[PEN-L:7061] Re: anti-intellectualism against and ...
Alex Izurieta wrote: well... 'Understanding' denotes there is a certain 'logic' underneath. What if there is any ? What if the so-called theory is a non-theory, as pomos themselves pretend by aiming at being the quintessence of 'deconstructionism' (of every theory, and consequently -'logically'- theirs as well ). In brief, what if 'that theory' is a non-sense?? A critical *conclusion* regarding a theory must be based on a meaningful and substantive evaluation of that theory. To present a conclusion about a theory without presenting the critique itself (or, at least, referring to where such a critique can be found) is anti-theory, anti-intellectual, and dismissive. I am going to hang his piece on my door at the ISS; just to 'provocate' those newly appering 'fast track pomos' around. From your reaction, it seems it works well. Is your purpose to "provocate" people or to get them to think? If you have the latter purpose in mind, you might consider something else to put on your door. On the other hand, Doug's post might make a good hand-out in a social science class about how *not* to have a meaningful discussion, i.e. it could be used to initiate a discussion about the way that many rely on vacuous put-downs and dismissive statements as an alternative to developing critical analysis. Jerry
[PEN-L:7062] Re: anti-intellectualism against and in the left
I think it's fair to say that _most_ pomo is pretentious bs. Some of it is good stuff, though, and I would definitely include Lyotard, Foucault and Derrida as having made some valuable contributions. I agree with bill that the substance is pretty simple, but I've noticed in trying to explain some of the simplest ideas from pomo that people strongly resist these ideas even when they are stated clearly -- especially when they are stated clearly. In my view, people like Derrida are saying something about language (and 'science' in the wider, European sense) that is roughly similar to what Marx said about the commodity in the section on the fetishism of the commodity in Capital. "A commodity appears at first sight an extremely obvious, trivial thing. But its analysis brings out that it is a very strange thing, abounding in metaphysical subtleties and theological niceties..." Try to explain the fetishism of the commodity to someone who believes *religiously* that market exchange is the primordial foundation of all civilization. I think it's intellectually liberating to realize that received ideas are not the product of some iron-clad, inexorable natural processs but, in many cases, are the enshrinement of some pretty silly imaginings and mental errors. It can also be intoxicating. The tower of post-modern babble probably owes as much to this intoxication as it does to tenure envy and post-tenure anxiety. "All that is solid melts into air..." Regards, Tom Walker, [EMAIL PROTECTED], (604) 669-3286 The TimeWork Web: http://mindlink.net/knowware/worksite.htm
[PEN-L:7063] AIUSA Union--Follow Up
Here is a followup message by one of the members of the AIUSA staff (sent
via the chair of the AIUSA board) arguing that AI management did not
intimidate workers (although they did use legal challenges to exclude
leaders of the union drive from the bargaining unit). --NN
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 12:44:16 -0500 (EST)
From: Mort Winston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Nathan Newman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: AIUSA union matters
FORWARDED TEXT
Wed 30-Oct-96 4:51pm
Roger Rathman (RRATHMAN.ATC) notedLatest
To DYU
Subject Note to Nate
David...FYI
RR
FORWARDED TEXT
Wed 30-Oct-96 11:17am
I informedLatest
To mail @ ih {[EMAIL PROTECTED]}
Subject AIUSA and unions
Dear Nate Stone,
My name is Roger Rathman, Media Director for AIUSA in New York
City. I was both a member of the designated bargaining unit
slated to vote on the issue of union representation and a member
of the Organizing Committee that was formed to explore the
options available to staff for collective bargaining. It is in
the latter capacity that I write in response to your note on the
net.
The organizational efforts here at AIUSA were and remain to be
designed to bring more democracy to the staff/management
relationship and to find a way to give formal voice to the
concerns of the staff.
In mid-summer of this year, 60-65 members of the staff signed
cards indicating their desire to have Communications Workers of
America, Local 1180 represent them as collective bargaining
agents. The signing of cards is the first of many steps in the
process. These cards, along with a petition to hold elections,
were forwarded by CWA to the National Labor Relations Board
(NLRB) for adjudication. At that time there were 90 employees, 7
of whom comprised the senior mangement of AIUSA, leaving 83
potential members of a bargaining unit.
While the management of AIUSA could have at that point elected to
recognize the union, they, under advice of counsel, choose to
legally challenge who would be considered eligible for the
bargaining unit. The NLRB then held three days of hearings with
both the management of AIUSA and the CWA represented by
attorneys. Senior level managers were made to defend their
challenges as to the eligibility of certain staff. While it can
safely be assumed that any attorney retained to defend challenges
by any management group would by neccessity work for the best
interest of their client, I do not hold the view that this was a
"union-busting lawyer". That description is way too
confrontational and does not add to the debate.
It was the NLRB, and not the attorney, who excluded 30 of the 83
staff members based on long-standing and legally recognized
definitions of supervisors and confidential employees. Of the
30, approximately 8 hold sensitive positions dealing with
personnel, payroll and privileged information. The remaining 22
are indeed supervisors and I can insure you that they do indeed
manage other people.
Throughout this process the management and the organizers handle
themselves with the utmost decorum. In my opinion no ethical,
legal, or moral issues were breached. I consider all to have
walked the high road on this. At no time did management or
others use intimidation to sway the results. No threats of being
fired were ever issued.
The 53 remaining members of the bargaining unit spent
considerable time discussing issues and debating best paths to
take. It became obvious that 1) CWA wasn't ideally suited to
meet the needs of the unique staff needs at AIUSA, nor did they
have experience in dealing with non-profits such as ours, and 2)
NOT ONE OF THE 53 WANTED A UNION VOTED IN BY A SLIM SIMPLE
MAJORITY, a distinct possibility that loomed large as the date to
vote approached.
On October 17 the bargaining unit held a democratically conducted
vote to determine majority opinion. By a vote of 40 for
withdrawal of the petition, 8 abstentions, 3 unavailable, 1 no
longer employed, and 1 position vacant. the staff elected to
notify the CWA of our desire to withdraw the petition. This has
now been accomplished and the vote cancelled. The petition can
be refiled after 6 months.
We have informed mangement of this and have indicated to them,
that we are willing to listen to and work with them to solve
issues affecting all staff. We have asked the Executive Director
to personally deal with these issues himself and to make this a
priority. We have made it clear that staff concerns require his
time and energy. We have agreed in principle to allow up to one
yaer for this purpose, and in the interim we will move ahead with
the formation of a formally recognized Staff Association.
I'd like to thank you for both your keen interest and support of
the staff here at AIUSA. It's heartening to know
[PEN-L:7064] Re: krugman again
At 11:56 PM 10/30/96, Ajit Sinha wrote: I'm glad that some part of academia has resisted turning completely journalistic. It is the journalification of the world that Baudrillard wrote so much about, which probably is the reason you got so much of problem with him. Oh, I see. Just as Lacan adopted his impenetrable style to frustrate American attempts to popularize him, so too is Baudrillard's more ludicrous than ludic style (which I don't find at all impenetrable, just silly) an act of resistance. Now let's see. Most of us are political economists of some sort here, right? Ricardo and Smith wrote fine English prose that any educated person can understand, yet they are regarded as the founders of a whole intellectual discipline. Marx is a bit more complex, but also accessible to any educated reader - and Marx's popular works are comprehensible to anyone with a high-school equivalency diploma - and he founded a whole mode of thought and changed the world. Keynes was the best English prose stylist among all economists - and he too founded a whole mode of thought and changed the world. Difficulty is not the issue. The world is complicated, and describing and analyzing it can't be done in simple sentences with a sixth-grade vocabulary. The issue is *pointless* difficulty - the difficulty that hides the fact that the author is actually speaking nonsense. One lesson of the Sokal affair is that the biggest names in cultural studies couldn't smell bullshit when it was placed right under their noses. Now who is Habermas Doug? A pomo in your opinion? I can see it now - after the revolution, the Culture Minister presides over the inquisition: "Are you now, or have you ever been, a postmodernist? Did you fall for the local knowledge/practices of resistance heresy? Did you accord primacy to discourse over social structures and material reality? Did you believe that transgressive personal practices were the functional equivalent of political action?" Habermas does get a bit too lost in the "communication" thing for my taste, if that's what you mean. When it comes to making "dumb points" on pen-l, I think you will be the leading contender for the crown. I always relish being a winner. Doug -- Doug Henwood Left Business Observer 250 W 85 St New York NY 10024-3217 USA +1-212-874-4020 voice +1-212-874-3137 fax email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/LBO_home.html
[PEN-L:7065] Excuse me...
Ok, sorry to interrupt all the yelling over things I don't quite understand yet...But I have a question: I am pursuing a interdisciplinary BA at the moment and am looking at grad schools...I am considering the New School's Interdisciplinary Political Economy track. Is there anyone out there who has gone/is going there, or has any comments about the school (or any other school for that matter) ? Thanks! Jon Witsell
[PEN-L:7066] Derrida v. Gingrich (was: anti-intellectualism against and in the
In the 80s, when I went to college, I read tons and tons of pomo and got my degree in "Political Discourse." Since I'd worked in the developmental disability rights movement, I was a prime candidate for using pomo, since much of our work revolved around the cracks and contradictions in the construction of social reality (eg., what is "intelligence"? When is something a "disability"?). By the end of college, I'd decided that once you'd agreed that reality is just a social construction, pomo didn't have much more to offer in analyzing power and taking on the Bad Guys. It seemed also to me that ultimately pomo used analyzing discourse as an excuse for not doing very much. But after spending the past three years talking to low-level grassroots Rightwing activists, I think there's a much better, more fundamental criticism of pomo. In the 1980s, the pomos argued that discourse and power were inextricably intertwined and that the key to winning was to fight over discourse, preferably in fights whose discourse was engineered by academics. After 16 years, the end result has been a huge number of academic treatices that almost no one can read, more hip advertising, MTV (?), and, perhaps, a generation of college educated lefties who are incredibly cynical and who sometimes aren't sure there are answers to anything (although you could certainly argue it's unfair to blame that on pomo). In the 1980s, there was another group of professors, the most important being Gingrich, who also preached that discourse was tied to power and that winning the battle over discourse was critical, preferably in fights whose discourse was engineered by academics (eg., conservative opportunity society vs liberal welfare state). After 16 years, the end result was a number of incredibly powerful nation-wide grassroots organizations; domination of one of the two major political parties; thousands of extreme, ideologically motivated, activists in political positions of power from the school board to the Senate; and amazing success in changing the political discourse in the U.S. (there are limits to how far changing discourse will convince people that toxic water is good for them or that Social Security is "evil government", but even so, Newt's done remarkably well). Of course, you could argue that it's unfair to compare the discursive ideologues of the left and right, because there was one very big difference between Derrida and Gingrich: money. In response, I'd say: 1) There are plenty of groups on the far right that have a hell of a lot of money based on serious grassroots organizing--1 million members each paying $10-20/yr adds up. If pomo had helped push us away from dependency on foundations and towards serious grassroots organizing, money wouldn't have been a problem. 2) There's a hell of a lot of money on our side that we don't use well. Z magazine published a great article on money and progressive groups a few years back which pointed that out. There's also a shitload of money in unions, much of which is wasted (that's why Sweeney is pushing for spending 30% of union dues on organizing). For ex, my union, the UAW, has an insane amt of money tied up in buildings they've bought over the years. If they sold most of those buildings and rented space instead, someone figured out they could have $50-100 million dollars a YEAR to spend, just off the interest on the money they'd saved. Again, if pomo had been remotely useful, pomos would've gone after this money, and they would have gotten some of it. 3) Since when did _any_ of the pomos say we needed lots of money to win? I sure don't remember hearing that in any course I took or any book I read. In fact, talking seriously about money was often considered a sign of being insufficiently pomo--you were just too wrapped up in the old, stale paradigms (unless, of course, the subject was profs' salaries). In short, the problem with the pomos isn't that they were wrong about the connections between discourse and power. They were just incompetent. R. Anders Schneiderman, PhD. Progressive Communications
[PEN-L:7068] White collar/unproductive worker?
Hi Folks! The other day I was at my dentist's office for checkup and cleaning. As the dental assistant was scraping my teeth I was thinking: is she blue collar or white collar worker? I know she is "unproductive" worker. Can someone care to comment? Fikret +Fikret Ceyhun voice: (701)777-3348 work + +Dept. of Economics (701)772-5135 home + +Univ. of North Dakota fax:(701)777-5099 + +University Station, Box 8369e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] + +Grand Forks, ND 58202/USA +
[PEN-L:7067] intellectualism and anti-intellectualism
Tom Walker writes:In my view, people like Derrida are saying something about language (and 'science' in the wider, European sense) that is roughly similar to what Marx said about the commodity in the section on the fetishism of the commodity in Capital. "A commodity appears at first sight an extremely obvious, trivial thing. But its analysis brings out that it is a very strange thing, abounding in metaphysical subtleties and theological niceties..." Try to explain the fetishism of the commodity to someone who believes *religiously* that market exchange is the primordial foundation of all civilization. I think it's intellectually liberating to realize that received ideas are not the product of some iron-clad, inexorable natural processs but, in many cases, are the enshrinement of some pretty silly imaginings and mental errors. Strictly speaking, I don't know Derrida from dogfood, but perhaps the issue can be clarified with the following opposition: (1) Derrida, Foucault, et al criticize science, etc. as being _ideological_, a matter of consciousness. In this view, there is an ideology of commodities (involving "metaphysical subtleties and theological niceties"). In response, there are at least two options: (a) this ideology can be corrected by looking at matters in a different way, perhaps by "deconstructing" commodities. or (b) the dominant ideology of commodities can only be replaced by a different ideology. My impression is that the pomotistas go for option (b), since they eschew science: deconstruction does not produce truth and is never advertised as such. Sometimes this process can be a good thing, as when Foucault's exposition of different perceptions of homosexuality in different eras (which I know only from second-hand sources) indicates that the vision that is currently dominant does not have any kind of objective or scientific basis. (2) Marx, IMHI (in my humble interpretation), sees the fetishism or ideology of commodities as not simply a matter of subjective ideology or "false consciousness" but instead sees it as the "natural" way that individual people look at commodities given the objective social conditions and processes of a commodity-producing society (e.g., capitalism) that they live under. As such, the only way to truly get rid of the fetishism of commodities is to abolish commodity production. This happens on the micro level within capitalist firms, revealing class relations hidden and obscured by commodity relations. Of course, Marx would favor abolishing commodity production at more levels than that. Marx did see his dialectical method (and the content and method of presentation in CAPITAL) as cutting through the fetishism of commodities: dialectics, by getting away from the one-sided view of commodities that is available to participants in the system as long as they remain merely passive participants, gives a more complete and more scientific vision (though _not_ a "scientific" vision in the positivistic sense of the word, i.e., objective, value-free, etc.) But as long as this break with com. fet. remains merely theoretical, the fetishism remains. I am sure that pen-l folks will correct me if I'm wrong. It can also be intoxicating. The tower of post-modern babble probably owes as much to this intoxication as it does to tenure envy and post-tenure anxiety. There's a lot of truth to that. I would say that babble is a normal academic disease from Talcott Parsons to Gerard Debreu (and hits many people outside of academia). It's the mandarin mentality: if one can dress up one's thought in fancy words, confusing syntax, and/or mathematics, one's ideas seem much more profound than they really are. Then a bunch of these folks get together and talk the same mandarin lingo, impressing each other (and giving each other promotions and Nobel Prizes) while leaving the key assumptions unquestioned and the key questions unasked. I wish that instead of going for this stuff people would read Orwell's little essay "Politics of the English Language" (or something like that). But that would go against the incentives of academic life. Final note: someone said that 95% of the pomotista stuff is nonsense but that we should value the worthwhile 5%. That probably is true of all different schools of thought. I've forgotten the name of the science fiction writer who said that 95% of _everything_ is dreck. But it's probably true. I wish, however, that the pomotistas would make it easier to figure out what part of there stuff is dreck and what part is not. I'm not one of those who assume that because Talcott Parsons or (fill in a name of a pomotista) can't write clearly he must be profound; with Orwell, I assume instead that he's hiding something. in pen-l solidarity, Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ. 7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA 310/338-2948
[PEN-L:7070] SUPPORT THE MAYA: BUY HUMAN BEAN COFFEE (fwd)
Forwarded message: From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Oct 30 22:28 PST 1996 Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 22:11:57 -0700 (MST) From: Evan Ravitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-Id: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: SUPPORT THE MAYA: BUY HUMAN BEAN COFFEE Content-Type: text Content-Length: 8128 PLEASE SUPPORT THE MAYA: Government by the People, a non-profit, urges you to buy Human Bean Company coffee, weavings, videos, etc. (We found your address in the Chiapas email lists. We'll use it only to support the indigenous, and rarely. We'll remove you from our list on request.) The Human Bean Co. is now open at 218 S. Broadway in Denver! Started by videographer Kerry Appel, winner of our local 5 de Mayo Human Rights Award, the Human Bean is "cooperatively conducted in association with indigenous partners in Chiapas and dedicated to putting human values before profit values." Endorsed by Zapatista Commandante David and the other Tzotzile commandantes. Kerry needs now to sell 900 pounds of excelente organic coffee from the Chiapas highlands to enable his next buying trip around Christmas. He plans to buy several tons from 19 communities. 1-10 lbs: US $8.50/lb. (Whole beans. Specify expresso or medium roast) 10 + lbs:$5.00/lb. Introductory price only through November! The Human Bean Co. also has weavings from 100 women in 26 communities including tapestries, skirts, blouses, men's shirts, etc., as well as copal (incense),T-shirts, books, posters from the International Encuentro, music on tape and his award-winning vide os, shown twice on our local PBS station. These include: 89.5-minute video "El Viaje del Relampago Rojo: Profits, Politics and Zapatistas" cost $25. Ask for E-90. 29- minute video "El Ultimo Viaje del Relampago Rojo" costs $20. Ask for E-30. Include $4 for shipping 1 or 2 videos. (example: One of each cost $49 total.) Ask your local station to broadcast them! The Human Bean Co. accepts personal checks or money orders. Checks over $200 must clear before shipping. Make them to: The Human Bean Co. and send to 218 S. Broadway, Denver CO 80209. A full catalog will be available in the Spring. For coffee shipping costs, etc. contact Kerry: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or (303)871-8464 (tel/fax). Tell him your zip code to help figure shipping costs. Please distribute this notice far and wide. %\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\% To further support the Maya and democracy, you may use this editorial freely, as long as it is reproduced in its entirety: %\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\%\% Mayans Weave A Better World by Evan Ravitz "Upon this gifted age, in its dark hour/ falls from the sky a meteoric shower/ of facts..they lie unquestioned, uncombined./ Wisdom enough to leech us of our ill/ is daily spun; but there exists no loom/ to weave it into fabric..." -Edna St. Vincent Millay, Huntsman, What Quarry Nowhere in the Western hemisphere is the hour darker than in the mountains and jungle of Chiapas, Mexico, where some 23,000 Mayan Indians right now face slow starvation or perhaps rapid helicopter attack by the Mexican Army --US-armed and trained under the guise of the Drug War.* The Mayans are already famous as weavers of cloth, but -in spite of the silence of the mass media- are becoming known as well for the loom with which they weave their wisdom into social fabric: "la consulta", the consultation, a discussion and vote of all the people. At their First International Encounter for Humanity and Against Neoliberalism in August, some 3000 supporters from 45 countries saw la consulta in action. "La consulta" is simply the extension of traditional village direct democratic decision-making into the larger arena. Now some 200,000 (including children!) vote on every stage of the negotiations with the Mexican government. It is a laborious process, involving translating the proposals into the six different Mayan languages involved (Tzeltal, Tzoltzil, Tojolobal, Zoque, Chol and Mame), taking them by muddy trails (I've walked them, knee-deep for miles, in the dry season) to thousands of villages, discussing them for days or weeks, then voting by show of hands - pencil and paper being luxuries- finally taking the results back out and adding up the totals. NAFTA sparked the revolt after passing Congress against the will of 2/3 of Americans. (You can read the excellent cover story "The New Manifest Destiny: NAFTA and oil threaten future of Chiapas Indians" from the July 4, 1996 Boulder Weekly, on the web at http://boulder.earthnet.net/~bweditor/070496/cover.html.) NAFTA, a colossal failure of "representative" democracy, has thus ironically spurred the Zapatista revolution by direct (or participatory) democracy -just what 76% of Americans want, according to a 1987 Gallup poll. Here we not only have pencils and paper -and literacy- but the
[PEN-L:7069] Frenchman to run Bosnian bank
(c) Inter Press Service BOSNIA-FINANCE: Frenchman to Run Bosnian Central Bank by Abid Aslam WASHINGTON, Oct 30 (IPS) - A Frenchman appointed by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is to head the Central Bank of Bosnia and Hercegovina. The IMF Wednesday announced the appointment of Serge Robert, a former commercial banker and staffer at the Banque de France who has served the past eight months as senior adviser to the governor of the Bank of Haiti. The appointment, sanctioned by the Bosnian constitution, is the latest in a series of moves by which the international community is -- in effect, if not by intention -- strangling the war-torn Balkan country, critics charge. The new Bosnian constitution, enacted as part of the Dayton/Paris peace accords, gives the IMF power to hire and fire the central bank's head, who cannot be a citizen of Bosnia or any of its neighbours. The IMF is to wield this power for six years. ''This points to the way in which the international financial institutions are interfering in the internal affairs of so-called sovereign states,'' said Michel Chossudovsky, professor of economics at the University of Ottawa, Canada, and author of 'The Globalisation of Poverty: The impact of the IMF and World Bank', published recently in London and Penang, Malaysia. ''Under IMF stewardship, (the new central bank) will function simply as a currency board. It can't even mobilise domestic resources for reconstruction,'' Chossudovsky said. As a consequence, Bosnia must rely on foreign aid, very little of which has been reaching the country since the beginning of the year, he added. Donors have pledged support, but much of this is tied to servicing that portion of the former Yugoslavia's external debt that creditors assigned to Bosnia. Much of what has been marketed as relief financing has amounted to ''the engineering of debt and debt servicing,'' Chossudovsky said. To establish a relationship with the IMF, which it joined in late 1995, Chossudovsky explained, the Sarajevo government first had to clear the arrears it inherited from Belgrade, some 36 million dollars. It did so with bridge financing from the Netherlands, which it in turn had to pay off from 44 million dollars drawn against the IMF's post-conflict loan facility. Fund officials say Bosnia's ability to draw the money without having in place an IMF-approved economic programme is proof of their flexibility and willingness to help out war-torn countries. Future funding, however, will be possible once the new government and the IMF have finalised such an economic programme. The announcement of Robert's appointment follows a slow-down in international aid for reconstruction called by Carl Bildt, the senior international envoy to Bosnia. Bildt wants donors to withhold aid as a way of forcing the creation of multi-ethnic institutions. In an interview with the 'Financial Times' Wednesday, he said he would ''seek more clearly defined powers next year to oversee the reconstruction effort, in order to make the use of aid as a political lever more effective.'' Decisions on economic assistance should be linked explicitly to compliance with the Dayton accords, Bildt was reported to have told the newspaper. ''The country is virtually stangled,'' Chossudovsky said. ''In the first place, they have been made entirely dependent on foreign credit. In the second place, they are unable to mobilise effective foreign credit because of their debt to the Paris Club, and then, (Bildt) calls for a moratorium on reconstruction aid.'' The announcement also follows press reports of infighting and competition between donors, which is believed to have hampered relief and reconstruction efforts. The World Bank, which put together a 150-million-dollar package of concessional loans and grants even before Bosnia became its 180th member last April, has denied recent allegations it has held financing and project implementation hostage to its own ambitions of making policy on behalf of other donors. The IMF Wednesday also announced the nominations of three other members of the Bosnian central bank's governing board: Kasim Omicevic, the current governor of the National Bank of Bosnia and Hercegovina; Jure Pelivan, a former governor of the Bosnian national bank; and Manojlo Coric, governor of the National Bank of Republika Srpska, the Serb entity comprising nearly half of Bosnia's territory. During Robert's stint with the Haitian central bank, the government of President Rene Preval signed on to a structural adjustment programme engineered by the IMF and World Bank. As governor of the Bosnian central bank, he will in effect head a currency board charged with issuing a new domestic currency in exchange for purchases of foreign exchange. Under the IMF's six-year mandate, the central bank will have no
[PEN-L:7071] Re: White collar/unproductive worker?
I can't relate this to postmodernism but I can tell you something about dental workers. If this person was scraping your teeth my guess is she is a dental hygienist rather than a dental assistant, unless N. Dakota has different practice standards. Dental hygiene is a licensed occupation and most practitioners would probably consider themselves professionals as opposed to blue collar workers. Education for DHs in Oregon is either through 2 year community college programs or bachelor's degree programs. As I'm writing this their position begins to sound similar to registered nurses. My connection with dental hygienists is in investigating the health and safety hazards of their jobs. I can tell you that their exposures to physical stress and strain (as well as bloodborne diseases) places them at levels of risk of work-related injury and illness far higher than many industrial workers, so in that respect their work may qualify as blue collar. Their work seems to be increasingly routinized, as they spend much of their time repetitively scaling (scraping) teeth. My understanding is that dental hygiene is a big money maker for dentists because it's a steady insurance-paid revenue stream. If you want to get into the pecking order of dental hygienists and dental assistants, that opens up another whole issue. Dental assistants, while some may also consider it a profession, are definitely at the low end of the hierarchy in dental offices. In fact looking at health studies of all the dental professions, a major psychosocial risk factor for assistants seems to be the low value placed on their work by dentists. There. Is that more than you ever wanted to know about dental workers? Steve Hecker Hi Folks! The other day I was at my dentist's office for checkup and cleaning. As the dental assistant was scraping my teeth I was thinking: is she blue collar or white collar worker? I know she is "unproductive" worker. Can someone care to comment? Fikret +Fikret Ceyhun voice: (701)777-3348 work + +Dept. of Economics (701)772-5135 home + +Univ. of North Dakota fax:(701)777-5099 + +University Station, Box 8369e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] + +Grand Forks, ND 58202/USA + Steven Hecker Labor Education and Research Center 1289 University of Oregon Eugene, OR 97403-1289 USA tel: 541-346-2788 * Note new area code now in effect fax: 541-346-2790 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:7072] Re: White collar/unproductive worker?
At 02:08 PM 10/31/96 -0800, you wrote: The other day I was at my dentist's office for checkup and cleaning. As the dental assistant was scraping my teeth I was thinking: is she blue collar or white collar worker? I know she is "unproductive" worker. Can someone care to comment? Pink collar. Dental hygenists and dental assistants consistently make the top 10 list for gender segregated employment. They used to 99.x% female 10 years ago and I doubt things have changed that much. The work has pleasant "amenities" (what with the cool music, plants and literature) but inadequate pay and little possibility for advancement. Jim Westrich Institute on Disability and Human Development University of Illinois at Chicago Must we really see Chicago in order to be educated? . . . Chicago is a sort of monster-shop, full of bustles and bores. -- Oscar Wilde (1887 1891).
[PEN-L:7073] dental hygene (White collar/unproductive worker?)
as someone who should be calling up his dentist at this moment to schedule an appointment rather than respond to this question, I have two additional points, in addition to Steve Hecker's excellent answer: (1) as almost all dental hygenists are women, many would call them "pink collar" workers. (2) are they "productive workers"? To Smith they weren't because they produced only services. But to Marx, if they sold their labor-power to capitalist dentists, they were productive. In any case, I doubt that it matters whether they are productive or unproductive. -- Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] "A society is rich when material goods, including capital, are cheap, and human beings dear." -- R.H. Tawney.
[PEN-L:7075] Re: White collar/unproductive worker?
Fikret Ceyhun wrote: The other day I was at my dentist's office for checkup and cleaning. As the dental assistant was scraping my teeth I was thinking: is she blue collar or white collar worker? I know she is "unproductive" worker. Can someone care to comment? (1) The color of a person's collar (blue, white, pink) does not determine whether one's labour is productive or unproductive [of surplus value]. (2) Why do you "know" she is an unproductive worker? She's not working for the state and being paid out of state revenues (unless there are state-run dental services in North Dakota). She's not part of management, is she? Her labour isn't for the purposes of realizing surplus value (e.g. advertising), is it? Jerry
[PEN-L:7076] more self-promotion
I promise I won't self-promote for a long time after this, but I have a piece in the new issue of 21stC (http://www.columbia.edu/cu/21stC/issue-2.1/henwood.htm) on Graciela Chichilnisky's scheme to price environmental assets using financial theory and then trade contracts on them. Chichilnisky is a mathemetician and economist at Columbia who holds a UNESCO chair and whose thinking apparently influences U.S. global warming policy; 21stC (http://www.columbia.edu/cu/21stC) is a very good webzine about research at Columbia. Doug -- Doug Henwood Left Business Observer 250 W 85 St New York NY 10024-3217 USA +1-212-874-4020 voice +1-212-874-3137 fax email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.panix.com/~dhenwood/LBO_home.html
[PEN-L:7074] Political Pitch for Ralph Nader
Dear Comrades, I am pitching for Ralph Nader. I would like to present arguments for Nader and against Clinton/Dole for the upcoming presidential election on Novermber 5th. I am hoping to convert some of you who have not decided whether to vote for Clinton or stay home, and hopefully, those who are sold for my argument might convert others so that we can have some decent showing for someone who fought for so long for the consumer, and who is genuinely an alternative to the Clinton/Dole ticket. In addition, a discussion for whom we should vote is important because many of us still tend to vote for the lesser of the two, three, or four evils. Some of you might have been exposed to the arguments presented below. I am submitting it for the benefit of those who have not been. . . . I have compiled my arguments (most are direct quotes) from following publications. 1. AGAINST THE CURRENT (September/October, 1996): a) "A Letter from the Editors." b) "Ralph Nader and the Greens," by Walt C. Sheasby. 2. THE NATION (October 14, 1996): a) "The Case for Nader," by Marc Cooper and Micah L. Sifry. 3. E-MAIL from Janice Shields, Subject: "CEOs Want Balance Budget; Won't Give Up Corporate Welfare," posted by D Shniad. 4. BUSINESS WEEK (October 14, 1996): a) "Editorials." 5. THE ECONOMIST (October 19, 1996). --- THE CASE FOR NADER PRESIDENCY We have to reject two-party Tweedledom. Instead we vote for consumer advocate and Green Party candidate Ralph Nader, the only candidate who stands for the principles we fight for. Here are reasons why we should not vote for the Clinton/Dole ticket. Think of what Clinton and Dole agree upon: § that cash assistance to poor children should no longer be a federal guarantee, while $167 billion in corporate welfare should go untouched. § that Medicare and Medicaid should be cut while military spending is increased. § that the private market is the only way to reform health care. § that the death penalty should be expanded and jails should continue to fill with nonviolent drug offenders and those ensnared in "three strikes, you're out " laws. Both also agree on the speedy imposition of the death penalty under "omnibus anti-crime bill." § that civil liberties should be sacrificed to fight "terrorism." § that free trade should come before the interests of workers. § that gays should be denied spousal Social Security and pension benefits, immigration rights, visitation rights, etc. § that it's fine to water down the Delaney Clause, which keeps carcinogens out of our food; weaken the Endangered Species Act; and let the timber industry ravage our forests. § that a $5.15 minimum wage is enough, although it fails to lift a family of four above the federal poverty level. § that we should continue to spend $100 billion a year "defending" Europe and East Asia. § that energy policy should be founded on military support for the dictators of Saudi Arabia and the other oil kingdoms. § that the current system of financing elections works just fine. § that freedom for capital should replace unionized jobs with the cheapest possible labor under the banner of "globalization," "competitiveness" and "free trade." § that an attack on immigrants and their children, including attempts to deprive them of education and health care. Listen what Business Week editorial said, STOP ATTACKING IMMIGRANTS: Immigrant-baiting is as loathsome as race-baiting, and it is used for the same ugly political purposes. Expelling children of immigrants from public schools is self-defeating. So is denying federally funded AIDS treatment for legal immigrants. The new welfare bill penalizes legal immigrants by curbing access to Medicaid and food stamps. Stigmatizing immigrants by pols playing the blame game cannot be tolerated. Truth is, the average education of incoming legal immigrants is higher than the average education of the US work-force. Many have advanced degrees in engineering, science, and math. Where would America's high-tech industry be without immigrants? Immigration also boosts the country's entrepreneurial energy. Immigrant entrepreneurs are revitalizing neighborhoods in cities all over the country. Aging boomers will need all the hard workers they can get to support them in their retirement. Those workers won't be there in 10 or 15 years if the country relies solely on domestic population growth. Educated working-age immigrants might reduce social tensions while
[PEN-L:7077] A Pomo (re)quest
To Doug H., Anders S., Jim D., and others who are on the attack against pomo, As I've read your various posts I find myself alternately wanting to respond, but also at times being angry at the dismissive comments (they're just incompetent), hostile interpretation of motives (because it's new!), and puerile alliterative juxtapositions (eg, Derrida from dogfood) and wonder what might be gained from any possible response. As someone who writes, reads, teaches, and thinks about postmodernism (in and around economics and Marxism), you can forgive me if I do take a little personally these types of remarks (made in solidarity?). And, as someone who recently organized a major conference on postmodernism and economics and has a book coming out called _Postmodernism, Economics and Knowledge_ from Routledge (with David Ruccio and Jack Amariglio), I feel strange reading about all these dumb ideas that pomos seem to purvey. What is most frustrating is the generality of the attack. It would be useful for all, wouldn't it, if the critics of pomo could be a bit more precise with their critiques and refer to some specific paper or book by some particular author(s) so we can be on the same page. We might then have a useful conversation. I have a suggestion given people's concern about Marx and Derrida. What's wrong, good, obtuse, insightful, troubling, about Derrida's _Specters of Marx_? A not completely innocent choice I must confess. Steve Cullenberg Tom Walker writes:In my view, people like Derrida are saying something about language (and 'science' in the wider, European sense) that is roughly similar to what Marx said about the commodity in the section on the fetishism of the commodity in Capital. "A commodity appears at first sight an extremely obvious, trivial thing. But its analysis brings out that it is a very strange thing, abounding in metaphysical subtleties and theological niceties..." Try to explain the fetishism of the commodity to someone who believes *religiously* that market exchange is the primordial foundation of all civilization. I think it's intellectually liberating to realize that received ideas are not the product of some iron-clad, inexorable natural processs but, in many cases, are the enshrinement of some pretty silly imaginings and mental errors. Strictly speaking, I don't know Derrida from dogfood, but perhaps the issue can be clarified with the following opposition: (1) Derrida, Foucault, et al criticize science, etc. as being _ideological_, a matter of consciousness. In this view, there is an ideology of commodities (involving "metaphysical subtleties and theological niceties"). In response, there are at least two options: (a) this ideology can be corrected by looking at matters in a different way, perhaps by "deconstructing" commodities. or (b) the dominant ideology of commodities can only be replaced by a different ideology. My impression is that the pomotistas go for option (b), since they eschew science: deconstruction does not produce truth and is never advertised as such. Sometimes this process can be a good thing, as when Foucault's exposition of different perceptions of homosexuality in different eras (which I know only from second-hand sources) indicates that the vision that is currently dominant does not have any kind of objective or scientific basis. (2) Marx, IMHI (in my humble interpretation), sees the fetishism or ideology of commodities as not simply a matter of subjective ideology or "false consciousness" but instead sees it as the "natural" way that individual people look at commodities given the objective social conditions and processes of a commodity-producing society (e.g., capitalism) that they live under. As such, the only way to truly get rid of the fetishism of commodities is to abolish commodity production. This happens on the micro level within capitalist firms, revealing class relations hidden and obscured by commodity relations. Of course, Marx would favor abolishing commodity production at more levels than that. Marx did see his dialectical method (and the content and method of presentation in CAPITAL) as cutting through the fetishism of commodities: dialectics, by getting away from the one-sided view of commodities that is available to participants in the system as long as they remain merely passive participants, gives a more complete and more scientific vision (though _not_ a "scientific" vision in the positivistic sense of the word, i.e., objective, value-free, etc.) But as long as this break with com. fet. remains merely theoretical, the fetishism remains. I am sure that pen-l folks will correct me if I'm wrong. It can also be intoxicating. The tower of post-modern babble probably owes as much to this intoxication as it does to tenure envy and post-tenure anxiety. There's a lot of truth to that. I would say that babble is a normal academic disease from Talcott Parsons to Gerard
[PEN-L:7078] Re: White collar/unproductive worker?
What about a productive worker who supplies an unproductive activity? Say, a paper worker whose product goes to Wall Street? -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 916-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:7079] Re: more self-promotion
Doug's article was interesting. He critiqued the notion of pricing the earth, the advocates of which say that we can just open up a market and bet on the unknowns of the environment. We did that in California. People could take out earthquake insurance. When the claims turned out to be too high, the state came in an bailed out insurers and limit claims. What a country! -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 916-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:7080] Re: A Pomo (re)quest
Dear Stephen, To Doug H., Anders S., Jim D., and others who are on the attack against pomo, As I've read your various posts I find myself alternately wanting to respond, but also at times being angry at the dismissive comments (they're just incompetent), hostile interpretation of motives (because it's new!), and puerile alliterative juxtapositions (eg, Derrida from dogfood) and wonder what might be gained from any possible response. OK, let's call a truce on the name-calling. What is most frustrating is the generality of the attack. It would be useful for all, wouldn't it, if the critics of pomo could be a bit more precise with their critiques and refer to some specific paper or book by some particular author(s) so we can be on the same page. We might then have a useful conversation. I have a suggestion given people's concern about Marx and Derrida. What's wrong, good, obtuse, insightful, troubling, about Derrida's _Specters of Marx_? A not completely innocent choice I must confess. Rather than using texts to make sure we're on the same page, why don't we use a specific political example? I think many of us gave up on pomo because we didn't see how it gave us a better understanding of the world that's useful for politcal action. I'd be delighted if you could convince me otherwise; it's a nasty world out there, and we can use all the tools we can get. So, can you give a concrete example of a current economic issue where you think a pomo approach will give us a better understanding of the issue and of how to tackle it politically than a non-pomo marxist/feminist/anti-racist approach would? If you could explain it using relatively simple, straightforward language, I'd appreciate it; that way we can make sure that everybody can play (those who chimes in on the anti-pomo side have to play by the same rules: anybody who uses terms like "fetishism" or "commodity production" will be fined). Anders Schneiderman Progressive Communications
[PEN-L:7081] re: A Pomo (re)quest
Steve Cullenberg wrote, I have a suggestion given people's concern about Marx and Derrida. What's wrong, good, obtuse, insightful, troubling, about Derrida's _Specters of Marx_? A not completely innocent choice I must confess. I'm glad you brought that one up. I stood in the bookstore for about 20 minutes leafing through _Spectres of Marx_ hoping for some clue of an excuse to buy it, take it home and read it. What I wanted to know is if it had anything to say to contemporary political conditions or if it was strictly an allusive, illusive literary dissertation. I frankly couldn't find anything I could get a handle on. "Seemless prose." And I've read and understood a good chunk of Derrida's other writing. So, Steve, tell us: what's the story? What's it about? Regards, Tom Walker, [EMAIL PROTECTED], (604) 669-3286 The TimeWork Web: http://mindlink.net/knowware/worksite.htm
[PEN-L:7082] fetishism and commodity production
If you could explain it using relatively simple, straightforward language, I'd appreciate it; that way we can make sure that everybody can play (those who chimes in on the anti-pomo side have to play by the same rules: anybody who uses terms like "fetishism" or "commodity production" will be fined). Anders Schneiderman So what's wrong with using words like "fetishism" (a word quite commonly used in my neighborhood) or "commodity" or "production" or "commodity production"? What fine have I incurred for using the offensive words? Jerry
[PEN-L:7083] re: A Pomo (re)quest
Tom Walker wrote: I stood in the bookstore for about 20 minutes leafing through _Spectres of Marx_ hoping for some clue of an excuse to buy it, take it home and read it. So, Steve, tell us: what's the story? What's it about? Oh, yeah: why don't you ask him to summarize _Capital_ for a 30 second soundbite for "Nightline"? Summaries of the "story" of Hegel's _Science of Logic_, Lenin's _Philosophical Notebooks_, Negri's _Marx After Marx_, and Althusser's + Balibar's _Reading Capital_ in no more than two sentences would also be appreciated. I would have thought that you would *read* _Spectres of Marx_ rather than leafing through it for 20 min. before consigning it to the dustbin of pomo trash. Where have all the intellectuals gone? Jerry
[PEN-L:7084] Reagan's 1981 tax cuts
I gather that Reagan's tax cuts did not reduce the deficit. However, I seem to recall that tax revenue may have increased in some years after the cuts. I also know that incomes of the top quintile increased. What happened at the bottom? Has someone a summary widely available reference on this? Cheers, Ken Hanly
[PEN-L:7085] Fwd: Re: AIUSA responds to allegations of unionbusting
Dear Nathan; I think you're right. It has also been my experience that when a group massively withdraws a petition to organize, they have been subject to some form of systematic harrassment. I had forgotten all about Taft-Hartley until I read your earlier message. This has been used systematically in the phone company to prevent first level managers from either joining current unions or forming their own unions. I also question the idea of exempting employees who dealt with 'sensitive' information. Sensitive is a completely subjective term. maggie coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Forwarded message: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nathan Newman) Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Multiple recipients of list) Date: 96-10-30 12:46:02 EST On Wed, 30 Oct 1996 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Phew, some letter! Well, I am certainly glad that aiusa did not oppose the unionization of its staff. It would, however, be interesting to find out some of the history of the debate just for general discussion. Maggie, As noted in my post, I am more outraged by this "explanation" than by the original accusations. Any times workers file for an election, go to NLRB hearings to haggle over the bargaining unit, then turn around and petition to withdraw from the election--I smell serious harassment of workers. The original story of threatening "supervisors" (a third of the workforce not covered by union protections) in order to blackmail the rest of the workers to abandon the union drive sounds much more credible than the management lawyer language put out by the AIUSA board chair. And the fact that the AIUSA Board Chair rewrote history to justify Taft-Hartley anti-union legislation as a "protection" for union workers is Orwellian and disgusting coming from a head of a human rights organization. I have been a supporter of AI but I am not going to contribute to any organization that defends Taft-Hartley. --Nathan Newman
[PEN-L:7086] Re: dental hygene (White collar/unproductive worker?)
I think clean teeth are a product. I also think that the prejudice against service workers as not at the heart of production arises out of the fact that most service workers are women, hence not worthy of MANLY consideration in revolutionary theory, if this message sounds a tad sarcastic, it is meant to sound that way. i just note this because sarcasm is difficult to convey at times. maggie coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:7087] re: A Pomo (re)quest
Jerry Levy wrote, Oh, yeah: why don't you ask him to summarize _Capital_ for a 30 second soundbite for "Nightline"? Summaries of the "story" of Hegel's _Science of Logic_, Lenin's _Philosophical Notebooks_, Negri's _Marx After Marx_, and Althusser's + Balibar's _Reading Capital_ in no more than two sentences would also be appreciated. I'll gladly summarize Althusser's Balibar's _Reading Capital_ in two WORDS: overdetermined and underedited. Where have all the intellectuals gone? Gone to grad school every one, when will they ever learn? when will they ever learn? I don't know, Jerry. I think 'intellectuals' has too many many syllables. Maybe we should try flowers. Regards, Tom Walker, [EMAIL PROTECTED], (604) 669-3286 The TimeWork Web: http://mindlink.net/knowware/worksite.htm
[PEN-L:7088] Re: White collar/unproductive worker?
Hi Folks! The other day I was at my dentist's office for checkup and cleaning. As the dental assistant was scraping my teeth I was thinking: is she blue collar or white collar worker? I know she is "unproductive" worker. Can someone care to comment? Fikret I don't understand why you think someone providing health care is an unproductive worker (assuming she's working for a capitalist enterprise, that is, the business is incorporated -- which is likely): she's an employee and wage laborer and the health care she provides is part of a service sold as a commodity by the dental corporation. Blair Blair Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
