I think the term is pretty descriptive.  

Greg McD  
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T


From sabocat59 at mac.com  Sat Mar  7 03:28:47 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 10:28:47 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] When Facebook Isn't Fun, or...
Message-ID: <811989382-1236421833-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1734781230-@bxe1210.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

Rohan G wrote:

(Music culture means buying CD's to listen to on your expensive hi-fi?or?paying to watch a band, not getting together with friends to play instuments, unless you are unusually talented**.? With the commodification of culture it becomes increasing about passive consumption rather than active participation.? But?paradoxically, the internet - itself a commodity - facilitates, at least in part, a reversal of the trend.? Blogs and other internet?facilities allow for increased participation by?non specialists?- even if this does represent unpaid labour as you say.?)

In terms of music culture I think.    we've gone beyond the "listening to cd's on expensive stereos" stage. Fact is people don't even really listen to music anymore.  That is to say people may hear music but they're not really listening. Music has become background noise for people who are engaged in other tasks.  

And if they do listen its more of the "dancing alone with my ipod in a solipsistic state variety" than anything else. Music has become just another distraction and a way to keep people isolated.   ? 

My audiophile cohorts who spend more time spinning vinyl than salivating over the newest hi fi gadget are always complaining about this.  People think it strange when we suggest to sit down and listen to music, like active listening is not really an alternative, they say. Of course the whole purpose of having a really good hi fi system is to recreate the auditory experience of live performance like the band is in the room. That's why musicians tend to have the best stereo systems. A good stereo system is emotionally engaging for that reason. 

Jerry Garcia was partial to McIntosh components, for example. 

But humans are more visually oriented anyway. We follow our eyes not our ears. 

Which is why people are more interested in multi channel as opposed to two channel systems. They want to feel the movie spectacle vibrate through their bodies. It makes watching movies more emotionally engaging I suppose.  
 
At least people still go to hear live music if they can afford it.     

Karaoke is really just an american idol fantasy. The person singing doesn't play any instruments or write any lyrics. Its not a very authentic form of self expression.  

Greg McDonald
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

From debs4prez at comcast.net  Sat Mar  7 03:35:46 2009
From: debs4prez at comcast.net (debs4prez at comcast.net)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 10:35:46 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [Marxism] Fwd: Matt Reichel Wins 5th CD Primary and Needs Your
	Support Today!
In-Reply-To: <255091.16441.qm@web81705.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1535936551.5868381236422146020.JavaMail.root@sz0030a.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net>


--- On Sat, 3/7/09, Your Friend Alex <obeynow20001 at yahoo.com> wrote: 

From: Your Friend Alex <obeynow20001 at yahoo.com> Subject: Fw: Matt Reichel Wins 5th CD Primary and Needs Your Support Today! To: "Alex" <obeynow20001 at yahoo.com> Date: Saturday, March 7, 2009, 4:19 AM See below and mattreichel.us 

He is trying to raise $1000 by the end of the weekend and has $250 at last count. He is running against the machine and against a nazi sympathizer for Rahm Emanuel's old seat. Help pull the debate in a pro-worker, pro-immigrant direction! 

Alex 

*************************** 

*************************** 

http://www.votenader.org 

http://www.ilgp.org 

http://www.northsidegreenparty.org 

http://www.greenallianceusa.org 

http://www.labornotes.org 

http://www.solidarity-us.org 

http://www.internationalviewpoint.org 



----- Original Message ----- From: Matt Reichel 

To: IllinoisGreensFocus @yahoogroups. com ; cookcodiscussion@ yahoogroups. com 

Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 8:58 AM Subject: Re: [IllinoisGreensFocu s] Re: [cookcodiscussion] Re: [Green5th] Final Election Tally 







The election results will be certified and "officialized" today. 

I cannot stress enough how important it is to get funding into this campaign quickly. We have less than 5 weeks to organize in this general election period, and we are in need of campaign material: yard signs, buttons, more campaign literature, bumper stickers, and so on. 

Online donations can be taken through our website, and checks can be mailed to: Matt Reichel for Congress 
1726 W. Carmen Chicago, IL 60640 

Since yesterday morning, we have raised $180 online, and have received a few pledges for checks to be sent in. We need to get this number up to $1,000 by the end of the weekend, so that I can send an order in for campaign materials and we can start getting a "Matt!" yard sign in every progressive' s yard throughout the district. I want to see a sea of green yard signs here on the north and northwest side by April. 

By the way, Commissioner Quigley told NPR yesterday that due to his environmental accomplishments in the county board, "I am more green than many people in the Green Party." The war of words has begun. 

I retorted: "If he is so Green, then he should refuse to accept corporate contributions over the next five weeks and do battle on an equal playing field." 

Thanks again! 

Sincerely, Matt Reichel www.mattreichel. us 

--- On Thu, 3/5/09, Steve Alesch - 2009 Green Party Candidate for DuPage County Winfield Township Trustee - www.votestev <steve.alesch@ votesteve. org> wrote: 


From: Steve Alesch - 2009 Green Party Candidate for DuPage County Winfield Township Trustee - www.votestev <steve.alesch@ votesteve. org> Subject: [IllinoisGreensFocu s] Re: [cookcodiscussion] Re: [Green5th] Final Election Tally To: Date: Thursday, March 5, 2009, 2:21 AM 






Congratulations to all the candidates. I have a $100 check for whomever is the official Green Party candidate! 
-- 
Steve Alesch 
2009 Green Party Candidate for DuPage County Winfield Township Trustee - www.votesteve. org 

Vote for Fiscal Responsibility, Peace, Social Justice, Ecological Wisdom, and Grassroots Democracy! 

Vote Green Party on April 7, 2009! www.votesteve. org www.dupagegreens. org www.ilgp.org www.gp.org 


Patrick Kelly wrote: 



Congratulations, Matt, and to the other candidates as well on a great campaign! 

Patrick K 

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 3:53 PM, Matt Reichel <reichel at ymail. com> wrote: All Precincts reporting in the IL 5th District Congressional Race: 

Matt 

Reichel 
166 Deb 

Gordils 
155 Mark Arnold Frederickson 70 Alan Augustson 
62 Simon Ribeiro 
37 

Thank you all very much for all the help you have given during this election. I look forward to working with everyone over the next five weeks as we organize to take down the machine on April 7th. 

Canvassing every Saturday and Sunday, meet at the office, 1726 W. Carmen, 

2pm. It's warming up; great way to get some 

exercise. 

Sincerely, Matt Reichel www.mattreichel. us 












__._,_.___ 






Messages in this topic (2) 



Reply (via web post) | 

Start a new topic 




Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar 





MARKETPLACE 



From ian at ianpace.com  Sat Mar  7 04:03:41 2009
From: ian at ianpace.com (Ian Pace)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 11:03:41 -0000
Subject: [Marxism] When Facebook Isn't Fun, or...
References: <811989382-1236421833-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1734781230-@bxe1210.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
Message-ID: <0469389FC02A45A3824FBF949F695060@IanPacePC>

There are strains of pre-industrial nostalgia underlying some of these 
arguments. I can't see anything socialist in a hearkening back to musical 
life before the division of labour, before the advent of recordings, 
electronics, advanced means of reproduction, etc., in which there was a far 
greater stratification between aristocratic, bourgeois, and folk music. 
Consumerist aesthetics undoubtedly inform the majority of musical 
consumption, but that's every bit as true of those supposedly discerning 
listeners who seek out particular concerts and recordings (in fact, 
especially true of them, many of whom collect CDs in the same way as Imelda 
Marcos collected shoes) as it is of those who employ music as background 
listening.

I encounter so much snide disparagement of the latter by musicians, 
classical music listeners, and some jazz and 'rockist' (those promulgating 
the supposed superiority of 'authentic' rock as against 'manufactured' pop) 
snobs; but what is the great benefit of the type of 'active listening' 
usually advocated as an alternative? Usually simply making a fetish of 
certain aspects of the music, relatively meaningless in themselves 
(structural complexity, harmonic or timbral exoticism, virtuosity, etc.), 
which serve to remove the music from a relationship with lived experience 
and the world and instead render it the property of the disinterested 
aesthete. All of this, and its associated discourse, is purely about 
mystifying music and elevating the status of those who claim to truly 
'appreciate' it. And this in itself helps to reinforce the social status of 
those who have been taught the 'correct' approach to music and culture 
(disinterested, pseudo-discerning, and above all depoliticised (which 
invariably means right wing reactionary)) through their bourgeois education.

There is such a thing as an active listening which focuses upon how the 
social context of particular music informs its very fabric, and also how 
changing modes of reception relate to social and ideological aspects of 
particular times and places. This attitude is most common in the best jazz 
criticism, but is very uncommon in other fields. There is a real virtue in 
this approach, as it refuses to consider music as being autonomous of time 
and place (and thus history, society, ideology). But otherwise, I see no 
reason to value the experience of sitting down and listening to a Pink Floyd 
album, or buying tickets to see the latest over-hyped Russian violinist, 
smothering some music with copious amount of vibrato and exaggerated rubato 
in order to lend it a mystical aura, than a teenager listening to some hits 
in the background or on their iPod.

Solidarity,
Ian 



From david at miradoiro.com  Sat Mar  7 04:21:36 2009
From: david at miradoiro.com (=?Windows-1252?Q?David_Pic=F3n_=C1lvarez?=)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 12:21:36 +0100
Subject: [Marxism] When Facebook Isn't Fun, or...
References: <811989382-1236421833-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1734781230-@bxe1210.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
Message-ID: <27D3A03B6EDB4240AC63BA7AC5C8DC5B@Nautilus>

From: <sabocat59 at mac.com>
[Snipped some text with which I mostly agree.]
> Karaoke is really just an american idol fantasy. The person singing 
> doesn't play any instruments or write any lyrics. Its not a very authentic 
> form of self expression.

I think you're reading this wrong, or, at least, where I live karaoke has a 
different character. Karaoke is basically a modernization of what people 
used to do in gatherings: after having a meal and drinking, people would 
start singing. Most people wouldn't know how to play instruments or make up 
lyrics of their own (although some of our folk songs have forms that help in 
that regard, making it easy to add verses). But nonetheless I wouldn't say 
such singing would be an unauthentic form of self expression, it's just the 
expression of a collective cultural corpus instead of the corpus coming out 
of a single creative individual or a small group of them. Songs would get 
altered, verses added, modified or removed, according to popular taste, and 
so on. This is where karaoke loses something of that, because the music and 
lyrics are always the same, but on the other hand it helps people sing along 
to a melody, and it makes for a more complete experience of the music. 
People singing along after gatherings was not enough when people could 
instead turn on a stereo and listen to music. So I think karaoke is more 
ambiguous than how you portray it.

BTW, there's something incredibly funny about hearing a whole room of 
20-something-year-olds (me included) singing along to a folk song that was 
old in the 50s. Somehow songs that before karaoke young people would refuse 
as "old-fashioned" or "music for old people" are coming back into their own.

--David.



From sabocat59 at mac.com  Sat Mar  7 04:35:31 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 11:35:31 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] When Facebook Isn't Fun, or..
Message-ID: <1610795466-1236425839-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-838673754-@bxe1243.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

Ian Pace wrote:

(There is such a thing as an active listening which focuses upon how the social context of particular music informs its very fabric, and also how changing modes of reception relate to social and ideological aspects of particular times and places. This attitude is most common in the best jazz criticism, but is very uncommon in other fields. There is a real virtue in this approach, as it refuses to consider music as being autonomous of time and place (and thus history, society, ideology). But otherwise, I see no reason to value the experience of sitting down and listening to a Pink Floyd album, or buying tickets to see the latest over-hyped Russian violinist, smothering some music with copious amount of vibrato and exaggerated rubato in order to lend it a mystical aura, than a teenager listening to some hits in the background or on their iPod)
__________________________
To be sure there are a lot of mystifying snobs in the audiophile world.  Try reading some of the Stereophile mag reviews for example. 

But what you call active listening is not really listening, its more of a mode of discussion, or written criticism, to set the stage as it were, for the musicians who were playing. 

Although I agree with the point that serious jazz and blues writing on the subject incorporates the social and historical context, like the music which came out of the NYC loft scene, or the musicians which congregated around the Blue Note label. There have been plenty of good books written on the subject.   

And then there's the whole anthropogical take on the subject and the people like Alan Lomax who recorded legendary yet forgotten blues musicians. They helped to preserve a whole world of music which would otherwise have faded into nothingness. 

But I don't think it's snobbish or mystifying to try to recreate live sound on a stereo. Its simply more enjoyable than listening to music on a crappy system. Musicians and others who stick to this argument tend to be labelled elitist but I think we have a point.  Of course you wouldn't know unless you actually heard music coming through a good system.  

In terms of comparing music collectors to Imelda Marcos, that's pretty funny.  I get a lot of joy out of finding old vinyl on original labels and cleaning the records so they sound good.  Just the other day I discovered a boatload of ECM label vinyl.  ECM is a german label which produced very high quality vinyl and recorded people like Keith Jarrett, Bobo Stenson and Jan Garbarek.  Great stuff.  I paid $3 a record and have a bunch of records which sound way better than any overly produced cd. Just call me Imelda on the cheap.  


Greg McD
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

From sabocat59 at mac.com  Sat Mar  7 04:40:51 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 11:40:51 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] When Facebook Isn't Fun, or..
Message-ID: <1876846782-1236426161-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1012252164-@bxe1243.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

That's an interesting take David.  I think you make a very good point. 

Communal activity is in our genes which is perhaps why the spector of socialism will always be present to haunt the rulers.  

Greg McD
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T


From ian at ianpace.com  Sat Mar  7 05:04:18 2009
From: ian at ianpace.com (Ian Pace)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 12:04:18 -0000
Subject: [Marxism] When Facebook Isn't Fun, or..
References: <1610795466-1236425839-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-838673754-@bxe1243.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
Message-ID: <31C790C3AE35487B878F22AA357A9E71@IanPacePC>

Greg McD> And then there's the whole anthropogical take on the subject and 
the people like Alan Lomax who recorded legendary yet forgotten blues 
musicians. They helped to preserve a whole world of music which would 
otherwise have faded into nothingness.
>
This is something of a devil's advocate's point: whilst in this particular 
case I can absolutely see the point in preserving in such music, more widely 
might some music be better left to die a natural death? The instinct to 
preserve historical music, at least in the West, only dates from the 
mid-19th century (with that era's strong historicising tendencies). In the 
classical world, I see the tendency towards preservation (and continuous 
digging up of obscure works and composers from past eras) as tied in with 
idealisation of hideously unjust former times. Presentation and appreciation 
of the operas of the French baroque, and styles of performance which 
emphasise the rigid hierarchical structures contained within the music, has 
undoubtedly something to do with a nostalgia for the supposed splendour of 
the absolutist feudal system of the time; similarly the mixture of 
exoticism, mysticism, canned sensuousness and de-subjectivisation in 
Tchaikovsky mirrors (and quite consciously so) the whole aura created around 
the Tsarist monarchy (and for this very reason it was despised by early 
musical revolutionaries in the Leninist era, though in the Stalin/Zhdanov 
times that music which had become part of a nationalistic construction of 
'tradition', including most of the romantics, became presented as some type 
of 'workers' music'). I wouldn't be unhappy to see much of this archaic 
music die away.

 > But I don't think it's snobbish or mystifying to try to recreate live 
sound on a stereo. Its simply more enjoyable than listening to music on a 
crappy system.

Sure, that wasn't really what I was saying. Though I do have doubts about 
the idea that a recording is at best a reproduction of a live performance, 
rather than something in its own right. In a time when bands and many other 
musicians make recordings first, then go on tour on the back of those 
(rather than the other way round, as in former times), I do think this model 
needs rethinking. Not least also because of the musical possibilities 
(especially involving electronics) available uniquely in the studio.

Solidarity,
Ian 



From sabocat59 at mac.com  Sat Mar  7 05:26:07 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 12:26:07 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] When Facebook Isn't Fun, or..
Message-ID: <1742641849-1236428873-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-11168653-@bxe1243.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

Ian Pace wrote:

 Though I do have doubts about the idea that a recording is at best a reproduction of a live performance, rather than something in its own right. In a time when bands and many other musicians make recordings first, then go on tour on the back of those (rather than the other way round, as in former times), I do think this model needs rethinking. Not least also because of the musical possibilities (especially involving electronics) available uniquely in the studio.

___________________________

Well yes.  Some audiophiles say live performance is really an excuse to socialize and when they want to do serious listening they fire up the amp. 
I think what is really interesting in terms of music, recording and the internet is the possibility for direct marketing by musicians. It's now possible to have your own hi tech recording studio. 

And many musicians are doing a hybrid approach. They are also working with a multitude of mom and pop vinyl production companies which have sprung up.  So you can buy a vinyl record, which seals in the profit for the musician, and inside you will find website directions for a free mp3 download, so the music can spread and attract new buyers. 

You also see this trend emerging among stereo production companies. There's an interesting co. called Cullen which has made hi fi components for major manufacturers over the years.  When the latter went offshore they started their own direct marketing strategy and began working for themselves.  They employ Bang and Olufsen's ICE technology and sell high quality components at about 50% of the cost of similar products on the market.  

Greg McD
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

From sabocat59 at mac.com  Sat Mar  7 06:13:43 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 13:13:43 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] When Facebook Isn't Fun, or..
Message-ID: <549219367-1236431733-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-545027908-@bxe1260.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

Ian Pace wrote:

This is something of a devil's advocate's point: whilst in this particular case I can absolutely see the point in preserving in such music, more widely might some music be better left to die a natural death? The instinct to preserve historical music, at least in the West, only dates from the mid-19th century (with that era's strong historicising tendencies). In the classical world, I see the tendency towards preservation (and continuous digging up of obscure works and composers from past eras) as tied in with idealisation of hideously unjust former times. Presentation and appreciation of the operas of the French baroque, and styles of performance which emphasise the rigid hierarchical structures contained within the music, has undoubtedly something to do with a nostalgia for the supposed splendour of the absolutist feudal system of the time; similarly the mixture of exoticism, mysticism, canned sensuousness and de-subjectivisation in Tchaikovsky mirrors (and quite consciously so) the whole aura created around the Tsarist monarchy (and for this very reason it was despised by early musical revolutionaries in the Leninist era, though in the Stalin/Zhdanov times that music which had become part of a nationalistic construction of 'tradition', including most of the romantics, became presented as some type of 'workers' music'). I wouldn't be unhappy to see much of this archaic music die away.
------------------------------------
You won't get any argument from me there. I'm not much of a classical buff anyway, although I am fond of some of the contemporary classical composers like Arvo Part,  Henryk Gorecki,  and Adams. Part's "Tabula Rasa" is a favorite of mine and Gorecki's third makes me cry every time I listen to it. Of course you also cannot go wrong with Glenn Gould on Bach.  

But I much prefer not to separate genres. Charlie Parker was a big Bartok fan for instance. I think the Duke had it right when he said there are only two kinds of music, good and bad. 

But back to the whole context thing. The big band music of mid century was really live dance music and when economics dictated a small band approach you had bebop etc. I think that jazz ossified somewhat when the live dance music component faded away. 

That's why I'm a big Sun Ra fan.  Sun Ra incorporated vaudeville into his scene in a brilliant manner. The live show or happening was an important current for him up until the end, and he was experimenting with controlled free form way before Cecil Taylor. 

Of course Monk had elements of that approach as well but now I'm rambling.  

Greg McD  
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

From sabocat59 at mac.com  Sat Mar  7 07:05:37 2009
From: sabocat59 at mac.com (sabocat59 at mac.com)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 14:05:37 +0000
Subject: [Marxism] Wiki on Sun Ra
Message-ID: <341745836-1236434836-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-840649094-@bxe1225.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Ra



Draft and wartime experiences 

In October 1942 Blount received a selective service notification that he had been drafted into the Military of the United States. He quickly declared himself a conscientious objector, citing religious objections to war and killing, his financial support of his great-aunt Ida, and his chronic hernia. His case was rejected by the local draft board, and in his appeal to the national draft board, Blount wrote that the lack of black men on the draft appeal board "smacks of Hitlerism".[12] His family was deeply embarrassed by Sonny's refusal to join the military, and he was effectively ostracized by many of his relatives. Blount was eventually approved for alternate service at Civilian Public Service camp in Pennsylvania. However, Blount didn't appear at the camp as scheduled on December 8, 1942, and shortly thereafter, he was arrested in Alabama. In court, Blount declared that even alternate service was unacceptable to him, and he debated the judge on points of law and Biblical interpretation. Though sympathetic to Blount, the judge also declared that he was clearly in violation of the law, and was risking forcible induction into the U.S. Military. Blount declared that if he were inducted, he would use his military weapons and training to kill the first high-ranking military officer he could. The judge sentenced Blount to jail (pending draft board and CPS rulings), and then declared "I've never seen a nigger like you before;" Blount replied, "No, and you never will again."[13] 
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

From lnp3 at panix.com  Sat Mar  7 07:11:42 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 09:11:42 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Israel annexing East Jerusalem, says EU
Message-ID: <49B2809E.7040602@panix.com>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/07/israel-palestine-eu-report-jerusalem
Israel annexing East Jerusalem, says EU
by Rory McCarthy

40-year-old Palestinian Mahmoud al-Abbasi stands amid the rubble of his 
home after it was demolished by the Jerusalem municipality in the East 
Jerusalem neighborhood of Silwan. Photograph: Gali Tibbon

A confidential EU report accuses the Israeli government of using 
settlement expansion, house demolitions, discriminatory housing policies 
and the West Bank barrier as a way of "actively pursuing the illegal 
annexation" of East Jerusalem.

The document says Israel has accelerated its plans for East Jerusalem, 
and is undermining the Palestinian Authority's credibility and weakening 
support for peace talks. "Israel's actions in and around Jerusalem 
constitute one of the most acute challenges to Israeli-Palestinian 
peace-making," says the document, EU Heads of Mission Report on East 
Jerusalem.

The report, obtained by the Guardian, is dated 15 December 2008. It 
acknowledges Israel's legitimate security concerns in Jerusalem, but 
adds: "Many of its current illegal actions in and around the city have 
limited security justifications."

"Israeli 'facts on the ground' - including new settlements, construction 
of the barrier, discriminatory housing policies, house demolitions, 
restrictive permit regime and continued closure of Palestinian 
institutions - increase Jewish Israeli presence in East Jerusalem, 
weaken the Palestinian community in the city, impede Palestinian urban 
development and separate East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank," 
the report says.

The document has emerged at a time of mounting concern over Israeli 
policies in East Jerusalem. Two houses were demolished on Monday just 
before the arrival of the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, and a 
further 88 are scheduled for demolition, all for lack of permits. 
Clinton described the demolitions as "unhelpful", noting that they 
violated Israel's obligations under the US "road map" for peace.

The EU report goes further, saying that the demolitions are "illegal 
under international law, serve no obvious purpose, have severe 
humanitarian effects, and fuel bitterness and extremism." The EU raised 
its concern in a formal diplomatic representation on December 1, it says.

It notes that although Palestinians in the east represent 34% of the 
city's residents, only 5%-10% of the municipal budget is spent in their 
areas, leaving them with poor services and infrastructure.

Israel issues fewer than 200 permits a year for Palestinian homes and 
leaves only 12% of East Jerusalem available for Palestinian residential 
use. As a result many homes are built without Israeli permits. About 400 
houses have been demolished since 2004 and a further 1,000 demolition 
orders have yet to be carried out, it said.

City officials dismissed criticisms of its housing policy as "a 
disinformation campaign". "Mayor Nir Barkat continues to promote 
investments in infrastructure, construction and education in East 
Jerusalem, while at the same time upholding the law throughout West and 
East Jerusalem equally without bias," the mayor's office said after 
Clinton's visit.

However, the EU says the fourth Geneva convention prevents an occupying 
power extending its jurisdiction to occupied territory. Israel occupied 
the east of the city in the 1967 six day war and later annexed it. The 
Palestinians claim East Jerusalem as the capital of their future state.

The EU says settlement are being built in the east of the city at a 
"rapid pace". Since the Annapolis peace talks began in late 2007, nearly 
5,500 new settlement housing units have been submitted for public 
review, with 3,000 so far approved, the report says. There are now about 
470,000 settlers in the occupied territories, including 190,000 in East 
Jerusalem.

The EU is particularly concerned about settlements inside the Old City, 
where there were plans to build a Jewish settlement of 35 housing units 
in the Muslim quarter, as well as expansion plans for Silwan, just 
outside the Old City walls.

The goal, it says, is to "create territorial contiguity" between East 
Jerusalem settlements and the Old City and to "sever" East Jerusalem and 
its settlement blocks from the West Bank.

There are plans for 3,500 housing units, an industrial park, two police 
stations and other infrastructure in a controversial area known as E1, 
between East Jerusalem and the West Bank settlement of Ma'ale Adumim, 
home to 31,000 settlers. Israeli measures in E1 were "one of the most 
significant challenges to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process", the 
report says.

Mark Regev, spokesman for the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, said 
conditions for Palestinians living in East Jerusalem were better than in 
the West Bank. "East Jerusalem residents are under Israeli law and they 
were offered full Israeli citizenship after that law was passed in 
1967," he said. "We are committed to the continued development of the 
city for the benefit of all its population."


From lnp3 at panix.com  Sat Mar  7 07:40:52 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 09:40:52 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Zizek interview in the FT
Message-ID: <49B28774.7070505@panix.com>

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/06b42e32-09dd-11de-add8-0000779fd2ac.html

I've sort of lost the appetite for shooting fish in a barrel, but can't 
let this paragraph from the article slip by without comment:

---
What we often fail to understand, he argues, is how Stalinism was a 
counter-revolution, reacting against the extreme ?post-human? utopian 
ambitions that were championed by Bolshevik leaders in the 1920s. 
Communist extremists predicted the day when workers would live in a 
perfect society with no need for emotions, or even names, and all 
sexuality and family life would be suppressed. But Stalin was far more 
conservative, reacting against experimental art and insisting on the 
sanctity of family life. ?Stalinism reacted against these negative 
dystopias that were even more terrifying. Stalinism was, in that sense, 
a return to normal life. People forget that.?
---

This encapsulates exactly what is wrong with Zizek's "Marxism". It is 
utterly uninterested in socio-economic forces, such as the "scissor" 
effect that antagonized the peasants, the loss of Bolshevik cadre during 
the civil war, the failure of the revolutionary movement to take power 
elsewhere in the 1920s, etc. Everything gets reduced to a culture war 
over family values, as if Stalin were Jerry Falwell wearing a 
hammer-and-sickle instead of a cross. How Zizek manages to get the 
reputation of brilliant Marxist genius is one of the greatest mysteries 
of the past 50 years. But then again, reviewers still fawn over Woody Allen.


From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Sat Mar  7 08:25:28 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 10:25:28 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Zizek interview in the FT
In-Reply-To: <49B28774.7070505@panix.com>
References: <49B28774.7070505@panix.com>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903070725q300b439cpf4e1e13c834aae79@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> wrote:
> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/06b42e32-09dd-11de-add8-0000779fd2ac.html
>
> I've sort of lost the appetite for shooting fish in a barrel, but can't
> let this paragraph from the article slip by without comment:
>
> ---
> What we often fail to understand, he argues, is how Stalinism was a
> counter-revolution, reacting against the extreme ?post-human? utopian
> ambitions that were championed by Bolshevik leaders in the 1920s.
> Communist extremists predicted the day when workers would live in a
> perfect society with no need for emotions, or even names, and all
> sexuality and family life would be suppressed. But Stalin was far more
> conservative, reacting against experimental art and insisting on the
> sanctity of family life. ?Stalinism reacted against these negative
> dystopias that were even more terrifying. Stalinism was, in that sense,
> a return to normal life. People forget that.?
> ---
>
> This encapsulates exactly what is wrong with Zizek's "Marxism". It is
> utterly uninterested in socio-economic forces, such as the "scissor"
> effect that antagonized the peasants, the loss of Bolshevik cadre during
> the civil war, the failure of the revolutionary movement to take power
> elsewhere in the 1920s, etc. Everything gets reduced to a culture war
> over family values, as if Stalin were Jerry Falwell wearing a
> hammer-and-sickle instead of a cross. How Zizek manages to get the
> reputation of brilliant Marxist genius is one of the greatest mysteries
> of the past 50 years. But then again, reviewers still fawn over Woody Allen.
>

This is unfair...he is a cultural theorist, so he focuses on culture.
Are you also going to criticize Gindin or Panitch on the basis that
they "only talk about economics"?

The question here is: thus culture play a role? Since at least
Gramsci, Marxists have believed that yes, it does.

I don't think Zizek ever said that *only* culture matters. Where is he
saying that in the above passage?


From lnp3 at panix.com  Sat Mar  7 08:38:11 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 10:38:11 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Zizek interview in the FT
In-Reply-To: <908b689f0903070725q300b439cpf4e1e13c834aae79@mail.gmail.com>
References: <49B28774.7070505@panix.com>
	<908b689f0903070725q300b439cpf4e1e13c834aae79@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <49B294E3.4080702@panix.com>

Ruthless Critic of All that Exists wrote:
> This is unfair...he is a cultural theorist, so he focuses on culture.
> Are you also going to criticize Gindin or Panitch on the basis that
> they "only talk about economics"?

I agree that he is a cultural theorist, but the FT refers to him 
repeatedly as a Marxist and that is the reputation he enjoys.

> The question here is: thus culture play a role? Since at least
> Gramsci, Marxists have believed that yes, it does.

As somebody who reviews a movie a week, I can say that culture does play 
a role. But I also write about socio-economic forces such as, for 
example, the role of slavery in the origins of capitalism. Zizek is 
strictly a lightweight on such matters.

> I don't think Zizek ever said that *only* culture matters. Where is he
> saying that in the above passage?

Look, if you think that the rise of Stalin was a family values response 
to Bolshevik sexual experimentation, be my guest.


From mqduck at sonic.net  Sat Mar  7 08:57:55 2009
From: mqduck at sonic.net (Jeffrey Thomas Piercy)
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 07:57:55 -0800
Subject: [Marxism] Facebook
In-Reply-To: <CF0E2DEF7FE845A4963AF498CC239CD9@your4f1261a8e5>
References: <49B1A8A2.1050205@panix.com><595539.11571.qm@web81805.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<49B1ABCF.5070104@panix.com><B3F3036F4C414418A22792136014FFC4@your4f1261a8e5>	<49B1BA68.1000705@panix.com>
	<CF0E2DEF7FE845A4963AF498CC239CD9@your4f1261a8e5>
Message-ID: <49B29983.2030403@sonic.net>

  Erik Carlos Toren wrote:
>> Nobody I know is using MySpace, but I get about an invitation a day to
>> join some Facebook group. Hi5, I never heard of.
> 
> I don't think there are many folks of your generation in MySpace. Hell, even 
> my generation (Xgeners) are mostly in Facebook. MySpace is mostly teens and 
> early 20's.

I resent that. Us people in our early 20s (wait, am I in my mid 20s 
now?) stopped using Myspace a long time ago (in Internet terms, anyway). 
Honestly, I don't know who the hell's using Myspace anymore.

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


From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Sat Mar  7 09:07:39 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 11:07:39 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Zizek interview in the FT
In-Reply-To: <49B294E3.4080702@panix.com>
References: <49B28774.7070505@panix.com>
	<908b689f0903070725q300b439cpf4e1e13c834aae79@mail.gmail.com>
	<49B294E3.4080702@panix.com>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903070807h198fca2cr7108df835ca172e4@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> wrote:
> Ruthless Critic of All that Exists wrote:

>
> Look, if you think that the rise of Stalin was a family values response
> to Bolshevik sexual experimentation, be my guest.

He's not saying that this is the *entire* explanation of Stalinism --
just that this was *part* of Stalinism's appeal to the masses. It was
also paradigmatic (a "paradigmatic" example), I think he's arguing, of
the *general* thirst for stability and "normalcy" after the trauma and
tumult of the early years, all of which led people to favor Stalinism.
So it's not as if the psychological/cultural explanation is totally
disjoint from the economic/political one. They are both materially
produced.


From ectoren at sbcglobal.net  Sat Mar  7 09:10:17 2009
From: ectoren at sbcglobal.net (Erik Carlos Toren)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 08:10:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Marxism] Facebook
References: <49B1A8A2.1050205@panix.com><595539.11571.qm@web81805.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<49B1ABCF.5070104@panix.com><B3F3036F4C414418A22792136014FFC4@your4f1261a8e5>
	<49B1BA68.1000705@panix.com>
	<CF0E2DEF7FE845A4963AF498CC239CD9@your4f1261a8e5>
	<49B29983.2030403@sonic.net>
Message-ID: <178852.71524.qm@web81806.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


LOL. 


MySpace is still being used by teens. If based on looking at the different MySpace groups and my nephes' internet tastes, it's teens, teens, teens.

I did use MySpace for our local peace and justice groups, etc. But I have found Facebook to be more useful for events and networking. I have noticed that local groups whose membership are on their 20's the have started moving from MySpace to Facebook. 

 ??Erik??


----- Original Message ----
From: Jeffrey Thomas Piercy <mqduck at sonic.net>


I resent that. Us people in our early 20s (wait, am I in my mid 20s 
now?) stopped using Myspace a long time ago (in Internet terms, anyway). 
Honestly, I don't know who the hell's using Myspace anymore.


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sat Mar  7 09:12:46 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 11:12:46 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Zizek interview in the FT
References: <49B28774.7070505@panix.com>
	<908b689f0903070725q300b439cpf4e1e13c834aae79@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <16A920EE4274451F9CF67387D4348E84@dmsthinkpad>

No it's not unfair, Zizek is making, or attempting to make an historical 
analysis, not a cultural analysis.  He is not even making a pseudo-Weberian 
statement about the interplay of history and culture, history and ideology. 
He is attributing  Stalin's assumption of historical power to a view on the 
family, to some sort of innate, immutable cultural conservatism.  What total 
crap.

This is like, no not like, it is exactly the same thing as attributing 
Reagan's election and presidential power to his trumpeting of "family 
values"--- had nothing to do with the economic reality, rather served as an 
ideological smokescreen to cover what Reagan actually did to real families--  
real working class families-- causing them to split up to find work in 
different locations, increasing strains geometrically through imposed 
unemployment and reduced wage rates.

All previous history is not the history of sentimentalities.

Not just fish in the barrel you're shooting when shooting at Zizek, it's 
carp.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ruthless Critic of All that Exists" <ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 10:25 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Zizek interview in the FT


On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> wrote:
> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/06b42e32-09dd-11de-add8-0000779fd2ac.html
This is unfair...he is a cultural theorist, so he focuses on culture.
Are you also going to criticize Gindin or Panitch on the basis that
they "only talk about economics"?

I don't think Zizek ever said that *only* culture matters. Where is he
saying that in the above passage?



From binesi at gvtel.com  Sat Mar  7 09:13:50 2009
From: binesi at gvtel.com (David Thorstad)
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 10:13:50 -0600
Subject: [Marxism] More Intelligent Life: Is the battle for same-sex
 marriage worth it?
Message-ID: <49B29D3E.5060300@gvtel.com>


http://www.moreintelligentlife.com/story/gay-marriage-battle





From lnp3 at panix.com  Sat Mar  7 09:15:09 2009
From: lnp3 at panix.com (Louis Proyect)
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 11:15:09 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Zizek interview in the FT
In-Reply-To: <16A920EE4274451F9CF67387D4348E84@dmsthinkpad>
References: <49B28774.7070505@panix.com>	<908b689f0903070725q300b439cpf4e1e13c834aae79@mail.gmail.com>
	<16A920EE4274451F9CF67387D4348E84@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <49B29D8D.1010603@panix.com>

S. Artesian wrote:
> Not just fish in the barrel you're shooting when shooting at Zizek, it's 
> carp.

Is carp a typo, perhaps?


From ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Sat Mar  7 09:23:14 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 11:23:14 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] When Facebook Isn't Fun, or..
In-Reply-To: <31C790C3AE35487B878F22AA357A9E71@IanPacePC>
References: <1610795466-1236425839-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-838673754-@bxe1243.bisx.prod.on.blackberry>
	<31C790C3AE35487B878F22AA357A9E71@IanPacePC>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903070823m7a15fe3fie5de4f9e0a29eed6@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 7:04 AM, Ian Pace <ian at ianpace.com> wrote:

> This is something of a devil's advocate's point: whilst in this particular
> case I can absolutely see the point in preserving in such music, more widely
> might some music be better left to die a natural death? The instinct to
> preserve historical music, at least in the West, only dates from the
> mid-19th century (with that era's strong historicising tendencies). In the
> classical world, I see the tendency towards preservation (and continuous
> digging up of obscure works and composers from past eras) as tied in with
> idealisation of hideously unjust former times. Presentation and appreciation
> of the operas of the French baroque, and styles of performance which
> emphasise the rigid hierarchical structures contained within the music, has
> undoubtedly something to do with a nostalgia for the supposed splendour of
> the absolutist feudal system of the time; similarly the mixture of
> exoticism, mysticism, canned sensuousness and de-subjectivisation in
> Tchaikovsky mirrors (and quite consciously so) the whole aura created around
> the Tsarist monarchy (and for this very reason it was despised by early
> musical revolutionaries in the Leninist era, though in the Stalin/Zhdanov
> times that music which had become part of a nationalistic construction of
> 'tradition', including most of the romantics, became presented as some type
> of 'workers' music'). I wouldn't be unhappy to see much of this archaic
> music die away.

I disagree.... Notice what Trotsky (quite brilliantly) points out
about why art produced even under conditions characterized by highly
oppressive social relations can nevertheless be valuable:

"One cannot approach art as one can politics, not because artistic
creation is a religious rite or something mystical, as somebody here
ironically said, but because it has its own laws of development, and
above all because in artistic creation an enormous role is played by
subconscious processes ? slower, more idle and less subjected to
management and guidance, just because they are subconscious.

"It has been said here that those writings of Pilnyak?s which are
closer to Communism are feebler than those which are politically
further away from us. What is the explanation? Why, just this, that on
the rationalistic plane Pilnyak is ahead of himself as an artist. To
consciously swing himself round on his own axis even only a few
degrees is a very difficult task for an artist, often connected with a
profound, sometimes fatal crisis. And what we are considering is not
an individual or group change in creative endeavour, but such a change
on the class, social scale.

"This is a long and very complicated process. When we speak of
proletarian literature not in the sense of particular more or less
successful verses or stories, but in the incomparably more weighty
sense in which we speak of bourgeois literature, we have no right to
forget for one moment the extraordinary cultural backwardness of the
overwhelming majority of the proletariat.

"Art is created on the basis of a continual everyday, cultural,
ideological inter-relationship between a class and its artists.
Between the aristocracy or the bourgeoisie and their artists there was
no split in daily life. The artists lived, and still live, in a
bourgeois milieu, breathing the air of bourgeois salons, they received
and are receiving hypodermic inspirations from their class. This
nourishes the subconscious processes of their creativity.

"Does the proletariat of today offer such a cultural-ideological
milieu, in which the new artist may obtain, without leaving it in his
day-to-day existence, all the inspiration he needs while at the same
time mastering the procedures of his craft? No, the working masses are
culturally extremely backward; the illiteracy or low level of literacy
of the majority of the workers presents in itself a very great
obstacle to this."

Leon Trotsky, in  "Class and Art"


From sartesian at earthlink.net  Sat Mar  7 09:26:01 2009
From: sartesian at earthlink.net (S. Artesian)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 11:26:01 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Zizek interview in the FT
References: <49B28774.7070505@panix.com>	<908b689f0903070725q300b439cpf4e1e13c834aae79@mail.gmail.com><16A920EE4274451F9CF67387D4348E84@dmsthinkpad>
	<49B29D8D.1010603@panix.com>
Message-ID: <B8E3D64AC0DE46CD974DB0EB8FEEE765@dmsthinkpad>

Not really, sort of "objective chance"  as the surrealists would call it 
making its presence known.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Louis Proyect" <lnp3 at panix.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Saturday, March 07, 2009 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Zizek interview in the FT


> S. Artesian wrote:
>> Not just fish in the barrel you're shooting when shooting at Zizek, it's
>> carp.
>
> Is carp a typo, perhaps?
>
> ________________________________________________
> 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 ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com  Sat Mar  7 09:38:38 2009
From: ok.president+nbsy at gmail.com (Ruthless Critic of All that Exists)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 11:38:38 -0500
Subject: [Marxism] Zizek interview in the FT
In-Reply-To: <16A920EE4274451F9CF67387D4348E84@dmsthinkpad>
References: <49B28774.7070505@panix.com>
	<908b689f0903070725q300b439cpf4e1e13c834aae79@mail.gmail.com>
	<16A920EE4274451F9CF67387D4348E84@dmsthinkpad>
Message-ID: <908b689f0903070838x7d94f0c4rac26d40c46d832bb@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 11:12 AM, S. Artesian <sartesian at earthlink.net> wrote:

> He is attributing ?Stalin's assumption of historical power to a view on the
> family, to some sort of innate, immutable cultural conservatism.

Where's he saying that it's "immutable" or "innate"?

Also, there's a huge difference being "attributing" X to Y (as in
assigning exclusive causality, saying that it was exclusively Y that
caused X) and in identifying Y as one among an ensemble of mutually
reinforcing factors that lead to X.

I read Zizek here as saying the latter, not the former. No "exclusive"
cause is being suggested by him.


From ian at ianpace.com  Sat Mar  7 09:42:47 2009
From: ian at ianpace.com (Ian Pace)
Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 16:42:47 -0000
Subject: [Marxism] When Facebook Isn't Fun, or..
References: <1610795466-1236425839-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-838673754-@bxe1243.bisx.prod.on.blackberry><31C790C3AE35487B878F22AA357A9E71@IanPacePC>
	<908b689f0903070823m7a15fe3fie5de4f9e0a29eed6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <66B8790264B54825A20A594F346C32F0@IanPacePC>

Trotsky's arguments were primarily focused upon literature; I'm not sure how 
well they transpose to other mediums, including music. Certainly his point 
about art produced under oppressive social conditions is valid in a 
sense -Luk?cs made similar arguments in defence of Balzac and others, as 
against explicitly 'committed' art, and this aspect of Luk?cs's thought (if 
little else) influenced Adorno's essay 'Committment' (Adorno's diagnosis of 
all of these issues remains the most powerful). But I believe all of these 
figures are speaking of a type of art in which some of its own immanent laws 
of development, and subconscious processes, are allowed to permeate the art 
works in question. The work I'm criticising and describing as archaic does 
little of that, as it is so wholly subsumed to its social function. As a 
mirror of its times without a utopian function, it can be of historical 
interest, but it is not a living art.

It's with these sorts of analyses in mind that I'm very gradually coming 
round to the argument (at least as a possibility) that commercialised music 
stands more of a chance of reflecting critically upon the very social and 
economic conditions from which it emerges than does protected, subsidised 
music, much of which nowadays simply consists of reified archaic materials 
and forms borne out of obsolete romantic or neo-feudal aesthetics. With the 
lack of a real Western avant-garde (such as could be said to have existed 
between 1918 and 1939, or from 1945 until the early 1970s) whose work in one 
way or another in a critical relationship to this unholy legacy, 'classical' 
music is perhaps approaching a true death.

Solidarity,
Ian 



From ian at ianpace.com  Sat Mar  7 09:44