Re: UN resolutions and Desert Fox (98) and Sept 96attacks on Iraq
Re: UN resolutions and Desert Fox (98) and Sept 96attacks on Iraq Read what John Pilger said back in Aug. 2000. According to Boutros Boutros-Ghali, not even the no-fly zones are authorized by the original resolutions, let alone using them as a means to bomb Iraq. Labour Party to increase military spending; bombing of Iraq criticized. John Pilger August 7, 2000 All governments are liars, wrote the great American muckraker I F Stone, and nothing they say should be believed. He exaggerated, although not by much. The lies of new Labour appear more grandiose than those of its Tory predecessors in government, only because of the illusions it is allowed to promote. For example, under headlines announcing a revolution, Gordon Brown was said to hand out the historic sum of [pound]43bn. The truth was the opposite: new Labour's spending on public services will be considerably less than in all but three years of Tory governments since 1979. Under this government, the divisions between the healthy and sick, rich and poor, have grown as never before. However, as the Prime Minister noted in his famous leaked memo, new Labour will stand up for Britain. There is some truth in this, if you regard the war industry as Britain. Military spending is to rise for the first time since the end of the cold war. That is to say, the one, true commitment of new Labour is the acquisition, manufacture and selling of the means of killing and maiming, and the pursuit of policies that, by other means, have a similar effect. Here, the attendant lies are spectacular. On the BBC's Today programme recently, the Foreign Office minister Peter Hain gave his personal assurance that new Labour had never sold arms to any government that used them for internal repression. At last month's Farnborough arms fair, weapons and all manner of war equipment were on offer to Pakistan, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Turkey and other countries for which there is a voluminous record of internal repression. Such is the scale of the repression, and so corrupt is the medieval regime in Saudi Arabia, that the report of the National Audit Office into the multibillion-pound British arms deal known as Al Yammamah remains suppressed by this government, largely at the urging of the Foreign Office, of which Hain is one of the most enthusiastic mouthpieces in memory. Apart from an occasional Amnesty report, the Foreign Office has largely succeeded in keeping the facts about the Saudi regime out of the British media. In the same way, the export of handguns that are banned in this country and the use o f cluster bombs -- landmines in all but name -- have been minimised as issues of international criminality, along with the targeting of civilians in Iraq and former Yugoslavia. As I have told the House on many occasions, said Hain on 2 May, we are not conducting a bombing campaign against Iraq... The Royal Air Force, together with the US, bombs Iraq almost every day. Since December 1998, the Ministry of Defence has admitted dropping 780 tonnes of bombs on a country with which Britain is not at war. During the same period, the United States has conducted 24,000 combat missions over southern Iraq alone, mostly in populated areas. In one five-month period, 41 per cent of casualties were civilians: farmers, fishermen, shepherds, their children and their sheep -- the circumstances of their killing were documented by the United Nations Security Sector. Now consider Hain's statement that no bombing campaign exists. In truth, it is the longest such campaign since the Second World War. Our actions are entirely lawful, wrote Hain in a now notorious letter drafted by the Iraq desk at the Foreign Office. In fact, the bombing has no basis in international law. To be absolutely sure about this, I took the trouble to ask Dr Boutros Boutros-Ghali, who was secretary-general of the UN when the US and Britain set up the so-called no-fly zones, in which they dictate whose aircraft can fly. The Security council never approved or in any way ratified these zones, he said. Does that make them illegal? I asked. Yes, he replied. Although minuscule compared with the US adventure in Iraq, the RAF bombing costs the British taxpayer [pound]63m a year. That, incidentally, is the figure new Labour clawed back from single mothers in benefits. Hain seems to want to make his name on the great suffering of Iraq, as well he might. He has signed along letter to MPs and constituents that is almost entirely untrue. For example, it says that there is no credible research data linking the use of depleted uranium (DU) with the sevenfold increase in cancer in southern Iraq. Since 1943, when the atomic bomb was being developed, there has been an abundance of documented evidence that DU destroys lung tissue and leads to cancer. The UK Atomic Energy Authority quoted a theoretical 500,000 potential deaths in the region following the Gulf war if only a fraction of DU dust was inhaled. It is ten years on
Re: Re: Polluted Air Increases medical expenses:ken hanly
My son is an economist who works for the Sask government and tries to determine costs to Saskatchewan of the Kyoto agreement. His take on the Liberals is that they think the overall political impact of signing on to Kyoto is positive. It will not be a case of Martin paying the bill. The targets simply will not be met insofar as they create any serious economic disruption. What is the cost of not meeting them? Bombing by Bush! So some environmentalists will howl. The government can point out that it is the protector of jobs economic growth etc. Cheers, Ken Hanly - Original Message - From: Hari Kumar [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pen-l [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 4:46 PM Subject: [PEN-L:32177] Re: Polluted Air Increases medical expenses:ken hanly Ken: Thanks. Have any economists done an analysis on the societal benefits resulting from reduction of emissions etc.? Given the barrage of stuff from the anti-Kyoto-ists in Canada - it might be useful grist. PS: What do you think the Chretien push on Kyotot is all about? Leave Martin with the bill? H
An opposition party
Gore is coming out for single payer; Bush is talking about privatizing government jobs. Could the Dems be ready to be a real opposition party? Are the Greens partially responsible for the Dems giving signs of moving to the left? -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: An opposition party
On Friday, November 15, 2002 at 06:55:45 (-0800) Michael Perelman writes: Gore is coming out for single payer; Bush is talking about privatizing government jobs. Could the Dems be ready to be a real opposition party? Are the Greens partially responsible for the Dems giving signs of moving to the left? Not if you follow the admirable Thomas Ferguson's line of reasoning and follow the money. To the extent that there is conflict among elite sectors of society, that will be reflected in party opposition. The sectors of the economy that are coalescing behind the Democrats couldn't support too much of a lurch leftward (meaning, back toward the center). My guess is that single payer is going to be nuanced --- meaning costs will be socialized, gains privatized, lots of loopholes, etc. Bill
RE: Re: An opposition party
Title: RE: [PEN-L:32253] Re: An opposition party Frankly, I can't see Gore pulling a Bullworth, i.e., having a mid-life crisis and then returning to his New-Deal liberal roots. (I'm not talking about the rap part of the flick.) Remember that he was -- and likely is -- a leader of the Democratic Leadership Conference, one of the organizations that pushed hard to make the Dems into GOP Lite. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Bill Lear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 8:09 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:32253] Re: An opposition party On Friday, November 15, 2002 at 06:55:45 (-0800) Michael Perelman writes: Gore is coming out for single payer; Bush is talking about privatizing government jobs. Could the Dems be ready to be a real opposition party? Are the Greens partially responsible for the Dems giving signs of moving to the left? Not if you follow the admirable Thomas Ferguson's line of reasoning and follow the money. To the extent that there is conflict among elite sectors of society, that will be reflected in party opposition. The sectors of the economy that are coalescing behind the Democrats couldn't support too much of a lurch leftward (meaning, back toward the center). My guess is that single payer is going to be nuanced --- meaning costs will be socialized, gains privatized, lots of loopholes, etc. Bill
Re: Re: An opposition party
Both Jim and Bill have dashed my hopes, but a Bullworth conversion would certainly be a hoot. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Re: Re: An opposition party
Title: RE: [PEN-L:32255] Re: Re: An opposition party it would be interesting to see Gore actually having rhythm. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Michael Perelman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 8:13 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:32255] Re: Re: An opposition party Both Jim and Bill have dashed my hopes, but a Bullworth conversion would certainly be a hoot. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: RE: Re: Re: An opposition party
Actually, when he speaks to Black audiences, he does get a very good cadence and sounds quite impressive -- if you forget the source of the words. On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 08:14:08AM -0800, Devine, James wrote: it would be interesting to see Gore actually having rhythm. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine -Original Message- From: Michael Perelman [mailto:michael;ecst.csuchico.edu] Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 8:13 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:32255] Re: Re: An opposition party Both Jim and Bill have dashed my hopes, but a Bullworth conversion would certainly be a hoot. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Theory/my conclusion
"But the perfecting of machinery is making human labor superfluous. If the introduction and increase of machinery means the displacement of millions of manual by a few machine-workers, improvement in machinery means the displacement of more and more of the machine-workers themselves. It means, in the last instance, the production of a number of available wage workers in excess of the average needs of capital, the formation of a complete industrial reserve army, as I called it in 1845, available at the times when industry is working at high pressure, to be cast out upon the street when the inevitable crash comes, a constant dead weight upon the limbs of the working-class in its struggle for existence with capital, a regulator for keeping of wages down to the low level that suits the interests of 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 constantly tear the means of subsistence out of the hands of the laborer; that they very product of the worker is turned into an instrument for his subjugation. "Thus it comes about that the economizing of the instruments of labor becomes at the same time, from the outset, the most reckless waste of labor-power, and robbery based upon the normal conditions under which labor functions; that 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.' (Capital, English edition,) (End of quote: Engels Socialism: Utopia and Scientific) The theoretical proposition that we have arrived at a new phase - juncture, in history comes straight from the horse's mouth. It was to the lot of Frederick Engels to discover the historic trajectory of the law of value back in 1845. It was to the lot of Karl Marx to unravel the law system of value - commodity production. Karl Marx read Engel's "Condition of the Working Class in England" and said, "Damn, who is this guy. We arrived at the same conclusion from different avenues." Marx actually relays this story in the Preface to his Contribution to a Critique of Political Economy. Engel's calls machinery and its technological advance labor wasting devices and not labor saving devices. Labor cannot be "saved" as such, only stored in the form of dead labor - machinery, whose activation by living labor excites the production process to life. Society has passed from the stage of creating a reserved army of labor to destruction of the working class as a class. This process unfolds uneven, yet millions have today been pushed outside the sphere, wherein the sell and purchase of labor power takes place. Emancipation of a class means its destruction as an economic category, not spiritual or ideological enlightenment. The advance of computerization and the current stage in robotics are new qualitative ingredients injected into the production process, which makes the reform of the industrial system impossible. Thus begins the leap to a new mode of production and with this transition the demand for a new doctrine to advance theoretical Marxism becomes urgent. The computer and advanced robotics is the gravedigger of the bourgeoisie as a class. Picture that. Heck I grew up thinking that the working class as a class was the gravedigger! What a difference a day - or rather doctrine, makes! Melvin P.
Argentina defaults on loan repayment
Are there any Argentines here who can comment on this? Sabri ++ Financial Times Argentina defaults on loan repayment By Alan Beattie in Washington November 15 2002 0:29 The Argentine government on Thursday took the extraordinary step of defaulting on a loan repayment to the World Bank, in a sign of its intense frustration over negotiations with the bank's sister institution, the International Monetary Fund. The decision not to make a due payment of $805m places Argentina in the company of countries such as Iraq, Zimbabwe and Liberia in defaulting on loans from international institutions. It makes Argentina ineligible for any new lending from the bank or reductions in interest rates on outstanding loans. Disbursements from existing loans, around $2bn of which has yet to be paid, will also be stopped if the country does not pay within 30 days. Alfredo Atanasof, chief of the cabinet, said: The country's level of reserves prevents it from paying the total of the quotas that expire today. An interest payment of $79m would be made, he said. The World Bank confirmed it had received a partial payment. The World Bank welcomes statements from government officials that Argentina remains committed to rectifying the situation as soon as possible. Economists said the decision showed Argentina's determination to raise the stakes in negotiations with the IMF. The government wants to have its $13bn debt to the fund rolled over until the end of next year. The IMF said on Thursday that it would allow Argentina to defer its next loan repayment, due on November 22.
Argentina's Default
Hanging by a thread Nov 15th 2002 From The Economist Global Agenda Argentinas decision to default on its loan payments to the World Bank will worsen the countrys economic predicament. And it will not make it easier for the government to reach a deal with the International Monetary Fund MOST people expected Argentina to blink first. For weeks, the government of President Eduardo Duhalde had been threatening to default on the $805m payment to the World Bank due on Thursday November 14th. The threat was explicitly aimed at persuading the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to agree to a new programme for Argentina which would unlock new IMF money for the beleaguered economy. But the IMF, exasperated by Argentinas failure to deliver economic reforms, refused to play ball. Argentina in turn decided it had nothing to lose by trying to force the issue. So the economy minister, Roberto Lavagna, went in person to the World Bank headquarters in Washington to deliver the news that his government would only pay $79.2m, the interest element of the loan repayment due. Back in Buenos Aires, Mr Duhalde confirmed that the government was still negotiating with the IMF and would meet its obligations as soon as a deal was sealed. This is a high-risk strategy for a country still reeling from the catastrophic economic collapse it experienced at the turn of the year. Argentina has now, in effect, cut itself off from its last source of outside financing. The government defaulted on its debts to the private sector last Decemberat around $140 billion, that made it the biggest default in history. IMF disbursements have also been suspended for ten months as negotiations on a new IMF programme have dragged on. If the World Bank loan isnt repaid within 30 days of the due date, no new loans will be forthcoming and there can be no interest-rate reductions on existing loans; if the government remains in default for 60 days, all disbursements of existing loans will stop as well. Since the World Bank money has been aimed at mitigating the worst effects of Argentina's economic crisis, the default has potentially unpleasant consequences for the country's poorest citizens. Poverty has increased sharply in Argentina. By the end of this year, the IMF reckons the economy will have shrunk by about 20% over a four-year period. Unemployment has soared during the long recession that eventually made the countrys currency pegfixed at parity with the American dollarunsustainable. Instead of accepting the advice of many economists (and, in private, many governments) that the peg should be abandoned, the then government in Buenos Aires stubbornly stuck to the ten-year-old peg. The crisis that unfolded in December 2001 was far worse than anyone had predicted. As the economy crashed, so did the banking system, and the government. Economic chaos was followed by political chaos. Mr Duhalde is the fourth man to hold the office since Fernando de la Rua was ousted last December. By bringing forward the presidential elections to next March, Mr Duhalde in effect put himself in charge of a caretaker administration. That hasnt helped him stop the political infighting that has hindered economic reform. It's reform that the IMF wants to see before it will put new money on the table. The Fund was heavily criticised in some quarters for providing Argentina with a new $8 billion loan in August last year without demanding an end to the currency peg. Those involved with that decision defend it on the basis that it is difficult to advise a government to abandon a policy which has widespread popular supportas the currency peg didand to refuse new money when a government proposes an economic programme which, in principle, appears sustainable. The critics remain unconvinced by that explanation, though, and the IMF has certainly taken a much tougher line this year, wanting clear evidence that promises of reform are credible. Senior Fund staff have privately expressed exasperation at Argentinas reluctance to accept the need to put its economic house in order. Some of that frustration spilled over in public on November 15th, when Horst Köhler, the IMF's head, said that even in a crisis, taking responsibility for oneself is unavoidable. On the face of it, defaulting on its World Bank loan makes Argentinas negotiations with the IMF far more difficult. Some observers doubt a deal is possible this side of the elections: the IMF, they suspect, no longer trusts the current government enough and doubts its ability to deliver on any promises it does make. And yet the Funds response to the default announcement was intriguing. It did not comment directly on Argentinas decision. Instead, a statement said that progress had been made in the latest round of negotiations between Argentina and the IMF, but that further issues needed to be resolved. It also referred to the need to seek political consensus for what had already been agreed. High stakes for Lavagna and
Re: Re: Re: economy in novels
Also, see . Bruna Ingrao, Economic Life in Ninteenth-Century Novels: What Economists might Learn from Literature, in Guido Erreygers (ed.), _Economics and Interdisciplinary Exchange_ (London and New York: Routledge, 2001). Mohammad Maljoo From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:32216] Re: Re: economy in novels Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 09:35:15 -0800 Stephen Hymer's Monthly Review article on Robinson Crusoe is an excellent example of using novels to teach economics. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: economy in novels
A student wants to read some novels to compare the views on capitalism they portray. Any suggestions? (something more contemporary than, say, Dickens' Hard Times). Post-WWII or thereabouts. Thanks, Mat jack conroy's 'the disinherited', meridel lesuer's 'the girl' (both depression era)... michael hoover
Re: Negri explains the multitude
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/13/02 02:59PM Doug Henwood wrote: The U.S. is under the control of a frightening gang of lunatics hellbent on war with a good bit of the world. Why are Toni Negri and The Nation magazine such urgent enemies? They aren't -- but this is a maillist, not the political bureau of a mass revolutionary party, or even the steering committee of a mass reform party. Carrol theorizing configurations of global and local requires new multidimensional strategies ranging from macro to micro in order to intervene in wide range of contemporary and future struggles, max weber meet thomas hobbes... michael hoover
Re: Re: Negri explains the multitude
- Original Message - From: Michael Hoover [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 11:26 AM Subject: [PEN-L:32263] Re: Negri explains the multitude [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/13/02 02:59PM Doug Henwood wrote: The U.S. is under the control of a frightening gang of lunatics hellbent on war with a good bit of the world. Why are Toni Negri and The Nation magazine such urgent enemies? They aren't -- but this is a maillist, not the political bureau of a mass revolutionary party, or even the steering committee of a mass reform party. Carrol theorizing configurations of global and local requires new multidimensional strategies ranging from macro to micro in order to intervene in wide range of contemporary and future struggles, max weber meet thomas hobbes... michael hoover === And Benoit Mandelbrot... Ian
Re: Negri explains the multitude
At 15/11/02 11:55 -0800, you wrote: but this is a maillist, not the political bureau of a mass revolutionary party, or even the steering committee of a mass reform party. Carrol theorizing configurations of global and local requires new multidimensional strategies ranging from macro to micro in order to intervene in wide range of contemporary and future struggles, max weber meet thomas hobbes... michael hoover === And Benoit Mandelbrot... Ian These comments are not as whimsical as they might seem. At the risk of inviting a whole number of people to disagree, including perhaps Ian and Michael H, let me try amplifying them in the way that makes sense to me. Yes there is not a single line or programme, but struggles at both the local level and the global level can enhance democracy for working people, and restrict the power of capital. The struggle for concrete demoncratic rights for working people is a major feature of the struggle for socialism. Making transparent the social nature of productive relations, and removing the mystification of money, prepares the ground for the ownership and control of the means of production for working people. The multitude was a negative term for Spinoza, but Hardt and Negri use it in a positive sense to mean the masses of working people., and to infuse some revolutionary enthusiasm, and lightness of being at the expense of clearly defining the target of the fight and emphasising class struggle. But in the sense that the expropriation of capital will be by the billions of working people whose creative energies, capital represents, that is a relevant fundamental contradiction in the world today. Yes Mandelbrot, and other champions of chaos theory, remind us that the stabilities of the world may conceal the possibility of sudden instabilities, or phase changes. These seem impossible for much of the time, and at other times need only a relatively slight push to flip the whole system into a different phase state. More dully called dynamical systems theory, together with complexity theory, it provides a scientific structure that in consistent with dialectical principles of qualitative change sometimes leading to quantitative changes. Basically it is about whether you believe the economic system is essentially a social system, although privately owned, and whether you believe in the cooperative powers of human beings eventually to get on top of it, even though there may be no one party line. Chris Burford London
Re: economy in novels
Oh, I almost forgot to mention Walter Brierley's The Sandwichman, 1937. I recommended this one before in reply to a Pen-l thread a couple of years ago on Workplace Literature. So I'll just recycle my 2 1/2 year old message: Louis Proyect wrote or quoted: Marx warned that, in a capitalist system, the worker becomes a commodity, and indeed, the most despised of commodities. Saunders' correction is that the worker becomes an advertisement, and, indeed, the most wretchedly inarticulate of advertisements. . . I would like to here and now start a cult for a 1937 book by Walter Brierley titled, The Sandwichman. Actually, I'd like to start a cult for about 25 pages in the book, from 201 to 226, wherein the unemployed protagonist, Arthur Gardner, temporarily works at two 'jobs'. The first assignment is as the sandwichman of the book's title, advertising a sale at a furniture store. The second is as an adult education night school lecturer, presenting a series of six lectures on drama, one on pre-Shakespearean, one -- or two, perhaps -- on Shakespeare, then Restoration and the Romantic comedy in one, then two on the moderns. As a sandwichman for the furniture store, Arthur wears a sign that proclaims: SALE! SALE! SALE! LATHAM'S! LATHAM'S! LATHAMS!. His lectures, in Fritchburn, a little village about half-way between Pirley and Leawood, are advertised by an paper stuck to a bus-stop hoarding announcing Arthur's name in large capitals and the subject of that evening's lecture. Arthur manages to delude himself into believing that hawking culture as if it were furniture is somehow more 'respectible' than hawking furniture, but other than the delusion, the former comes off as a more profound humiliation than the former. Tom Walker 604 255 4812
new radio stuff
Just posted to my radio archive http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Radio.html, my November 14 show, featuring: * Ruy Teixeira, public opinion expert at The Century Foundation and co-author of The Emerging Democratic Majority on why that majority failed to emerge on November 5 * Bonnie Brower, of The City Project, on the dire budget situation in New York City Already on the site: interviews with Christopher Hitchens (on Orwell and his new bellicose self); Noam Chomsky, Tariq Ali, Cynthia Enloe (on the coming war with Iraq); Linda Peeno (former HMO medical director, on how she denied care to increase profits); Joseph Stiglitz (on his time with the Clinton administration and the World Bank, ending with his suggestion that maybe it's time to shut the IMF); Judith Levine (on kids and sex); Robert Brenner (on the bubble and the bust); Greg Palast (on the Florida election scandals and other things); and Gore Vidal; y mucho mucho mas! Doug
Re: new radio stuff
On Friday, November 15, 2002 at 16:35:44 (-0500) Doug Henwood writes: ... Already on the site: interviews with Christopher Hitchens (on Orwell and his new bellicose self); ... I don't have the appropriate hardware to listen to these, though I'd like to. How was Hitchens? Bill
Re: Re: Negri explains the multitude
- Original Message - From: Chris Burford [EMAIL PROTECTED] theorizing configurations of global and local requires new multidimensional strategies ranging from macro to micro in order to intervene in wide range of contemporary and future struggles, max weber meet thomas hobbes... michael hoover === And Benoit Mandelbrot... Ian These comments are not as whimsical as they might seem. At the risk of inviting a whole number of people to disagree, including perhaps Ian and Michael H, let me try amplifying them in the way that makes sense to me. Yes there is not a single line or programme, but struggles at both the local level and the global level can enhance democracy for working people, and restrict the power of capital. The struggle for concrete demoncratic rights for working people is a major feature of the struggle for socialism. Making transparent the social nature of productive relations, and removing the mystification of money, prepares the ground for the ownership and control of the means of production for working people. The multitude was a negative term for Spinoza, but Hardt and Negri use it in a positive sense to mean the masses of working people., and to infuse some revolutionary enthusiasm, and lightness of being at the expense of clearly defining the target of the fight and emphasising class struggle. But in the sense that the expropriation of capital will be by the billions of working people whose creative energies, capital represents, that is a relevant fundamental contradiction in the world today. Yes Mandelbrot, and other champions of chaos theory, remind us that the stabilities of the world may conceal the possibility of sudden instabilities, or phase changes. These seem impossible for much of the time, and at other times need only a relatively slight push to flip the whole system into a different phase state. More dully called dynamical systems theory, together with complexity theory, it provides a scientific structure that in consistent with dialectical principles of qualitative change sometimes leading to quantitative changes. Basically it is about whether you believe the economic system is essentially a social system, although privately owned, and whether you believe in the cooperative powers of human beings eventually to get on top of it, even though there may be no one party line. Chris Burford London === For the sake of possibly providing an example of some concreteness, the link is to an essay which conjoins Sartre's and LeFebvre's notions of counterfinality [law of unintended consequences meets the fallacy of composition] with computational complexity theory and fractal geometry to redescribe Bologna, Italy. I think in an indirect way it represents the kind of localized intellectual environment that Negri is working in. That is to say, the vocabularies and idioms of some Italian intellectuals are influencing *him* to a greater or lesser extent than one can get simply from reading his latest work; while Negri may be writing for a [virtually] global audience, his writing participates in a specific environment of ideas communicated with his [possible] colleagues. http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Mandelbrot.html Ian
Re: Re: new radio stuff
Bill Lear wrote: On Friday, November 15, 2002 at 16:35:44 (-0500) Doug Henwood writes: ... Already on the site: interviews with Christopher Hitchens (on Orwell and his new bellicose self); ... I don't have the appropriate hardware to listen to these, though I'd like to. How was Hitchens? Polite, evasive, and bellicose. And he closed with a coughing fit. Doug
Re: Re: Re: outsourcing the State
[here's the AFGE press release...] FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: November 14, 2002 Contact: Diane S. Witiak (202) 639-6419 AFGE STATEMENT ON OMB RELEASE OF DRAFT PUBLIC-PRIVATE COMPETITION PROCESS (Washington, D.C.)-AFGE believes contractors and their allies in the Bush Administration have insisted on rewriting the OMB Circular A-76, which governs the public-private competition process, because it doesn't allow contractors to take federal employee jobs often enough or fast enough. Bush Administration officials are at war with reliable and experienced rank-and-file federal employees; they are systematically conspiring to bust their unions, gut their civil service protections, and hand over their jobs to politically well-connected contractors. AFGE approaches the Bush Administration's rewrite of OMB Circular A-76 with considerable skepticism. However, until experts both inside and outside of AFGE have had an opportunity to carefully review the rewrite, we will reserve judgment. During AFGE's review of the new process, it will keep these ten important considerations in mind: 1. Does it ensure the government-wide establishment of a reliable and comprehensive system to track the cost, size, and responsibilities of the massive federal contractor workforce, which some observers have estimated to be twice the size of the federal workforce, both generally as well as for specific contracts? 2. Does it eliminate the pernicious practice of contracting out work performed by federal employees without public-private competition, whether direct conversions promoted by the infamous Office of Management and Budget (OMB) quotas or the Army's Third Wave wholesale privatization initiative? 3. Does it protect the interests of taxpayers by ensuring that any use of the controversial and subjective best value approach is limited to a genuine pilot project that would allow for a careful and objective review of the results? 4. Does it ensure that taxpayers will receive the level of services they need at the lowest possible prices, or will it allow agency managers to charge taxpayers for unneeded bells and whistles? Given that the revolving door problem-senior officials awarding contracts to firms for which they intend to work once their federal careers are over-will be significantly exacerbated by the introduction of any subjective best value process, what steps does the rewrite take with respect to eliminating conflicts of interest? -more- 5. Is it being introduced as part of a broader effort to ensure that federal employees and their union representatives have the same legal standing currently enjoyed by contractors? 6. Does it reduce the impact of wages and benefits on award decisions, so that privatization no longer results in significantly reduced living standards for those who do government work? 7. Does it ensure that agencies will finally begin to subject new government work and government work performed by contractors to real public-private competition, as they do with respect to work performed by federal employees? 8. Does it repudiate the use of numerical or functional privatization quotas, which are even more foolish and ill-advised when agencies are attempting to adapt to a wholly new and unprecedented public-private competition process? 9. Does it err on the side of caution with respect to protecting and preserving robust in-house capabilities, especially given the acknowledgement by Bush Administration officials that at least two major agencies have privatized inherently governmental work? 10. Does it envision the reestablishment of real labor-management partnerships that are necessary if in-house employees are to be given fair chances to prevail? Although the relentlessly pro-contractor Bush Administration's record offers little encouragement, AFGE will carefully review the rewritten public-private competition process to determine how it stacks up in relation to the factors discussed above. Given the impact and complexity of this effort, it is deeply regrettable that little more than four weeks are allowed for affected groups to provide their comments.
Re: Negri explains the multitude
For me, it isn't that Negri's post-modern philosophy is not very interesting. I was forced to read far worse at grad school. It isn't that he wrote so much very badly on Spinoza. It's that he knows crap all about the US, like so many European 'intellectuals'. I will concede that the Empire book is a postmodern masterpiece of escapist fiction. But if all this is unfair, let him come on this list and defend himself like normal human beings have to do. C. Jannuzi __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site http://webhosting.yahoo.com
Re: An opposition party
It's a shame that Bush's proposal will likely have more impact on American society, getting the federal government even more out of the role taken on in the Roosevelt era. I can see it now: the federal government will be pared down to a Republican hardcore elite of elected politicans, appointed political hacks, and 6-8 million zombies working for the military, intelligence and 'homeland security'. On a more positive note, Daschle is still calling for the House to get its act together and investigate 9-11. C. Jannuzi __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site http://webhosting.yahoo.com
RE: Re: An opposition party
Title: RE: [PEN-L:32274] Re: An opposition party On a more positive note, Daschle is still calling for the House to get its act together and investigate 9-11. of course, the results of such investigation are likely to lead to calls for _stronger_ (larger, more expensive) intelliegence community. More better spooks. Jim
Re: An opposition party
--- Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On a more positive note, Daschle is still calling for the House to get its act together and investigate 9-11. of course, the results of such investigation are likely to lead to calls for _stronger_ (larger, more expensive) intelliegence community. More better spooks. Jim I'd rather have such calls with an independent investigation going on than the situation we have now. CJ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site http://webhosting.yahoo.com
Re: RE: Re: An opposition party
- Original Message - From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 4:43 PM Subject: [PEN-L:32275] RE: Re: An opposition party On a more positive note, Daschle is still calling for the House to get its act together and investigate 9-11. of course, the results of such investigation are likely to lead to calls for _stronger_ (larger, more expensive) intelliegence community. More better spooks. Jim Replete with calls for help from academic institutions...which are already starting... Ian
Archetypes
A year ago I said Japan gets deflation (already a fact), and US efforts to avoid deflation would result in stagflation. Here are my current bets: Deflation for Japan and Germany (saddled with a high currency and an inability to cut interest rates, since Japan is at 0 and Germany is locked into a pact with inflationary, cheap currency countries). Stagflation for Australia and Canada because they long ago got used to a cheap cheap currency and must now steer their cheap dollars higher just to avoid inflation, even as the world looks very flat. The US is the puzzle. Is it deflation or stagflation. Given what I intuitively feel about the US economy's critical mass of true unproductivity, I'm betting stagflation. C. Jannuzi __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site http://webhosting.yahoo.com
Re:Re: Negri explains the multitude
Charles: But if all this is unfair, let him come on this list and defend himself like normal human beings have to do.> Comment: Charles, please do not take this amiss, but why the hell would he? I mean while we gathered here - might get something out of this lark on PEN - what meaning does it have? This actually comes back to the matter of What is the real function of PEN? No scratch that! Commander Michael: I will follow PEN! Hari
Re: Re:Re: Negri explains the multitude
The function of the list is to inform each other and to enjoy each other's virtual company. Of course, the list is a complete failure in the latter respect -- since some of us don't like others. Hari is absolutely correct that nobody needs to defend themselves or to answer charges that are levelled here. On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 08:20:40PM -0500, Hari Kumar wrote: Charles: But if all this is unfair, let him come on this list and defend himself like normal human beings have to do. Comment: Charles, please do not take this amiss, but why the hell would he? I mean while we gathered here - might get something out of this lark on PEN - what meaning does it have? This actually comes back to the matter of What is the real function of PEN? No scratch that! Commander Michael: I will follow PEN! Hari -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
economics on pen-l
The sh* is hitting the fan. I think that knowledge of Bush's economics plans will be very important in the coming months. Some of us will be called upon to make public statements about what is afoot. Isn't it important that we do more to get us up to speed on such matters? The bankruptcy bill, as Robert Manning has insisted, would have be strong drag on the economy. Tax cuts and privatizing employment will not have a positive aggregate effect over and above its redistributional effects. Also, the Repugs are trying to shift liability in a number of ways -- curtailing punative awards by electing conservative state courts, restricting suits on vaccines, giving subsidies to terrorism insurance -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: economics on pen-l
Bush's FCC, according to today's Wall St. Journal, gave $16 billion (maybe a net $8 billion) to the wireless companies that had bid the money for spectrum. The FCC citing the serious economic difficulties of the wireless industry, freed the carriers from obligations to pay ... for licenses. The companies freely bid for these, the government sold them the spectrum, and now they don't have to pay. But the article notes that they still want the spectrum, only will come back later and get it cheaper. I've got serious economic difficulties of my own but ... Gene Coyle Michael Perelman wrote: The sh* is hitting the fan. I think that knowledge of Bush's economics plans will be very important in the coming months. Some of us will be called upon to make public statements about what is afoot. Isn't it important that we do more to get us up to speed on such matters? The bankruptcy bill, as Robert Manning has insisted, would have be strong drag on the economy. Tax cuts and privatizing employment will not have a positive aggregate effect over and above its redistributional effects. Also, the Repugs are trying to shift liability in a number of ways -- curtailing punative awards by electing conservative state courts, restricting suits on vaccines, giving subsidies to terrorism insurance -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Theory/my conclusion
"But the perfecting of machinery is making human labor superfluous. If the introduction and increase of machinery means the displacement of millions of manual by a few machine-workers, improvement in machinery means the displacement of more and more of the machine-workers themselves. It means, in the last instance, the production of a number of available wage workers in excess of the average needs of capital, the formation of a complete industrial reserve army, as I called it in 1845, available at the times when industry is working at high pressure, to be cast out upon the street when the inevitable crash comes, a constant dead weight upon the limbs of the working-class in its struggle for existence with capital, a regulator for keeping of wages down to the low level that suits the interests of 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 constantly tear the means of subsistence out of the hands of the laborer; that they very product of the worker is turned into an instrument for his subjugation. "Thus it comes about that the economizing of the instruments of labor becomes at the same time, from the outset, the most reckless waste of labor-power, and robbery based upon the normal conditions under which labor functions; that 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.' (Capital, English edition,) (End of quote: Engels Socialism: Utopia and Scientific) The theoretical proposition that we have arrived at a new phase - juncture, in history comes straight from the horse's mouth. It was to the lot of Frederick Engels to discover the historic trajectory of the law of value back in 1845. It was to the lot of Karl Marx to unravel the law system of value - commodity production. Karl Marx read Engel's "Condition of the Working Class in England" and said, "Damn, who is this guy. We arrived at the same conclusion from different avenues." Marx actually relays this story in the Preface to his Contribution to a Critique of Political Economy. Engel's calls machinery and its technological advance labor wasting devices and not labor saving devices. Labor cannot be "saved" as such, only stored in the form of dead labor - machinery, whose activation by living labor excites the production process to life. Society has passed from the stage of creating a reserved army of labor to destruction of the working class as a class. This process unfolds uneven, yet millions have today been pushed outside the sphere, wherein the sell and purchase of labor power takes place. Emancipation of a class means its destruction as an economic category, not spiritual or ideological enlightenment. The advance of computerization and the current stage in robotics are new qualitative ingredients injected into the production process, which makes the reform of the industrial system impossible. Thus begins the leap to a new mode of production and with this transition the demand for a new doctrine to advance theoretical Marxism becomes urgent. The computer and advanced robotics is the gravedigger of the bourgeoisie as a class. Picture that. Heck I grew up thinking that the working class as a class was the gravedigger! What a difference a day - or rather doctrine, makes! Melvin P.
Re: Re: economics on pen-l
I wish somebody would collect a compendium of this nonsense, but it probably occurs faster than anybody could record it. On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 07:01:03PM -0800, Eugene Coyle wrote: Bush's FCC, according to today's Wall St. Journal, gave $16 billion (maybe a net $8 billion) to the wireless companies that had bid the money for spectrum. The FCC citing the serious economic difficulties of the wireless industry, freed the carriers from obligations to pay ... for licenses. The companies freely bid for these, the government sold them the spectrum, and now they don't have to pay. But the article notes that they still want the spectrum, only will come back later and get it cheaper. I've got serious economic difficulties of my own but ... Gene Coyle Michael Perelman wrote: The sh* is hitting the fan. I think that knowledge of Bush's economics plans will be very important in the coming months. Some of us will be called upon to make public statements about what is afoot. Isn't it important that we do more to get us up to speed on such matters? The bankruptcy bill, as Robert Manning has insisted, would have be strong drag on the economy. Tax cuts and privatizing employment will not have a positive aggregate effect over and above its redistributional effects. Also, the Repugs are trying to shift liability in a number of ways -- curtailing punative awards by electing conservative state courts, restricting suits on vaccines, giving subsidies to terrorism insurance -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
opening markets?
Sweet nothings The west's failure to open its markets could yet turn out to be a boon for poor countries Larry Elliott Saturday November 16, 2002 The Guardian The cheque's in the post. It's the oldest lie in the book, and it was told with a straight face by the smooth talkers from Brussels and Washington when they cajoled the developing world into launching a new round of trade talks at the World Trade Organisation conference in Doha last November. A year ago, the world's focus was not on Doha but on the fall of Kabul. But after the violent clashes surrounding the 1999 WTO meeting in Seattle and the September 11 attacks, a deal to begin enlarging the scope of global markets through the WTO was seen as a virility symbol of multilateralism. So, like an unfaithful millionaire caught cheating on his wife, the west laid it on with a trowel. It begged forgiveness for its past indiscretions, the way in which it had hoovered up all the goodies from bouts of market opening. Yes, the Americans and the Europeans said, we know that we've treated you shabbily. Yes, we know that you have every right to be mad. We couldn't really complain if you gave up on us altogether. But give us one more chance because this time - honest - it will all be different. Poor countries were suspicious of this. Eventually, however, they were wooed by the peace offerings: the pledges to get rid of the handouts to farmers, to make it easier for goods from the developing world to penetrate rich country markets, and to ensure that public health in Africa, Latin America and Asia would take precedence over the claims of patent holders. The message to countries such as Ethiopia, where 15 million people are now suffering from famine, was that free trade was the way to prosperity. But for the west, opening up markets is what chastity was to St Augustine, highly desirable but not yet. As such, Doha was the triumph of spin over substance, even down to the name given to the negotiations. In the past, most rounds had been named after the place where they were launched. There has been a Uruguay round, a Tokyo round, even in the very early days a Torquay round. This time, to show that they really meant what they said, the rich countries said that Doha would be the start of the development round. Well, that was a year ago. Predictably, the reality has failed to live up to the rhetoric. The west whispered sweet nothings in Doha, but its behaviour has changed not one jot. Actually, that's wrong. It has changed - for the worse. Barely was the ink dry on the Doha declaration than the backsliding began. George Bush's farm bill and the squalid deal cooked up to perpetuate the common agricultural policy have shown that pork barrel politics count for more than the development needs of poor countries. The US has beefed up the protection of its steel industry and the big guns of the pharmaceutical industry have been lobbying hard to defend the system for protecting western intellectual property rights established by the Uruguay round. On agriculture, it has not just been a case of business as usual; more like the west opening up a few new branches of Subsidies R Us. Handouts to the US cotton industry, running at $4bn a year, have lowered the world price by 25%, causing damage to producers in West Africa. Burkina Faso and Mali are losing more from US trade policies than they receive in aid and debt relief combined. The west's duplicity comes at a cost, however, and that is that the negotiations are now in trouble. The mood at the WTO's headquarters has been soured by the selfishness of the EU and the US; so much so that the negotiators from Brussels and Washington realise that their own goals - cracking open new markets for their multinationals - are at risk. An elite group of trade ministers has been meeting in Sydney this week to assess the progress made since Doha and to chart a course for a gather ing of all 145 WTO member states in Cancun next September, scheduled to be the halfway point in the talks. There was talk yesterday of ensuring that developing countries receive cheap drugs to tackle HIV/Aids, malaria and TB, but this was a blatant short-term fix to forestall an immediate crisis. Most of the previous rounds have broken down at some point, and unless there is some meaningful progress in the areas affecting developing countries there is a strong possibility that the crisis for the Doha round could come within the next six months. Countries that specialise in exporting farm produce are especially miffed at the way the EU and the US are dumping their excess produce on world markets. As one trade observer put it, the ministerial meeting in Cancun could become the equivalent of a visit to Relate for 145 trade ministers. What are the consequences of all this? First, if it is right that opening up markets is the key to faster development for the world's poorest countries, the west's behaviour is both damaging and nauseatingly hypocritical. Second,
Re: Re: Re: economics on pen-l
haven't we collected a bunch of it in the archives? - Original Message - From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 7:16 PM Subject: [PEN-L:32284] Re: Re: economics on pen-l I wish somebody would collect a compendium of this nonsense, but it probably occurs faster than anybody could record it. On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 07:01:03PM -0800, Eugene Coyle wrote: Bush's FCC, according to today's Wall St. Journal, gave $16 billion (maybe a net $8 billion) to the wireless companies that had bid the money for spectrum. The FCC citing the serious economic difficulties of the wireless industry, freed the carriers from obligations to pay ... for licenses. The companies freely bid for these, the government sold them the spectrum, and now they don't have to pay. But the article notes that they still want the spectrum, only will come back later and get it cheaper. I've got serious economic difficulties of my own but ... Gene Coyle Michael Perelman wrote: The sh* is hitting the fan. I think that knowledge of Bush's economics plans will be very important in the coming months. Some of us will be called upon to make public statements about what is afoot. Isn't it important that we do more to get us up to speed on such matters? The bankruptcy bill, as Robert Manning has insisted, would have be strong drag on the economy. Tax cuts and privatizing employment will not have a positive aggregate effect over and above its redistributional effects. Also, the Repugs are trying to shift liability in a number of ways -- curtailing punative awards by electing conservative state courts, restricting suits on vaccines, giving subsidies to terrorism insurance -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
the Iraqi army
Iraqi army is tougher than US believes The US claims a war against Saddam would be quick. Wrong, says analyst Toby Dodge, the conflict could be long and bloody Saturday November 16, 2002 The Guardian With just two days to go before the UN weapons inspectors arrive in Baghdad, George Bush's administration is still beating the war drum. On Thursday night, Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary, confidently predicted that, should a war erupt, the Iraqi army would soon surrender in the face of overwhelming US force. He noted that in the first Gulf war, when allied forces pushed Iraq out of Kuwait, ground combat had lasted only 100 hours. I can't say if the use of force would last five days or five weeks or five months, but it certainly isn't going to last any longer than that, he said. It won't be a world war three. You have always got to hope for minimum loss of life in any war, but Mr Rumsfeld's prognosis about the speed of an Iraqi army collapse is ideologically driven and strategically ill-informed. In the event of an invasion, US forces will face an army that has been thoroughly indoctrinated, with party commissars in every unit. In addition, a ruthless system of surveillance and constant purges mean that the officer corps has had to renounce political activity to survive. To quote President Saddam Hussein: With our party methods, there is no chance for anyone who disagrees with us jumping into a couple of tanks and overthrowing the government. These methods have gone. It is true that Iraqi resistance in the 1991 Gulf war was negligible. The troops that surrendered in their thousands to coalition forces were badly trained, poorly led and had often not been fed for days. The war was a one-sided affair, with the Iraqis overwhelmed by superior weapons, technology and air power. However, it is often forgotten that the Iraqi leadership made no serious attempt to defend Kuwait City. The fortifications were half-hearted and badly planned. They were primarily designed for propaganda, to convince coalition forces that military liberation would be too costly. Despite the portrayal of a heroic resistance in the mother of all battles, once the ground war began, President Saddam quickly withdrew most of the republican guard, redeploying them around Baghdad to guard his regime. Substandard and ill-prepared troops were left to face certain defeat. After the Gulf war defeat, the Iraqi army was cut to less than half its original size. The idea was to create a smaller, more disciplined force, ideologically committed to defending the regime. For more than a decade Washington has looked to this army for regime change. Today, the US government still hopes a coup triggered by an invasion will save American troops the high cost of fighting through Baghdad's streets to reach the presidential palace. Like Washington, President Saddam is also aware of the dangers the Iraqi armed forces pose to his continued rule. To counter this he has staffed the upper ranks with individuals tied to him by bonds of tribal loyalty or personal history. Like him, most officers are Sunni Arabs, the country's traditional ruling class. They are outnumbered by Shia Muslims and well aware of the resentment towards them. In addition, members of President Saddam's tribe, the Albu-Nasir, and those hailing from his hometown, Tikrit, dominate the army and security services' command, benefiting from regime patronage and enforcing his rule. They are also more than aware of the anger that will be directed at them if he goes. Because of this, those hoping for a coup may be disappointed. The regime has created a coalition of guilt that underpins its continued rule with corruption and great fear about what will happen when it is finally toppled. Sanctions In contrast to 1991, the battle this time will be not for a foreign land but for the very survival of a regime many have spent their lives serving. An invading US army will face 375,000 Iraqi troops and 2,200 tanks. Analysts are right to point out that the army as a whole has suffered greatly during more than a decade of sanctions. Beyond elite regiments, equipment is old and badly maintained. Estimates suggest that the army is only 50% combat effective, and regular troops may well behave as they did in 1991, fleeing the battlefield once war begins. On the other hand, President Saddam has surrounded himself with a robust security system spreading out in three concentric rings. The security services become more disciplined, motivated and reliable the closer they are to the president. The republican guard makes up the first ring of the regime's security. Stationed on the three main roads to Baghdad, this parallel military force totals between 50,000 and 70,000 men. They are better paid than ordinary soldiers and much more likely to remain loyal. Many stood by their posts during the Gulf war, losing a third of their tanks. In the aftermath, they played the lead role in suppressing Shia and Kurdish
Re: economics on pen-l
Agreed -- let's hear more analysis of the near-term economic situation. I'm wondering whether foreign central banks are already financing the US current account deficit, in light of the weakness in US financial markets. (We won't know until the numbers come out, some time from now.) If so, what implications, if any, does this have for global political economy? How can we explain Bushite unitaleralism and in-your-face hegemony in light of the increasing fragility of the US external position? Moreover, if we assume that serious money is now international (international portfolios and their mirror-image, international ownership of corporations, financial institutions and tradeable funds), how do we think about the constraints, if any, on US economic policy? (It doesn't look like we have vehicles for domestic constraints at the moment.) Or is US policy really reflective of a global consensus among the rich? Peter Michael Perelman wrote: The sh* is hitting the fan. I think that knowledge of Bush's economics plans will be very important in the coming months. Some of us will be called upon to make public statements about what is afoot. Isn't it important that we do more to get us up to speed on such matters? The bankruptcy bill, as Robert Manning has insisted, would have be strong drag on the economy. Tax cuts and privatizing employment will not have a positive aggregate effect over and above its redistributional effects. Also, the Repugs are trying to shift liability in a number of ways -- curtailing punative awards by electing conservative state courts, restricting suits on vaccines, giving subsidies to terrorism insurance -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
spying on US citizens
[since whatever US analog of MI5 is not going to have it's core cadres composed of those with only a high school education, this might be of some interest for the future of academic politics in the US] Bush Aides Consider Domestic Spy Agency Concerns on FBI's Performance Spur Debate of Options By Dana Priest and Dan Eggen Washington Post Staff Writers Saturday, November 16, 2002; Page A01 President Bush's top national security advisers have begun discussing the creation of a new, domestic intelligence agency that would take over responsibility for counterterrorism spying and analysis from the FBI, according to U.S. government officials and intelligence experts. The high-level debate reflects a widespread concern that the FBI has been unable to transform itself from a law enforcement agency into an intelligence-gathering unit able to detect and thwart terrorist plans in the United States. The FBI has admitted it has not yet completed the cultural sea change necessary to turn its agents into spies, but the creation of new agency is firmly opposed by FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III, who has said he believes the bureau can do the job. On Veterans Day, top national security officials gathered for two hours to discuss the issue in a meeting chaired by national security adviser Condoleezza Rice. White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr., Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, CIA Director George J. Tenet, Attorney General John D. Ashcroft, Mueller and six others attended. Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge was recently dispatched to London for a briefing on the fabled MI5, an agency empowered to collect and analyze intelligence within Britain, leaving law enforcement to the police. Similarly, if another agency were created in the United States, it would not replace the FBI but would have the primary role in gathering and analyzing intelligence about Americans and foreign nationals in the United States. Revelations of the debate come amid heightened apprehension within the U.S. intelligence community over the possibility of large-scale terrorist strikes against the United States or Europe. The FBI warned law enforcement agencies Thursday night that Osama bin Laden's terror network may be plotting spectacular attacks inside the United States. Some intelligence officials described the threats as even more ominous than those picked up in the weeks prior to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. But the administration, citing a lack of specific information about the time or place of any attack, did not increase the national threat alert indicator from yellow or elevated -- a status that means there is a significant risk of terror attacks. The FBI warning said al Qaeda may favor spectacular attacks that meet several criteria: high symbolic value, mass casualties, severe damage to the U.S. economy and maximum psychological trauma, adding that the highest priority targets were historic landmarks, the nuclear sector, aviation and petroleum. The alert came after the release of a new audiotape believed to be made by bin Laden threatening the United States and its allies. At a news conference, Rice responded to criticism from some Senate Democrats that the war on terror was flagging and from foreign officials that the war on Iraq would distract the administration from its unfinished battle with al Qaeda. Rice said that President Bush does not begin his day on Iraq; he begins his day on the war on terrorism. This is the central focus of this administration, she added. U.S. officials also revealed yesterday that they had recently captured a high-level al Qaeda member. They declined to identify him but said he is among the top dozen al Qaeda fugitives sought by the United States. It was not clear yesterday where the al Qaeda leader was being held. A Bush administration spokesman, who asked not to be named, said no conclusions were reached about a domestic intelligence agency during the Veterans Day meeting. He said an MI5-style agency was just one option considered. The official, and other sources knowledgeable about the issue, said the White House first wants to launch a new Department of Homeland Security, which would include an intelligence analysis division. Any major change such as this would come later, government sources said. More meetings on the subject are planned. Some members of Congress have said they favor creating a domestic security agency and it is likely legislative proposals will be offered during the next Congress. We're either going to create a working, effective, substantial domestic intelligence unit in the FBI or create a new agency, said Sen. Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.), ranking member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. The results are dismal to this point. He said creating a whole new agency would be a big-ticket item from everyone's standpoint. We have to think this out carefully. During the Veterans Day meeting, Mueller offered the same arguments about the FBI's
Re: spying on US citizens
Maybe the Dems should run Bob Barr and Saffire next time. Their way to the left of the nominal Dems on intrusions of big government. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
IMF plays down Argentina debt default
Financial Times IMF plays down Argentina debt default By Peter Hudson in Buenos Aires and Caroline Daniel in Washington November 16 2002 The International Monetary Fund on Friday played down the significance of Argentina's default on debt repayments to the World Bank, its sister institution. A statement by Anne Krueger, the fund's first deputy managing director, declared: We expect discussions will continue in the coming days. It added that the fund's management would recommend to the executive board an extension on a loan payment due on November 22. We are not shocked, a fund spokesperson said. We were not operating under any deadline and we never tried to set the stage for this week being a big decision. Argentina paid only $79.2m against a scheduled repayment of $805m. Although that means it is no longer eligible for fresh loans or reduced interest rates on current debt, the bank will continue to disburse funds for 30 days under existing agreements. Argentina remains optimistic that it can reach a deal with the fund. Our impression is that we moved forward a great deal on technical issues, a senior government official said. The Argentine Congress was in danger of undermining that progress, however, with attempts to pass laws protecting bank debtors from foreclosure and allowing them to use government bonds to pay their debts. President Eduardo Duhalde took the decision to postpone payment to the World Bank in order to force politicians to back the accord, the official said. Paul O'Neill, the US Treasury secretary, expressed hope for a deal. Our position continues to be supportive of the IMF and the Argentinians reaching an agreement that will provide for sustainable economic growth in Argentina, and as quickly as possible, putting that country back into a position where its people have an opportunity to grow and be employed again. Article at: http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/ FullStoryc=StoryFTcid=1035873342016p=1012571727088
Re: Negri explains the multitude
The point was Negri needs no defenders, he can defend himself--if he even asserted anything worth defending (I have my doubts). Next time I'll try to be more direct. CJ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site http://webhosting.yahoo.com
Re: economics on pen-l
--- Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wish somebody would collect a compendium of this nonsense, but it probably occurs faster than anybody could record it. On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 07:01:03PM -0800, Eugene Coyle wrote: Bush's FCC, according to today's Wall St. Journal, I thought that is just what the WSJ is for. CJ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site http://webhosting.yahoo.com
Re: the Iraqi army
The US game plan will be a relatively simple one. They take Mosul and Basra and isolate Baghdad in the middle. Then they hope Baghdad empties out of civilians and they encircle and bomb. They hope as the encirclement of Baghdad tightens and supplies run out on the Iraqi side, all but the most elite defect or surrender. I think they think it will be more like invading Panama than the last Persian Gulf War. CJ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site http://webhosting.yahoo.com
