Re: hegemony humbled
The WAY this story was reported in the UK was also revealing. The withdrawn UN vote was carried by CNN International but not CNN USA websites. The BBC presented it without a single comment about British support or lack of support. It was merely suggested that there was not sufficient support from other council members to get the necessary 9 votes. It was also emphasised that as the US now has case by case indemnity approved by the UN for each of the areas in which it has troops involved, in practice it did not make a lot of difference. But that means in future it will only be possible for hegemonic forces to engage in peace making or keeping by permission of a vote in the security council. And this plays into Britain's claim to be able to punch above its weight in international affairs: capable of intervening militarily, but more multi-lateralist in spirit than the USA, less controversial, reasonably well trained. Nice chappies. Including how they murmured sympathetically to the US delegation on the Security Council about how they had been lobbying but they really did not think the votes were there, and besides they have now got the unanimous vote on Iraq. And how they would not make a mention of the British position in any press briefing. This is the nature of inter-imperialist contradictions these days. The resultant of forces is towards a multi-lateral version of Empire. Chris Burford - Original Message - From: Chris Burford [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 11:46 PM Subject: [PEN-L] hegemony humbled US backs down in its attempts to win Security Council endorsement of exemption of its forces from possible redress in International Criminal Court after strong warning by Secretary General. http://edition.cnn.com/2004/LAW/06/23/us.war.crimes.court.ap/index.html Compare to how this adminstration was purging UN officials it did not like four years ago. U.S. offers deal if N. Korea halts nuclear program http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asiapcf/06/23/nkorea.talks/index.html US has been forced to respond to the audacious demand of North Korea for a treaty guaranteeing its security, launched just as US was preparing to invade Iraq. This is a superpower that has been humiliated into recognising the limits of its powers, not least its inability to fight more than one war at once effectively. Imperialism is still in command but in the face of opposition from people over the world, unilateralist imperialism has had to cede key ground to multi-lateralist imperialism. Blair has inched ahead of Rumsfeld. In the process towards world government the rule of law, however imperfectly, is being imposed on the incomparably powerful superstate. This is a tipping point that has tipped. The weakening of US dominance may now gather pace a little. Chris Burford
Re: Putin
My apologies to you, Michael, and everybody else. I think I need to learn when to go into "ignore" mode.Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am disgusted that people could not be courteous while I am unable to watch over thelist! Naturally, we have seen an increase in the unsubs.Can't people understand that nobobdy has ever been converted over an e-mail list.Repetition, insults, and jibs only make people get turned off.I repeat that Chris knows more -- maybe different information -- than we do. I wouldhave hoped that we could learn from him, respectfully point out where we differ andleave it at that.This is by no means a simple question to be answered by simple downloads.--Michael PerelmanEconomics DepartmentCalifornia State UniversityChico, CA 95929Tel. 530-898-5321E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
Re: Putin
Hi Melvin, Have I mentioned that you rock? I was going to comment on this bit you write a while back but then got distracted by a pointless flame war. So here I go. You say: For example the ruling people inside the Soviet Union were (white) Russians for a similar reason that the ruling peoples - not simply propertied class, in American are Anglo-American. I do not mean that the people of Chechnya were owned by the Russian people as whites once owned blacks, but that the imperial status of a people has much to do with their economic development and export of productive forces to less developed regions and areas. Here is the bottom line economic logic that placed many Russians at the top of the federated system. --- I just wanted to comment that racialist thinking, in the Western sense, is quite foreign to Russian culture (now I expect to get lots of posts about ethnic violence in Russia that I am going to ignore -- of course there is ethnic violence in Russia, but it is not racial). Use of the word chyornyi (black), which is sometimes used in a derogatory fashion by ethnic Slavs for people from the Caucasus or Central Asia, is a post-Soviet development, and appears to be an attempt to copy the West -- see! We have blacks too! Similarly, the Russian word for African, negr, historically has had no negative connotations -- but it is beginning to acquire them, because it sounds like a certain English word for black people that Russians see used in Hollywood movies. I think the obvious reason for this divergence between Russia and the West is that the Russian Empire never imported slaves. It already had its own, Russian, slaves.
Re: EMH
but you don't know _when_ the flame-war or long obscure discussion or predictions of instant doom will happen. In the SM, it's the timing that's crucial. jd --- You can make a good guess based on the email addresses of the participants. I've just been here a couple months, and I already think I vould make a bundle. :) Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
Re: Marxist Fianancial Advice
yeh, read it and it doesn't say that. It just like doesn't. It says the opposite, and sparked a mini-industry in writing papers attempting to prove the proposition that OJ futures are a good forecasting device. There were so many of these damn papers that the urban myth grew up that the original Roll paper was one of them. Roll's actually quite a good guy, very thoughtful for a finance professor. It was also him that came up with the Roll critique that you mentioned earlier - that market efficiency is an unverifiable concept because any empirical test of it is a joint test of EMH and the assumed data-generating process. I did a bit on this for my website a while ago and the ref I dug up was http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID396645_code030519500.pdf?abs tractid=396645 . The piece is at http://www.crookedtimber.org/archives/000340.html btw if anyone cares. dd -Original Message- From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Doug Henwood Sent: 24 June 2004 03:20 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Marxist Fianancial Advice Daniel Davies wrote: That point (which is, incredibly, very well established and true) is that 40% of the entire volatility of the NYMEX contract in September Frozen Concentrated Orange Juice occurs in the single day on which the Department of Agriculture releases its forecasts for orange production. I just can't for the life of me see how this factoid is at all consistent with the FCOJ futures market having any information advantage over the US government. Surely you've read, or read about, the paper (I think by Richard Roll) claiming the OJ futures market is better at predicting the weather than the U.S. Weather Service? Doug
Re: Putin
From what I have been able to find, the Bolsheviks did not consider Chechnyans as a national minoritywith a right of succession. --- This is what the (presumably Chechen) folks over at Chechnya Free have to say about it (in a book review): Establishment of the Soviet rule in Chechnya and first acts of resistance Most of the non-Russian people who consisted more than 50 percent of the Russian Empire's entire population supported the Bolshevik Party in its fight against tsarism and hoped to achieve freedom, national independence and social justice. Chechens and Ingushs who believed in Bolsheviks and their local supporters shed much of their and their enemies blood under the banner of the October Revolution. But the Bolshevik slogan about the right of nations for self-determination, even the secession and creation of an independent state was not realized for the ethnic minorities, including Chechens and Ingushs. The first steps by the Soviet rule showed that Bolsheviks' real politics had nothing to do with their slogans that attracted miserable highlanders in their fight for a bright future. Bolsheviks solved national and social issues as a part of the proletarian class struggle. Chechens and Ingushs received a tough regime alien to their traditions of social and economic system instead of the promised freedom, equality, land, independence, respect to national traditions and religion. Among the reasons that angered the local people were the atheist ideology and its implementation by Bolshevik rulers, their activity designed to trigger social conflicts in the Checheno-Ingush society, the ignorance of traditions and customs of Vainakhs and predatory requisitioning of farm products. All those triggered an uprising against the Soviet rule and a grandson of Shamil, Said-Bek, headed it in August 1920. Despite the fact this was a local incident it was a serious challenge to the Soviet rule. The Soviet leaders exploited the same strategy and tactics used by tsar Generals some time ago to suppress the uprising. The indocile villages were leveled to ground by artillery attacks and the people left were either executed or deported. The Soviet forces could establish law and order relatively in large cities of Chechnya. But remnant groups retreated to mountains and resumed to put resistance. Many large-scale offensives launched between 1921 and 24 failed to achieve complete success since rebels again retreated to mountains. The Soviet rule did not existed in the mountainous regions during this period. Though the military used same old methods in the fight against rebels, Bolsheviks political strategy was more flexible and effective. Stalin, Kirov, Ordzhonikidze and other leaders of the party who were aware of the conditions in the Caucasus, psychology of Vainakhs made a great contribution in working out the strategy. The strategy was aimed to split highlanders, especially clergy, set off secular and Moslem intellectuals against each other and stir up poor and rich against each other. In short, Bolsheviks followed the old principle of divide and rule and triggered rivalry between various ethnic and religious groups of the highlanders society. As a result Bolsheviks managed to organize conflicts between Kumyks, Dargins and Lezgin Avars. This was the reason that uprising did not spread to central and southern Dagestan. Communists directed Ingushs against Chechens, Chechen highlanders against lowlanders. At the same time native Communists who enjoyed authority among people were appointed to leading posts in the party and the government. The flexible policy pursued by T. Eldarkhanov and Kh. Ataev and the support they received from sheikhs A. Mitaev and S. Gaisumov who were loyal to the Soviet rule helped to strengthen the Soviet rule in Chechnya and Ingushetia. In addition, the economic and cultural life revived and political regime eased during the years of new economic policy. But the situation in the North Caucasus and the country as a whole radically changed as the totalitarian regime of Stalin strengthened. Under the pressure of the central party leaders the introduction of the Soviet style of life had been stepped up in Chechnya and Ingushetia. Stalin and his local proteges were angered by the policy of T. Eldarkhanov and other highlander-Communists oriented on an evolutionary development path, achieving civil peace and taking into account local traditions and their determination to realize the rights for self-rule in the autonomous mountainous regions. By their command, a campaign to fight against Bourgeois-nationalists and religious prejudices was launched in Chechnya and Ingushetia. In the sense this was a fight against traditional mode of life of Vainakhs and their culture and traditions. The repression started under pretence of the elimination of so-called political banditry in Chechnya. Under this slogan a large-scale military operation was carried out in Chechnya in 1925 to disarm the autonomous region of
Buy Venezuela Bonds: Marxist Financial Advice
Daniel wrote: 2. Chuck it into the bonds of more or less politically palatable emerging market countries. Venezuela has a few series of quite high-yielding bonds available, and buying them would both help Chavez to buy a little time to fend off the hegemon, and offer the possibility of a nice capital gain when and if he eventually fails and Vene becomes a US protectorate. Sort of a win-win situation, if you have a rather perverse definition of what constitutes a win. As I don't have the means to act on your advice, alas, I took the liberty of posting the above to my blog: Daniel Davies of D-Squared Digest (who nowadays mainly posts to Crooked Timber) says: I have two pieces of Marxist financial advice (note to regulators: no I don't). Depending on your own financial circumstances and risk appetite, blah blah, I would: 1. Find a life assurance company run by people you trust and chuck it all into one of their long-dated policies. or for the more adventurous 2. Chuck it into the bonds of more or less politically palatable emerging market countries. Venezuela has a few series of quite high-yielding bonds available, and buying them would both help Chavez to buy a little time to fend off the hegemon, and offer the possibility of a nice capital gain when and if he eventually fails and Vene becomes a US protectorate. Sort of a win-win situation, if you have a rather perverse definition of what constitutes a win. (Progressive Economists Network, June 23, 2004) Good advice. Despite the Venezuelan oligarchy's repeated attempts at economic sabotage, Hugo Chávez's record of debt management has been excellent, and high oil prices and big foreign reserves should continue to bolster investor confidence: * I think Chavez will stay in power, whether he avoids the recall or holds the vote and wins, said Jose Pedreira, a managing director at LW Asset Management, a New York-based hedge fund. Wall Street, put off by Chavez's anti-capitalist rhetoric but impressed by the country's debt management policies, sees smooth sailing for Venezuelan sovereign bonds. They have already rewarded holders with total returns of 34.6 percent so far this year while the rest of the market is up 27 percent. Venezuela total returns have risen 3.6 percent since Dec. 1 while JP Morgan's Emerging Markets Bond Index Plus has edged just 1.6 percent higher. . . . Venezuela bond prices have been going higher because, at the end to the day, Venezuela is in good shape in terms of being able to pay its debts, Pedreira said. Other emerging market countries offer much less yield, which continues to make Venezuela attractive. (Hugh Bronstein/Reuters, Venezuela Bonds Seen Rising above Political Woes, December 7, 2003) * Venezuela offered to buy back $1 billion of six-month dollar-denominated bonds after a surge in oil prices swelled government coffers. The government, which had sold the securities to local investors in March, offered to buy the 1.15 percent notes due Sept. 30, 2004, at 100 cents on the dollar, or par. They've had huge revenue off the oil side for quite some time and huge reserve levels, said Enrique Alvarez, a Latin American debt analyst with research company IDEAglobal in New York. And they're very comfortable repurchasing this since they're done selling dollar debt the rest of this year. Venezuelan oil has averaged $30 a barrel this year, more than the $18.50 estimate the government used to calculate this year's budget. Venezuela, the world's fifth largest crude supplier, will likely receive between $5 billion and $7 billion of extra oil income this year, Central Bank Director Armando Leon said last month. (Alex Kennedy, Venezuela Offers to Buy Back $1 Billion of Bonds, Bloomberg.com, June 7, 2004) * Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez has almost unlimited supplies of cash, with Venezuelan oil selling at over $30 a barrel, foreign reserves of more than $23 billion, and few qualms about using public funds to bolster his campaign for a 'no' vote (Phil Gunson, Chávez Well-armed in Recall Battle, Miami Herald, June 22, 2004). Credit rating agencies have been extremely tough on Venezuela, to be sure, but that's only because they are politically motivated. Bondholders have not lost confidence in the Bolivarian Republic: Venezuela, for instance, is rated Caa1 by Moody's -- one of the lowest ratings, even among high-yield, or junk, bonds -- and a full two notches below Brazil's B2 high-yield rating. Yet yields for Venezuelan bonds are comparable to those of Brazil. That means the market isn't demanding a higher premium from Venezuela, despite the lower rating. Investors like Mr. Hopper say this is understandable. Venezuela is a big oil producer and boasts foreign reserves that more than cover its debt, while Brazil's don't. Venezuela has been volatile, and at times overdiscounted by the market, he says. The ratings agencies have contributed to that. (Craig Karmin/The Associated Press, Ratings Take on Political Risk, June 21, 2004)
Re: Putin
Chris Doss wrote: From what I have been able to find, the Bolsheviks did not consider Chechnyans as a national minority with a right of succession. (clip) Stalin knew that for ages weapons considered the symbol of freedom, honour and dignity of Chechens and Ingushs and people would not voluntarily surrenders arms. But he decided to ignore this for the sake of strengthening the dictatorship of proletariat . V.I. Lenin: Stalin is too rude and this defect, although quite tolerable in our midst and in dealings among us Communists, becomes intolerable in a general secretary. That is why I suggest that the comrades think about a way of removing Stalin from that post and appointing another man in his stead who in all other respects differs from Comrade Stalin in having only one advantage, namely, that of being more tolerant, more loyal, less capricious, etc. (December 1922) Other letters written by Lenin: --Opposing Great Russian chauvinism of Stalin in relation to his proposal for union of the independent republics in the Russian Federation. [December 1922] --Opposing Stalins persecution of the Georgian case. [March 5-6 1923] http://home.mira.net/~andy/bs/1922vil.htm -- The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
Who shares responsibility for imperialism?
Dear Joel Kovel, In your Commondreams attack on the Nader-Camejo campaign, you write: Thus you will learn, if you read their unending email postings, that criticism of Nader is a plot engineered by the Democrats, that Kerry is a greater danger than Bush because he will be more effective, that the notion of anybody but Bush is a sign of cowardice, and that the real problem is not Bush but Bushism, a new word for a phenomenon as old as G.W. Bush himself, namely, that both mainstream parties share in the crafting of US imperialism. It is not exactly clear to me whether you think that this understanding of Bushism is correct or not. I myself have not heard this word before, but do subscribe to the view that both parties share an equal responsibility for imperialism. More to the point, it seems rather misleading to speak in terms of imperialism as a kind of policy that can be crafted. By contrast, a policy on gay marriage can be crafted. This is something that can be passed as law as it was in Massachusetts, despite Kerry's objection. But one can not pass laws in favor of imperialism in the same fashion. For example, if the legislative body in Ecuador passed a law stating that they would embark on a policy of imperialism, it is safe to say that this would have no practical consequences. When you really get down to it, imperialism is simply another term for world capitalism which has been defined for the past 200 years at least as a system in which the USA, Europe and Japan develop at the expense of the rest of the world. In this economic system, Ecuador has about as much chance of becoming a G7 nation as the USA has of becoming a banana republic. That is the reality. In terms of politics, it makes very little difference who is elected. On every single imperialist war of the past 100 years at least, support for such wars is a bipartisan affair. For example, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson--3 bona fide liberals--made the decision to commit US troops to imperialist adventures. Finally, on your observation: The problem is, however, that a very big difference between Democrats and Republicans has evolved over the past generation or so. This looks at the problem from only one angle. Not only is there a big difference between the two parties. There is a big difference between the Democratic Party of our youth and the DP of Jimmy Carter, the DLC and Bill Clinton. This party is not only objectively to the right of the traditional New Deal party and its heirs like LBJ, it is also to the right of the Nixon presidency. Just as it took a Republican to visit China, it took a Democrat like Clinton to smash aid to dependent children. So what is going on? What drives all these politicians to be so bellicose and to favor the rich? Is the human race coming up with poorer specimens due to fluoride in the water or too much corn syrup in the spaghetti sauce (including Paul Newman's, I was chagrined to discover.) At the risk of sounding like a member of the Spartacist League, I would have to insist that the push to the right is driven by the need of the American ruling class to dominate its competitors. It needed to dismantle the welfare state because it cut into corporate profits. It needs to invade Iraq in order to control oil. If we are to move forward politically, it would have to be on the basis of opposing the capitalist system and the Democratic-Republican party in the USA that is as committed to its survival as the Democratic Party of the early 1800s was committed to slavery. As serious efforts are mounted against this political-economic system, people like Ralph Nader and Peter Camejo will inevitably become lightning rods for criticism in the same fashion as the abolitionists of an earlier age were. -- The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
Re: EMH
Chris Doss wrote: but you don't know _when_ the flame-war or long obscure discussion or predictions of instant doom will happen. In the SM, it's the timing that's crucial. jd --- You can make a good guess based on the email addresses of the participants. I've just been here a couple months, and I already think I vould make a bundle. :) And you know just how to set them off. Poor George Soros - he had to work for decades to build his rep as a speculator to the point where a simple letter to the editor could set off the market reaction he wanted. Here, all you have to say is __ and __ pulls the flamethrower out of the closet. Doug
Re: EMH
but you don't know _when_ the flame-war or ... will happen. jd Chris Doss wrires: You can make a good guess based on the email addresses of the participants. ... that's why god invented the auto-trasher for e-mail. Fortunately or unfortunately, it means that I only get to read one side of some flame-wars... jd
Re: EMH
Here, all you have to say is __ and __ pulls the flamethrower out of the closet. Doug --- Marxism-Leninism is a dead ideology! I count the seconds... :)
housing bubble?
from the NYT (http://query.nytimes.com/mem/tnt.html?tntget=2004/06/24/business/24housing.htmltntemail0): ...Most analysts agree that there is no nationwide housing bubble because housing prices have climbed only slowly in the Midwest and the South, even as they have soared on the East and West Coasts. Still, if rising interest rates cause housing prices to drop, even slightly, industry officials warn that some new buyers will have no equity in their homes and could choose to walk away from their loans if they run into trouble with payments. A lot of these loans are dangerous, said Allen Jackson, manager of Bristol Home Loan in Bellflower, Calif., a mortgage broker who specializes in so-called subprime loans, which charge higher interest rates to people unable to qualify for traditional mortgages. If you have any dip in values, people can just say the heck with it because they don't have any of their own money in the house. Lenders have aggressively encouraged home buyers to stretch in ways that would have been unimaginable a decade ago. In the new world of flexible mortgage lending, it is possible to buy a $600,000 house with no down payment, and to pay only interest and nothing on the principal for years. The financing has changed everything, said Humid Karat, a manager of Tarbell Realty's office in Anaheim. Ten years ago, if I offered to buy your house with a 100 percent loan, you would have called it 'creative financing' and thought I was crooked. Today, everybody wants a 100 percent loan. The volume of subprime mortgages, primarily for people with poor credit ratings, has risen sharply, as indicated by securities backed by the mortgages. Such securities soared to a total of $195 billion in 2003 from $17 billion in 1995, according to Inside Mortgage Finance, an industry research firm in Bethesda, Md. Securities backed by unconventional mortgages, like no-money-down loans, climbed to nearly $80 billion from less than $1 billion. Underwriting standards have loosened to almost historic levels, said Bill Dallas, a pioneer in no-money-down loans and a board member of the California Mortgage Bankers Association. Nobody is heeding the yield signs. Experts say these novel techniques have democratized the access to credit and home ownership. The overall rate of ownership climbed to nearly 69 percent in 2003 from 64 percent in 1994. Home ownership among blacks rose to 48 percent from 42.2 percent. Among Hispanics, it was up to 46.4 percent from 41.1 percent. But the experts worry that problems may be just over the horizon, especially in markets where housing prices have risen far faster than personal income. Here in Orange County, one of the frothiest markets of all, the median price of a single-family home is $572,000, up 28 percent in the last year alone. jd (who owns an over-priced house).
Re: Marxist Fianancial Advice
Sabri Oncu wrote: One typical example you would find in many a papers is the Royal Dutch/Shell phenomenon. Here is what Thaler says about it: Consider the example of the Royal Dutch/ Shell Group, as documented in Rosenthal and Young (1990) and Froot and Dabora (1999). Royal Dutch Petroleum and Shell Transport are independently incorporated in, respectively, the Netherlands and England. The current company emerged from a 1907 alliance between Royal Dutch and Shell Transport in which the two companies agreed to merge their interests on a 60/40 basis. Royal Dutch trades primarily in the United States and the Netherlands and is part of the SP 500 Index; Shell trades primarily in London and is part of the Financial Times Stock Exchange Index. According to any rational model, the shares of these two components (after adjusting for foreign exchange) should trade in a 60-40 ratio. They do not; the actual price ratio has deviated from the expected one by more than 35 percent. Simple explanations, such as taxes and transaction costs, cannot explain the disparity. But is that because market prices aren't reflecting buying and selling, or because the buyers and sellers are irrational? Like I said, market prices can be efficiently reflecting nonsense. Doug
Re: EMH
Here, all you have to say is __ and __ pulls the flamethrower out of the closet. Doug --- Marxism-Leninism is a dead ideology! I count the seconds... :) --- no, that won't do. Hubbert hated Native Americans! jd
Re: EMH
no, that won't do.Hubbert hated Native Americans!jd --- Lenin ruined Russia, but then luckily Stalin came to restore it! Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
Clinton, Kerry and Kosovo
Counterpunch, June 24, 2004 Clinton, Kerry and Kosovo The Lie of a Good War By DIANE JOHNSTONE For U.S. politicians, if all wars are good, some are better than others. Democrats prefer Clinton wars and Republicans prefer Bush wars. But in the end, they almost unanimously come together to support all wars. The differences concern the choice of official rationale.. To suggest subtle criticism of the Republican war against Iraq, while making it clear that they are by no means opposed to war as such, the 2004 Democratic election campaigners can be expected to glorify the Kosovo war. The prominence of General Wesley Clark in the Democratic camp makes that quite clear. John Kerry's foreign policy adviser Will Marshall of the Progressive Policy Institute, author of Democratic Realism: the Third Way, points to the exemplary nature of the 1999 U.S.-led intervention in Kosovo. It was a policy consciously based on a mix of moral values and security interests with the parallel goals of halting a humanitarian tragedy and ensuring NATO's credibility as an effective force for regional stability. The humanitarian rationale sounds better than the weapons of mass destruction or the links to Al Qaeda which never existed. But then, the genocidefrom which the NATO war allegedly saved the Albanians of Kosovo never existed either. But while the WMD deception has been exposed, the founding lie behind the Kosovo war is still widely believed. It effectively distracts from the very existence of the what Marshall calls the parallel goalof strengthening NATO. Aside from the crippling material damage inflicted on the targeted country, the Kosovo lie has caused even more irreparable damage to relations between the Serb and Albanian inhabitants of Kosovo. The situation in that small province of multiethnic Serbia was the result of a long and complex history of conflict, frequently encouraged and exploited by outside powers, notably by the support to Albanian nationalism by the Axis powers in World War II. Each community accused the other of plotting ethnic cleansing and even genocide. But there were reasonable people on both sides willing to work out a compromise solution. The constructive role of outsiders would have been to calm the paranoid tendencies in both communities and support constructive initiatives. Indeed, the Kosovo problem could have been easily managed, and eventually solved, had the Great Powers so desired. But as in the past, the Great Powers exploited and aggravated the ethnic conflicts for their own purposes. In total ignorance of the complex history of the region, sheeplike politicians and media echoed and amplified the most extreme nationalist Albanian propaganda. This provided NATO with its pretext to demonstrate credibility. The Great Powers have in effect told the Albanians that all their worst accusations against the Serbs were true. Even Albanians know who know better (such as Veton Surroi) are intimidated and silenced by the racist nationalists backed by the United States. The result is disastrous. Empowered by their official status as unique victims of Serb iniquity, the Albanians of Kosovo -- and especially the youth, raised on a decade of nationalist myth -- can give free rein to their cultivated hatred of the Serbs. Armed Albanian nationalists proceeded to drive the Serbian and gypsy populations out of the province. Those remaining do not dare venture out of their ghettos. Albanians willing to live with the Serbs risk being murdered. Ever since the NATO-led force (KFOR) marched into Kosovo in June 1999, violent persecution of Serbs and Roma has been regularly described as revenge -- which in the Albanian tradition is considered the summit of virtuous conduct. Describing the murder of elderly women in their homes or children at play as acts of revenge is a way of excusing or even approving the violence. Last March 17, following the false accusation that Serbs were responsible for the accidental drowning of three Albanian children, organized mobs of Albanians, including many teenagers, rampaged through Kosovo destroying 35 Serbian Orthodox Christian churches and monasteries, some of them artistic gems dating from the fourteenth century. Well over a hundred churches had already been attacked with fire and explosives in the past five years. The objective is quite clearly to erase all historic trace of centuries of Serb presence, the better to assert their claim to an ethnically pure Albanian Kosovo. The self-satisfaction of the international community was severely shaken by the March violence. The occasional KFOR units that tried to protect Serb sites found themselves in armed clashes with Albanian mobs. In the wake of the rampages, Finnish politician Harri Holkeri resigned two months before expiration of his one-year renewable mandate as head of the UN Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) supposed to administer the province. He was the fourth to get out of the job as fast as he could. Apparently on the verge of a
Re: [lbo-talk] Compare/Contrast Texas Dem and GOP platforms
mail.ru is behaving spastically, so I resubbed using yahoo. Sigh. Louis, I personally know people who were ethnically cleansed from Chechnya. They were raped, had their apartment confiscated, and left Chechnya on foot. It took me all of 45 seconds on google to find a reference to the very well-known and well-documented phenomenon of ethnic cleansing in Chechnya here: Consequently, while ethnic cleansing affects people what is really at stake is territory; the primary consideration behind moving people is to secure territory defined in ethnic terms. In other words, the quest for territory inhabited only by one's own people is arguably the modus operandi of the ethnic cleansing process; the goal, then, is the ethnically homogeneous or pure (cleansed of minority ethnic groups) nation-state. Ethnic cleansing is therefore an instrument of nation-state creation. Indeed, such population movements are often carried out to bolster claims for international boundary changes or to consolidate control over disputed frontier areas. The cleansing of Croats from Serbian occupied Krajina, the cleansing of Azerbaijanis from Nagorno-Karabakh, and the cleansing of Russians from Chechnya are just a few post-Cold War examples of ethnic cleansing's role in the quest for national self-determination. http://www.ippu.purdue.edu/failed_states/2000/papers/jacksonpreece.html I am really tired of "conversations" involving an interlocutor who doesn't know what he or she is talking about, and will not admit it. So, you can take it up with Vadim Stolts, who happens to have the following on his website: Neither the genocide of ethnic Russians in Chechnya, in 1994-1999, nor the enslavement of and slave trade in thousands of working class people by Islamic fascists, nor their murderous attack on Dagestan, as the result of which the entire ethnic group (the Avars) was driven on the brink of extinction, nor the repeated pleas of Maskhadov-Basaev clique for NATO to attack Russian cities (mostly populated by working class people), nor dynamiting the working class apartment buildings in Piatigorsk, Bujnaksk, Moscow, and Volgograd--none of these crimes elicited as little as a token _expression_ of protest from ISWoR. http://left.ru/burtsev/iswor/reflections.html Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
Re: Putin
In a message dated 6/24/2004 3:26:28 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I was going to comment on this bit you write a while back but then got distracted by a pointless flame war. Comment Flame wars or fire wars only require a single spark to ignite. Upon inspection it is not the spark that caused the flames but a combination of factors that must involved combustible material. Without combustible material, oxygen, . . .bla . . .bla . .bla . . ., the spark cannot cause a flame war. Chechnya was the spark. The combustible material was ideology - the categories in ones head, political doctrine and "what I personally believe" to be noble and honorable. A horrific war was fought in the American Union over self determination - the right to secession up to and including the formation of an independent state structure. At the time it was among the bloodiest war in modern human history. This was the Civil War or as some call it South of the Mason-Dixon line, the War Between the States. In fact several states seceded and formed standing armies to protect their political secession. This time frame - roughly 1850 to 1890, basically embraces the Czarist clamp down on Chechnya . . . basically. I most certainly do not argue or defend the right of the plantation South to secede in that period of historyfor profound economic reasons that reduce itself to slavery. I understand that America was basically a Southern country in its genesis and early political and economic formation and the Northern states evolved as economic appendages to the slave holding South. The new nation that evolved in the North ended up subduing the old South. In American history the old demand of the South was for "states rights"and thisroughly mean "self determination" in the political arena. My point is that I do not unconditionally support anything other than the spontaneous revolution in the means of production. And the real reason for this is that I cannot stop its development anyway. I do not unconditionally support my own ideology or what I think, or rather imagine myself to think. In as much as this flame war is under the heading "Putin" my approach was basically what is Putin driven to do given certain economic factors, geopolitical considerations and the history of the state structures in the area he presides over. It takes a heck of a lot more than screaming self determination and quoting Lenin during an entirely different historical time framework, (and thus out of context in my opinion) to unravel the complexity of post Soviet Russia. Much of the base of the entire discussion was driven by Putin's move ona section of the gangster bourgeoisie and their jailing. Putin is a product of the Soviet system and intelligence and more than that . . . Russian history. I read a couple articles from the Moscow Times yesterday and could tell by the tone of the articles that there are decisive moves underway to restore "order" in relation with the autonomous region that is Chechnya. Nor do I mean to imply that the people of Chechnya are slave holders. The point is that self determination for me requires an attempt to see what is it that is trying to be determined? To this very day a small fraction of Southern reaction is screaming about the failure of the Yanks to respect their right to self determination during the Civil War. Today, would I support the right of the plantation South to secede from the Union? If it is under the banner of the historically reactionary South absolutely no. As a theory proposition I support freedom and self determination for all life forms in the universe. Then there is the real world which requires one to think things out carefully. I simply do not have a knee jerk reaction to apparent "democratic appeals." In a hypothetical situation where everyone is wrong . . . someone is generally more wrong that the other guy. Reminds me of watching the Godfather and cheering for the good guys . . . only to remember there are no damn good guys in the whole three movies. What happened in the discussion is that we left the bound of economic centers of gravity and political history. If I recall American history correctly there was a small section of slaves that fought on the side of the slave master - to preserve the masters right of self determination or the right of the slave holding South to form an independent state and conduct their business the way they see fit. I would rather try to look at each concrete situation. By the way . . . Lenin is dead. This might come as a shock. I believe they have finally taken his body off display. I mean Leninism is dead. Don't get things twisted. I liked Vladimir as much as the next guy. Speaking of Putin . . . average Ivan could give less than a damn if several truck loads of gangster capitalists are jailed. The Soviets had a history of shooting mangers and striking
Re: EMH
Well, I don't know if this is within the expected time range, but neither the methods, nor the substance, nor importance of the work done by Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Preobrazhensky, WEB DuBois, CLR James, etc. etc. is dead. Nor is any of their work an ideology. The value of the method and the work is its intimate, essential relation with the concrete; the actual economic, social determinants of capitalism development/destruction. Such work can be (mis)shaped into an ideology, but only by disassociating the actual method and content of the analysis from social reality, i.e duplicating the fetishism of capitalism, and turning Marx or Lenin into a commodity. When specific historical contexts are ignored and economic determinants are unexplored you get a sort of mirrored reproduction of capital, which is nothing but the alienation of labor, turning Marx on his head. -Original Message- From: Chris Doss [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Jun 24, 2004 10:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PEN-L] EMH Here, all you have to say is __ and __ pulls the flamethrower out of the closet. Doug --- Marxism-Leninism is a dead ideology! I count the seconds... :)
Re: EMH
It was a provocation, a provocation... Unfortunately I do think _most_ of the stuff going under the head "Leninism" nowadays _is_ ideology. But I'm not an expert."s.artesian" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, I don't know if this is within the expected time range, but neither the methods,nor the substance, nor importance of the work done by Marx, Lenin, Trotsky, Preobrazhensky,WEB DuBois, CLR James, etc. etc. is dead.Nor is any of their work an ideology. The value of the method and the work isits intimate, essential relation with the concrete; the actual economic, socialdeterminants of capitalism development/destruction.Such work can be (mis)shaped into an ideology, but only by disassociatingthe actual method and content of the analysis from social reality, i.e duplicatingthe fetishism of capitalism, and turning Marx or Lenin into a commodity. Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
Re: Putin
By the way . . . Lenin is dead. This might come as a shock. I believe they have finally taken his body off display. I mean Leninism is dead. --- He's still in the Mausoleum on Red Square (which is a really nice little piece of architecture). They recently dressed him in some new, more up-to-date and fashionable threads.
Re: Putin
From: Chris Doss [EMAIL PROTECTED] By the way . . . Lenin is dead. This might come as a shock. I believe they have finally taken his body off display. I mean Leninism is dead. --- He's still in the Mausoleum on Red Square (which is a really nice little piece of architecture). They recently dressed him in some new, more up-to-date and fashionable threads. [As corpses go, he's quite a la mode.] Friday, 07-Nov-2003 6:40AM PST Story from AFP MOSCOW - Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin, whose body remains on display in the mausoleum on Red Square, is getting a new suit, an official said Friday on the 86th anniversary of the Russian revolution. Lenin will be given new clothes during works that will be carried on his body between November 10 and December 29, said embalming expert Yuri Denisov-Nikosky, a senior official at the Russian centre for bio-medical technologies. The former Soviet leader has lain in the mausoleum on Red Square since his death in 1924, preserved by enbalming despite his declared wish to be buried in his native Saint Petersburg. Denisov-Nikolsky said Lenin's new suit will be his 10th during the 30 years in which he had been involved in preserving the body, the RIA Novosti news agency said. New clothes, including a white spotted tie, are ordered every three years, he said. After he was first buried in the mausoleum, Lenin was dressed in military uniform, but just before the (1941-45) war, someone decided it symbolised a militarist nature and he was immediately dressed in civilian clothes, Denisov-Nikolsky said. ... http://quickstart.clari.net/qs_se/webnews/wed/da/Qrussia-lenin.R3rw_DN7.html Carl _ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
Re: Putin
I wish they would follow his wishes. he wanted to be buried or cremated, I forget which. I doubt that anyone wants to be put on permanent display... jd -Original Message- From: PEN-L list on behalf of Chris Doss Sent: Thu 6/24/2004 8:44 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Putin By the way . . . Lenin is dead. This might come as a shock. I believe they have finally taken his body off display. I mean Leninism is dead. --- He's still in the Mausoleum on Red Square (which is a really nice little piece of architecture). They recently dressed him in some new, more up-to-date and fashionable threads.
Re: EMH
In a message dated 6/24/2004 9:06:54 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ---Marxism-Leninism is a dead ideology!I count the seconds... :) Reply Everyone has their own brand and definition of Marxism Leninism, although I most certainly believe that it is dead for complex and specific reasons. Just as Lenin was held on display long after he died, Marxism Leninism is still on display in various intellectual circles. Above all we are talking about a doctrine of combat as distinct from simply the method Marx deployed to arrive at this theory of the societal advance driven by changes in the mode of production. Leninism is a form of industrial ideology and revolutionary combat down to its organizational forms no matter how one defines the forms of organization. This does not mean that there is nothing relevant in Lenin's many writings. I most certainly would not try and apply the program Karl Marx outlines in the Communist Manifesto to today and in this sense the doctrine of Marx's strategy and tactics for 1848 are outdated. Actually, I would resist rasing the slogan of the late 1970s and early 1980s of "Jobs, Peace and Equality," and most certainly reject out of hand the 1930s slogan of "Blackand White Unite and Fight." My general approach is to try and better understand the world on the basis of fighting to change it in a certain direction. The "direction" contains a lot of economic logic and how people react and understand what is in front of them. The economic categories called classes - however one defines them, have undergone lots of change since the time of Marx and Lenin (in their form) and some classes no longer exist in a real way. The forms of capital in its mode of accumulation has changed over the past decades. The industrial working class and industrial classes have changed in the sense that they are on longer on the wave of ascendency based on the expansion of the industrial system proper. If all the fundamental conditions - in their inactivity, that gave rise to or was the basis for the emergence of Marxism Leninism are undergoing transformation, it seems to me that an ideology or doctrine that arose to address a specific boundary in history automatically becomes obsolete. It not like we have large political groups in American society advocating the industrial concentration of the past period of history because the industrial structures of society are undergoing profound change. Actually, it seems to me that Leninism (Marxism-Leninism) died twenty years ago - definitely and on a world scale. I was not a pallbearer but closed the Church doors after the casket was carried out. What is needed today is a doctrine of the American Revolution. Melvin P.
Re: Marxist Fianancial Advice
Doug Henwood wrote: But is that because market prices aren't reflecting buying and selling, or because the buyers and sellers are irrational? Like I said, market prices can be efficiently reflecting nonsense. One expression of irrationality is an inability to learn from experience. In part, this is because experience has been rendered unrealistic by the operation of unconscious phantasy. The weaker and less integrated the ego the more prone it is to fragmentation. This is a defence against persecutory anxiety. Reality is rendered lifeless (and, consequently, less dangerous) by fragmenting it into externally related bits. The underpinning psychology is revealed both by the sadistic, murderous hatred this can be shown to canalize and by the residual fear that the bits are not really dead and may in some circumstances spring back to life (as in the idea that a properly constructed machine can be alive). These factors are at work in the certainty of belief in the mistaken idea that diversification per se necessarily reduces risk. Ignorance can't be the basis of reduced risk. Fragmenting your wealth into forms about which you know nothing increases rather than reduces risk. The correct method is to focus investment in forms about which you have some knowledge. The linked mistaken use of mathematical and statistical methods can be explained in the same way. These are obsessional methods of escaping from persecutory anxiety. They produce a mistaken sense of certainty and security. Minds dominated by defences against persecutory anxiety are relatively incapable of insight into their own and others' motives. The kind of mind such insight requires is the kind able to learn from its experience of self and others. This is the kind of empiricism required for insightful social theory. It's best exemplified by minds able to create great literature. Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice, for instance, implicitly points to the psychological basis of the mistaken certainty that diversification reduces risk. Antonio agrees to Shylock's terms because he is mistakenly certain that the diversification of his mercantile wealth into many bottoms has guaranteed his ability to repay. Psychologically consistent with this, he is portrayed as a clinical depressive besotted with love for Bassanio. Ted
EMH
by Chris Doss no, that won't do. Hubbert hated Native Americans! jd --- Lenin ruined Russia, but then luckily Stalin came to restore it! ^^^ Heidegger was a Nazi. 9/11 was a conspiracy. There is objective reality. Ban the Klan. Vote for Nader/Vote for Kerry. The war on Iraq has to do with oil.
Mausoleums for Reds -- Ugh
Devine, James wrote: I wish they would follow his wishes. he wanted to be buried or cremated, I forget which. I doubt that anyone wants to be put on permanent display... jd Agreed. Chou en Lai (at his standing request) was cremated and his ashes spread from an airplane over the land. At the time it was official CPC policy that party members be cremated. The sad decision to put Mao on display was an early indication that things were iffy in China. Carrol
Re: EMH
The transformation problem is at best of limited relevance. -Original Message- From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Charles Brown Sent: 24 June 2004 17:21 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: EMH by Chris Doss no, that won't do. Hubbert hated Native Americans! jd --- Lenin ruined Russia, but then luckily Stalin came to restore it! ^^^ Heidegger was a Nazi. 9/11 was a conspiracy. There is objective reality. Ban the Klan. Vote for Nader/Vote for Kerry. The war on Iraq has to do with oil.
Re: Putin
James Devine wrote: I doubt that anyone wants to be put on permanent display. I think at his own request, Bentham;s stuffed and clothed skeleton adorned with a wax replica of his head is permanently on display in University College. The original head is in a box between his feet. Ted
Re: Putin
From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] I doubt that anyone wants to be put on permanent display... [Clearly you never met Jeremy Bentham.] The Auto-Icon At the end of the South Cloisters of the main building of UCL stands a wooden cabinet, which has been a source of curiosity and perplexity to visitors. The cabinet contains Bentham's preserved skeleton, dressed in his own clothes, and surmounted by a wax head. Bentham requested that his body be preserved in this way in his will made shortly before his death on 6 June 1832. The cabinet was moved to UCL in 1850. Not surprisingly, this peculiar relic has given rise to numerous legends and anecdotes. One of the most commonly recounted is that the Auto-Icon regularly attends meetings of the College Council, and that it is solemnly wheeled into the Council Room to take its place among the present-day members. Its presence, it is claimed, is always recorded in the minutes with the words Jeremy Bentham - present but not voting. Another version of the story asserts that the Auto-Icon does vote, but only on occasions when the votes of the other Council members are equally split. In these cases the Auto-Icon invariably votes for the motion. Bentham had originally intended that his head should be part of the Auto-Icon, and for ten years before his death (so runs another story) carried around in his pocket the glass eyes which were to adorn it. Unfortunately when the time came to preserve it for posterity, the process went disastrously wrong, robbing the head of most of its facial expression, and leaving it decidedly unattractive. The wax head was therefore substituted, and for some years the real head, with its glass eyes, reposed on the floor of the Auto-Icon, between Bentham's legs. However, it proved an irresistible target for students, especially from King's College London, and it frequently went missing, turning up on one occasion in a luggage locker at Aberdeen station. The last straw (so runs yet another story) came when it was discovered in the front quadrangle being used for football practice. Thereafter it was removed to the College vaults, where it remains to this day. Many people have speculated as to exactly why Bentham chose to have his body preserved in this way, with explanations ranging from a practical joke at the expense of posterity to a sense of overweening self-importance. Perhaps the Auto-Icon may be more plausibly regarded as an attempt to question religious sensibilities about life and death. Yet whatever Bentham's true motives, the Auto-Icon will always be a source of fascination and debate, and will serve as a perpetual reminder of the man whose ideals inspired the institution in which it stands. http://www.ucl.ac.uk/Bentham-Project/info/jb.htm Carl _ MSN Movies - Trailers, showtimes, DVD's, and the latest news from Hollywood! http://movies.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200509ave/direct/01/
Re: Putin
I thought it was at LSE. But Bentham is perhaps the exception that proves the rule, a true wierdo. jd -Original Message- From: PEN-L list on behalf of Ted Winslow Sent: Thu 6/24/2004 10:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Putin James Devine wrote: I doubt that anyone wants to be put on permanent display. I think at his own request, Bentham;s stuffed and clothed skeleton adorned with a wax replica of his head is permanently on display in University College. The original head is in a box between his feet. Ted
Felon purges
Christian Science Monitor, Dec. 14, 2000 Black ex-felons and Gore Earl Ofari Hutchinson LOS ANGELES - For the past month the Congressional Black Caucus, the NAACP, and nearly every civil-rights group have loudly protested that thousands of blacks were Jim Crow-ed - turned away for various technical reasons - at the polls in Florida. They charge that if their ballots had been counted, Al Gore would have sailed to victory in Florida - and into the White House. But even without those rejected black ballots, Mr. Gore still could have bagged thousands of black votes and taken the state, avoiding the nasty legal war with George W. Bush. The winning votes could have come from disenfranchised black ex-felons. Florida is 1 of 9 states in which ex-felons are permanently barred from voting. The conservative estimate is that 1 out of 4 black men is excluded from the polls in Florida, including those who are currently incarcerated. Factoring out those now in prison, it's 1 in 7. === http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5272141/ Democrats file anti-Nader suit Allege that most signatures on Arizona petitions are invalid Arizona Democrats are trying to keep Ralph Nader off the ballot. By Tom Curry (clip) One of the lawyers handling the suit, Andy Gordon, said that of those names on Nader petitions in Arizona that could be identified as registered voters, 46 percent were Republicans, 28 percent Democrats and 26 percent Greens or independents. This is clearly an effort by the Republicans to screw up the Kerry campaign, Gordon said. Gordon also charged that some of the signature gatherers used by the Nader campaign in Arizona were convicted felons and therefore not eligible to collect signatures. -- The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
Re: Putin
Bentham thought that his body ought to be useful after death and so he arranged for it to be dissected. It was later reconstructed as per the rest of the story..This is from the shorter Brittanica story After Bentham's death, in accordance with his directions, his body was dissected in the presence of his friends. The skeleton was then reconstructed, supplied with a wax head to replace the original (which had been mummified), dressed in Bentham's own clothes and set upright in a glass-fronted case. Both this effigy and the head are preserved in University College, London. - Original Message - From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2004 12:11 PM Subject: Re: Putin I thought it was at LSE. But Bentham is perhaps the exception that proves the rule, a true wierdo. jd -Original Message- From: PEN-L list on behalf of Ted Winslow Sent: Thu 6/24/2004 10:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Putin James Devine wrote: I doubt that anyone wants to be put on permanent display. I think at his own request, Bentham;s stuffed and clothed skeleton adorned with a wax replica of his head is permanently on display in University College. The original head is in a box between his feet. Ted
Re: Putin - Texas and the national factor- last post on this subject
In a message dated 6/24/2004 7:57:32 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From what I have been able to find, the Bolsheviks did not consider Chechnyans as a national minority with a right of succession. --- Reply I read the material suggested at http://www.chechnyafree.ru/index.php?lng=engsection=historyengrow=6#gak_3and found it very enlightening and interesting to say the least. The field of politics that has been called the "national question" is very difficult and generally involved the issue of a lesser economically developed people drawn into or forcibly annexed by a dominating state. All state structures are made up of and madereal by real people. Thus the dominating state is the dominating people or peoples. The only reason the national question is a question is because someone else is debating your fate and future if you happen to be the sucker on theshort end of the stick. Let's talk about the national factor and overthrow Leninism . . . again. I am for discarding the slogan "right of nations to self determination" and replacing it with something more accurate to today. Exactly what I do not know! What if you are not a so-called nation and getting the crap kicked out of you? In the case of the Indian people in America we all know their plight and the wars of genocide against them. In the case of the African American we all know about slavery and segregation on one level or another. In the case of Mexico and the Mexican nationals and Chicano's we have an awareness of the theftof half of Mexico/s territory on one level or another. Puerto-Rico and the Philippines need not be examined but pointed out. There are of course many other oppressed peoples within the filed of the multinational state that is the United States of North America. What of the question of Appalachia! The right of nations to self determination can be tricky if the dominate political group that advocates such right makes an assessment that ones group is not a nation. Exactly what is a national minority? What is a minority? What is an autonomous region within a multinational state structure? Better yet, what where these political and economic units and categories to the Soviet State and their ruling party? What did these categories mean to the people ruled by the Soviet State? On Pen-L I am willing to bet you cannot get three people who agree as to the political and economic meaning of the concept "national minority." There is a political and economic logic behind oppression and subjugation of less economically developed and militarily protected peoples. Slavery in America was an economic category of the highest importance. On Pen-L I am willing to bet you cannot geta dozenpeople who agree as to whether or not the African American people are a historically evolved people with a distinct culture that in history set them apart from say the Anglo-American people of the Northern portion of the American Union. My point is simple: anyone that believes there is a simple answer to the "national factor" is following and fooling themselves. Self determination for nation's up to and including the formation of an independent state . . . what if you ain't a nation and this formula is only applicable within the context of the struggle against capital . . . foreign and domestic, during a historically specific time frame? I am just saying that 1900s Russia is a hell of a lot different from 2004 America or 2004 Russia. Why drive your grandfathers Oldsmobile when you can get some new more green friendly ride? One can of course really examine the internal dynamics of the "Black power" movement of the late 1960s up to the mid 1980s and come to some conclusions. This period of reformulation of the national factor needs to be looked at. Lets take an example closer to home than the blacks in America, because the moment one says "black" everything gets screwy. Take Texas . . . the Lone Star State. The Lone Star State . . OK . . . meaning one star on the freaking flag. I currently live in Texas - recently, but this is not the first time I have been to Texas. My travel to Texas dates back to 1982. There are current s in Texas pushing for secession since the Alamos.In the latest edition of Texas Monthly there is a lead article basically called "Why They Hate US " and what is meant is not Americansbeing hated; but why the rest of America and the world hate "us" in Texas. Is not Texas basically larger than Germany? All the secessionists minded in Texas most certainly want to leave the American Union. Some gravitate back to Mexico and others gravitate toward absolute independence from everyone with the Mexicans on the bottom of the social order. Somebody got to mow the grass is the thinking of the latter trend. Is Texas a nation? Are the Mexicans in Texas national minorities or is the question a tad bit more complex and requires thinking
Re: Marxist Fianancial Advice
But is that because market prices aren't reflecting buying and selling, or because the buyers and sellers are irrational? Like I said, market prices can be efficiently reflecting nonsense. Doug The issue is not whether market prices reflect buying and selling. The issue is whether that happens instantly or not. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't, whatever the reasons. But this means that markets are not efficient even in the sense you defined. Simple logic, right? Look who is talking about logic! Sabri
To the author of the Nader = suicide bomber article in the Village Voice
Dr. Harry G. Levine, I had assumed that the author of the VV hatchet-job on Nader was some snot-nosed kid on George Soros's payroll. I was surprised to discover that it was instead written by a Queens College sociology professor: http://www.soc.qc.edu/Staff/levine/ (My advice, btw, is to trim the hair and beard. You are not 30 any more.) You have 2 articles on your website, one the VV article with the racist title and a similar one with the alternative title RALPH NADER AS MAD BOMBER. What's with the bomb obsession, anyhow? If you had allowed yourself just a tad more rhetorical excess, you might have wound up with something like Ralph Nader, oily Arab, go back where you came from. I see that you relied on the wretched G. William Domhoff for advice on your articles. This makes perfect sense. 35 years ago he earned some distinction for analyzing American class structure. In more recent years his attention seems to have turned toward the study of dreams and the need to vote for any Democrat, no matter how stinky. These two topics are obviously closely related. My suggestion to you is to take some Paxil or something to get rid of this obsession with Ralph Nader. Furthermore, you should not blame him for Gore's defeat in 2000. My old friend Peter Camejo told a news conference that over 200,000 registered Democrats in Florida voted for Bush that year. He also was sure that not a single Green Party member voted for Bush. If so, he demanded that the person turn himself in immediately. -- The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
A Day without a Mexican
A Day without a Mexican (a satirical mockumentary about the US economy's dependence on legal and illegal immigrant labor): http://montages.blogspot.com/2004/06/day-without-mexican.html -- Yoshie * Critical Montages: http://montages.blogspot.com/ * Bring Them Home Now! http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/ * Calendars of Events in Columbus: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/calendar.html, http://www.freepress.org/calendar.php, http://www.cpanews.org/ * Student International Forum: http://sif.org.ohio-state.edu/ * Committee for Justice in Palestine: http://www.osudivest.org/ * Al-Awda-Ohio: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio * Solidarity: http://www.solidarity-us.org/
Sovereignty lite in Iraq
Of course many jails will also be still under US control including Abu Ghraib. The interim govt. itself was chosen by the UN and vetted by US. The government is not to make laws but to be a caretaker. The laws are those passed by the occupation authorities including a recent law that gives US troops and contractors immunity from Iraq law, although there is dispute about how wide the exclusion will extend. Final say on security issues rests with US commanded multinational fig-leaf forces. The CPA is rushing to award all sorts of contracts that will bind new govt. once sovereignty is handed over to Iraqis.TheUS and its minions will continue to be kings of Saddam's castle. The US just recently noted that the new Iraq govt. will not be able to impose martial law.Only the US multinational force has authority to do that. Cheers, Ken Hanly Iraq's air and sea ports to stay under foreign control By Nicolas Pelham Published: June 24 2004 5:00 | Last Updated: June 24 2004 5:00 Iraq's air and sea ports will remain under foreign security control despite a formal transfer of sovereignty on June 30 to the interim government, according to coalition officials and security companies. In the dying weeks of its rule, the occupation administration says it is issuing contracts worth tens of millions of dollars to British security contractors in an effort to prolong foreign oversight of strategic ports that are vital to the US-led reconstruction effort. We hired a private contractor to train Iraqis and train themselves out of a job, says one of 16 coalition advisers at the transport ministry who will remain after June 30. Responsibility for security at the sea port of Umm Qasr has been awarded to the British company Olive. The coalition administration has also awarded Stevedoring Services of America a three-month contract to handle the administration and collection of revenue at the port, says SSA's John Walsh. An American company, Skylink, will continue to oversee air-traffic control at Baghdad airport at least until the end of September. Last-minute manoeuvring to keep a tight rein on security illustrates the coalition's nervousness at the transfer of power over strategic assets to Iraqis. Iraqi officials who had hoped the airport would return to Iraqi hands have voiced frustration at this month's United Nations resolution binding them to uphold the contracts awarded from the Development Fund of Iraq, the deposit for Iraq's oil revenues which the US-led administration is using to pay contractors. I prefer my people to secure the airport. It's a matter of sovereignty, says Louay al-Erris, Iraq's newly appointed transport minister. I don't think foreigners are more capable than Iraqi police and security. Iraqi officials have repeatedly alleged that military use of Baghdad International Airport (BIAP), has hampered its opening to commercial passenger traffic. Pent-up demand for travel in a country isolated by 25 years of sanctions and war is intense. While 500 aircraft land at BIAP daily, all but 50 are military craft. Coalition officials respond that they have gone out of their way to prepare BIAP for the handover. BIAP has been the largest American base in Iraq during the 16-month occupation, and the relocation of 15,000 troops to two adjacent camps, say US officials, amounts to a big concession. The coalition is making a sacrifice to give that airport back to Iraq, says the transport adviser, who adds that he has persuaded US military commanders they would still have access to Iraq's 160 other airfields. According to his plan, the ministry of transport would regain control of BIAP's eastern runway and terminals on July 1 and the western military runway by mid-August. He said he foresaw security contractors and Iraqi police working side by side. It remained unclear, he said, who would decide whether to lift the ban on Iraqi taxis entering the airport perimeter, for fear they were booby-trapped. But the security contractor at BIAP, Custerbattles, says its word on access to the airport remains final. We have the final say and the legal liability and that will carry over into the next contract, says Don Ritchie, programme manager for Custerbattles. But he added: If I was the Iraqi general in charge, I'd be upset because there's a security company doing things I think I should be doing. Iraqi officials also resent the contractors' recourse to foreign guards, viewing the presence of Nepalese, South African and British private security forces as an extension of the occupation. Bahnam Boulos, Iraq's former transport minister, who was replaced with the appointment of a new government on June 1, is sceptical of American US assurances that the security contracts will be short term. * A strike by US forces that destroyed a house in the Iraqi city of Falluja overnight killed about 20 foreign fighters, a senior military official said on Wednesday.Reuters reports from Baghdad. The US military says the strike targeted a
Re: Sovereignty lite in Iraq
shouldn't it be sovereignty NOT! in Iraq? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
FW: best article on housing situation I have seen yet
Steve Diamond [once of pen-l] sent me the following. I don't know its source, but it makes a lot of sense. -- jd. Why Rising Interest Rates Will Hammer Housingby Blanche Evans For many areas around the country, buyers are way ahead of Alan Greenspan. Sales are already "flattening out" as the Fed chief predicts will happen, because buyers in many metros are beginning to assess their risk and deciding it's too high. Overheated housing markets such as San Diego are beginning to report mild rises in inventory and longer days on market, signals that the housing frenzy may be abating, while buyers' markets like Dallas are sinking further into apathy with every 1/8 point rise in interest rates as buyers decide that affordability is a bigger factor than opportunity. New loan products and a relaxed lending environment, a lousy stock market, favorable tax laws and above average house sale returns, among other conditions have encouraged record homeownership to 68.6 percent last year. But many homeowners may get stuck in properties they can't sell if the nation sinks into a housing recession. There are just as many factors on the negative side of the housing column to suggest that could well happen: rising interest rates, record consumer debt service, lack of real job creation, fears over terrorism and the coming election, to name only a few. Every eighth of a point rise in interest rates impacts buyers' open-to-buy by adding as much as $25 or more per month to the monthly payment, depending on loan type. Consumer debt has reached 110 percent of disposable personal incomes. Despite a pace of three million new jobs created by year's end, unemployment figures are flat at 5.6 percent, if down from last year's peak of 6.3 percent. But, that figure is still 1. 6 million less than the number of jobs lost since 2001. Further, many new jobs don't pay what previous jobs did, according to the Economic Policy Institute. And, a 2.2 percent gain in earnings this year holds little comfort to those paying 35 percent more for a gallon of gas or double the price for a carton of milk, and eight percent more for housing nationally. A primary but undocumented factor is the change in attitudes buyers have about homeownership. Homes, in the "new economy," are no longer a place to live, but an investment. Many homeowners have adopted a kind of daytrader mentality toward their abodes, flipping homes for hefty profits, using their bankers' money. Other homeowners have cashed out their equity to service other debts or to make improvements. Many have purchased their homes with so little down that they can't afford to sell except at an inflated price. Never before has the home been such a crucial instrument of financial leverage. The prevailing notion among sellers is somehow that buyers should pay them for having made such a clever investment. Further, sellers believe they are entitled to sell at a profit - they want to get paid for occupying the home, even if it was for a short amount of time and their largesse is due to bankers' goodwill. Making no sense, but a factor, nonetheless, is that many homeowners who were burned in the stock market meltdown of 2000 believe they should be able to make those gains back with their housing investments. This is particularly true of retirees and empty nesters. Since 1980, according to the National Association of Home Builders, "home prices on average have increased around five percent annually and have never shown an annual loss." In fact, the housing market has been so good over the last eight years, that many homes have appreciated as much as 40 percent on average. No wonder sellers have come to expect profits on their homes. And that's the key word here - expectation. But buyers have expectations, too. They expect to realize equity, too, and now they are being told by the nation's most powerful economists that housing appreciation is slowing, interest rates are set to rise, and that job growth will offset rising housing prices. But for many the reality is different from the national statistics. Nationally, markets differ. California may be in a housing boom, but Texas is not. And booms turn into busts sooner or later. With interest rates rising, home appreciation is expected to slow, according to National Association of Realtors' economists. Buyers will want to be rewarded for buying in markets where slowing or flat home appreciation means more risk to equity-building. They not only don't want to pay the seller for occupying the home, they want some of that unrealized equity for themselves. They aren't as swayed by arguments that lending rates are at 30-year-lows as they have been, because interest rates have hovered at low levels for over six years. All they know is that they are paying a point more in interest than today than four months ago, and that alone should slow housing sales in many markets. Another point, and housing
Re: best article on housing situation I have seen yet
One of my colleagues doubles as a developer. He expects a bursting bubble for similar reasons -- especially the 100% loans. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
best article on housing situation I have seen yet
the article is from http://realtytimes.com/rtapages/20040623_hammerhousing.htm -Original Message- From: Devine, James Sent: Thu 6/24/2004 2:33 PM To: Pen-l (E-mail) Cc: Subject: FW: best article on housing situation I have seen yet Steve Diamond [once of pen-l] sent me the following. I don't know its source, but it makes a lot of sense. -- jd. Why Rising Interest Rates Will Hammer Housing by Blanche Evans For many areas around the country, buyers are way ahead of Alan Greenspan. Sales are already flattening out as the Fed chief predicts will happen, because buyers in many metros are beginning to assess their risk and deciding it's too high. Overheated housing markets such as San Diego http://realtytimes.com/rtmcrloc/California~San_Diego are beginning to report mild rises in inventory and longer days on market, signals that the housing frenzy may be abating, while buyers' markets like Dallas http://realtytimes.com/rtmcrloc/Texas~Dallas are sinking further into apathy with every 1/8 point rise in interest rates as buyers decide that affordability is a bigger factor than opportunity. New loan products and a relaxed lending environment, a lousy stock market, favorable tax laws and above average house sale returns, among other conditions have encouraged record homeownership to 68.6 percent last year. But many homeowners may get stuck in properties they can't sell if the nation sinks into a housing recession. There are just as many factors on the negative side of the housing column to suggest that could well happen: rising interest rates, record consumer debt service, lack of real job creation, fears over terrorism and the coming election, to name only a few. Every eighth of a point rise in interest rates impacts buyers' open-to-buy by adding as much as $25 or more per month to the monthly payment, depending on loan type. Consumer debt has reached 110 percent of disposable personal incomes. Despite a pace of three million new jobs created by year's end, unemployment figures are flat at 5.6 percent, if down from last year's peak of 6.3 percent. But, that figure is still 1. 6 million less than the number of jobs lost since 2001. Further, many new jobs don't pay what previous jobs did, according to the Economic Policy Institute. And, a 2.2 percent gain in earnings this year holds little comfort to those paying 35 percent more for a gallon of gas or double the price for a carton of milk, and eight percent more for housing nationally. A primary but undocumented factor is the change in attitudes buyers have about homeownership. Homes, in the new economy, are no longer a place to live, but an investment. Many homeowners have adopted a kind of daytrader mentality toward their abodes, flipping homes for hefty profits, using their bankers' money. Other homeowners have cashed out their equity to service other debts or to make improvements. Many have purchased their homes with so little down that they can't afford to sell except at an inflated price. Never before has the home been such a crucial instrument of financial leverage. The prevailing notion among sellers is somehow that buyers should pay them for having made such a clever investment. Further, sellers believe they are entitled to sell at a profit - they want to get paid for occupying the home, even if it was for a short amount of time and their largesse is due to bankers' goodwill. Making no sense, but a factor, nonetheless, is that many homeowners who were burned in the stock market meltdown of 2000 believe they should be able to make those gains back with their housing investments. This is particularly true of retirees and empty nesters. Since 1980, according to the National Association of Home Builders, home prices on average have increased around five percent annually and have never shown an annual loss. In fact, the housing market has been so good over the last eight years, that many homes have appreciated as much as 40 percent on average. No wonder sellers have come to expect profits on their homes. And that's the key word here - expectation. But buyers have expectations, too. They expect to realize equity, too, and now they are being told by the nation's most powerful economists that housing appreciation is slowing, interest rates are set to rise, and that job growth will offset rising housing prices. But for many the reality is different from the national statistics. Nationally, markets differ. California may be in a housing boom, but Texas is not. And booms turn into busts sooner or later. With interest rates rising, home appreciation is expected to slow, according to National Association of Realtors' http://www.realtor.org/ economists. Buyers will want to be rewarded for
Re: Marxist Fianancial Advice
on Royal Dutch Shleifer, Andrei. 2000. Are Markets Efficient? Wall Street Journal (28 December). Royal Dutch and Shell are independently incorporated in the and England, respectively. In 1907, they formed an alliance agreeing to merge their interests on a 60-40 basis while remaining separate and distinct entities. All their profits, adjusting for corporate taxes and control rights, are effectively split into these proportions. If prices are right, the market value of Royal Dutch should always equal 1.5 times the market value of Shell. In the early 1990s, Royal Dutch traded at a 5% to 7% discount from parity, while in the late 1990s it traded at up to a 20% premium. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
Re: Marxist Fianancial Advice
Keerist, can't we at least spell financial correctly? And then terminate this thread? Marxist financial advice. Come on. Cut it out. Where doe s this take us? Marxist arbitrage? Marxist hedge funds? Behind every free market there's a death squad, at least one. You need more money? S. Don't tell anyone. Figure it out yourself or go get a CFA. Next subject, Marxist methods of seducing housekeepers?
spam
there's so much spam these days, it's like smog. jd in LA
Re: Marxist Fianancial Advice
sartesian wrote: Keerist, can't we at least spell financial correctly? And then terminate this thread? Oh come off it. True the initial question, as phrased, was perhaps not very interesting, but a lot of different topics came up under the heading. And ultimately, maillists are conversation, not the formal meeting of the Political Committee of the Central Committee of The Sixth International. And a serious point, that's been bugging me for 35 years. The most chaotic parts of various regional and national conferences back during the '60s and early '70s were when someone started talking about what we should be talking about. It only led to talking about talking about what we should be talking about, which only led to talking about . . . . Carrol
Re: Marxist Fianancial Advice
hey, someone honestly asked for financial advice that's based on Marxian ideas. So there were some answers. I'd say the main one was that Marx doesn't have anything to add on this subject. Honest answer for an honest question. Why make fun? jd -Original Message- From: PEN-L list on behalf of sartesian Sent: Thu 6/24/2004 10:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Marxist Fianancial Advice Keerist, can't we at least spell financial correctly? And then terminate this thread? Marxist financial advice. Come on. Cut it out. Where doe s this take us? Marxist arbitrage? Marxist hedge funds? Behind every free market there's a death squad, at least one. You need more money? S. Don't tell anyone. Figure it out yourself or go get a CFA. Next subject, Marxist methods of seducing housekeepers?
HUD Community Resource Guide of Researchers/Evaluators Addressing Homelessness
To URPE Members and Friends From John McGah at UMass Boston [PLEASE RESPOND TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] at UMass Boston's Center for Social Policy if interested in appearing on the HUD list of researchers.] Dear researcher/evaluator: As you may know, HUD has required every community in the country to implement a Homeless Management Information System by October 2004 to collect comprehensive data on their homeless populations. As communities begin to set up their systems, many of them will be seeking to partner with researchers and evaluators to help informthe projectand interpret the data they arecollecting. The Center of Social Policy at UMass Boston has contracted with HUD and QED Group LLC to create a comprehensive list of researchers and evaluators,both centers and individuals, as a resource guide for local communities. We are producing a comprehensive list of researchers/evaluators with focus on poverty issues. If you are interested in being listed in this resource guide kindly respond by July 1 to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to the following4 short items: (1) Who is your primary contact person? (name, phone, e-mail, address, website) (2) What are your (centers) skill areas? (e.g., research/evaluation, poverty focus, welfare, homelessness, other) (3)Briefly describe any partnership(s) you havehadwith acommunity based organizationor local/state government (4) Can you recommend some other individuals/organizations that should be included on our list? Thank you for your interest. If you have any questions feel free to contact me at the Center for Social Policy, by e-mail at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or by phone at 617-287-5532. Thank you! John McGah Senior Research Associate Center for Social Policy UMass Boston 100 Morrissey Blvd. Boston, MA 02125 P: 617-287-5532 F: 617-287-5544 E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Marxist Fianancial Advice
I can't believe that I'm the only one to see the oxymoron in the question. As for making fun, or being insulting, is it possible that people are really that thin-skinned that they can't see the non-sequitors in their own proposals and questions? Can't laugh at themselves? Can't laugh with others laughing at them? I thought we were made of sterner stuff. Doesn't anybody have a sense of humor out there. And as the surrealists correctly pointed out, there is no humor without some element of cruelty. After what has transpired on, and off, the list over the Doss-Proyect conflict, my comments were truly benign-- I actually went through it twice to tone it down. Damn, you should see how we do it on the railroad. And I stand by what I said: behind every free market, behind every investment instrument there's a death squad. Plain and simple. - Original Message - From: Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2004 8:01 PM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Marxist Fianancial Advice hey, someone honestly asked for financial advice that's based on Marxian ideas. So there were some answers. I'd say the main one was that Marx doesn't have anything to add on this subject. Honest answer for an honest question. Why make fun? jd -Original Message- From: PEN-L list on behalf of sartesian Sent: Thu 6/24/2004 10:33 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Marxist Fianancial Advice Keerist, can't we at least spell financial correctly? And then terminate this thread? Marxist financial advice. Come on. Cut it out. Where doe s this take us? Marxist arbitrage? Marxist hedge funds? Behind every free market there's a death squad, at least one. You need more money? S. Don't tell anyone. Figure it out yourself or go get a CFA. Next subject, Marxist methods of seducing housekeepers?
Health Economist Position
To URPE Members and Friends Forwarded by Kim Christensen For information, contact: Helen Perry ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) FOR ADDITIONAL JOB POSTINGS, CHECK THE URPE WEBSITE: http://urpe.org/jobspostings.html ** CDC -- National Centers for Infectious Diseases Division of Bacterial and Mycotic Diseases Meningitis and Special Pathogens Branch Integrated Disease Surveillance and Response Initiative Atlanta, GA 30333 POSITION ANNOUNCEMENT Health Economist Post-Doctoral Fellowship Application Opening Date: June 1, 2004 Application Deadline: July 2, 2004 Location: Meningitis and Special Pathogens Branch (MSPB), Division of Bacterial and Mycotic Diseases (DBMD), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA 30333. Website: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dbmd/programs.htm The Meningitis and Special Pathogens Branch is responsible for investigation, surveillance, and control of meningitis, and other vaccine-preventable diseases for childhood and bacterial zoonotic diseases. MSPB has a history of applied economics research including, most recently, cost effectiveness of meningococcal conjugate vaccines and economic burden of Buruli Ulcer to households in Ghana. Project goals: A major project in MSPB is collaboration with the World Health Organization Regional Headquarters for Africa (AFRO) on integrated disease surveillance and response (IDSR). The goal of IDSR is to improve the availability and use of surveillance and laboratory data at the district level. IDSR addresses the availability of information that leads to early detection and control of nineteen priority communicable diseases in the African region. Position: We are inviting applications for a health economist to assist our IDSR team in development of critical questions and related studies that address cost implications of vertical versus integrated surveillance and response strategies and prevention effectiveness of IDSR using selected examples. The study results will be used to inform policy and guide public health leaders, private sector participants, funding partners and disease program managers in decision-making for improved resource mobilization and allocation for disease surveillance at national and international levels. Responsibilities: The successful candidate will: Evaluate existing data and support the team in developing an appropriate operational research agenda. Design and develop methodologies for analyzing costs and benefits of infectious disease surveillance in developing countries. Apply developed methodologies in gathering and analyzing data to evaluate the economics of a district surveillance package. Prepare interim reports and updates to support discussions with policy makers. Conduct an economic evaluation of IDSR Present findings in formal and non-formal settings and make finding accessible for practical applications in advocacy materials. Prepare manuscripts for biomedical journals. Qualifications PhD in Economics with specialization in health economics, prevention effectiveness or economics of health policy. Interest in collecting data from developing countries, particularly Africa. Self motivated and able to work very closely with non-economists from several disciplines, including epidemiologists, policy makers, training officers, clinicians, laboratorians, health educators, etc. Willing to look for innovative ways to combine economic theory and data analytic methodologies with public health data and theories. Willing to produce documents that are readily accessible to practical applications and multidisciplinary audiences as well as manuscripts that can be published in biomedical journals. Able to work with international non-economist counterparts in non-U.S. settings Willing to travel approximately 25% of the year. French- or Portuguese-language speaking ability is desirable. Compensation: The salary range is at the GS-12 to GS-13 level. Renewal for the second year is dependant upon successful performance appraisal for the first year. To apply: Please prepare an application packet that contains: 1. A letter describing your interest, qualifications and requirements for this position 2. A copy of your Curriculum Vitae 3. A list of three references with their contact information. Submit the materials by regular mail or E-mail to: Regular mail: Helen N. Perry, IDSR team leader CDC-NCID Division of Bacterial and Mycotic Diseases Meningitis and Special Pathogens Branch 1600 Clifton Rd. Mail Stop C-09 Atlanta, GA 30333 E-mail: Helen Perry ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Supervision of this position will be provided by Dr. Richard Besser, chief, MSPB/DBMD, Dr Martin Meltzer, Senior Health Economist, Dr Nancy Rosenstein, epidemiology section chief, MSPB/DBMD and Ms. Helen Perry, team leader for IDSR.
Undergrad Heterodox Programs Info Request
To URPE Members and Friends From Fred Lee Send responses to Fred at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Dear Colleagues, Previously with the help of Paddy Quick I compiled a list of universities/economic departments that had graduate programs in which heterodox economics was a significant component (see the attachment). We now would like to compile a similar list of colleges and universities whose undergraduate programs are broad, pluralistic and provide students with opportunities to examine and engage with mainstream and alternative/heterodox perspectives. Our purpose for compiling this list is to identify those colleges and universities where new entrants into academia as well as others who are interested in engaging with and teaching heterodox economics can do so in a friendly, supportive academic environment. What we are looking for is something like the following in terms of describing what your department is like: Luxemburg Veblen College, Kansas City, Missouri 64110 The Economics Department is a pretty heterodox friendly place. We have a political economy minor and regularly teach courses on Marxist and Institutionalist economics, have several other courses that include these as well as Post Keynesian, Feminist, Social, and Austrian perspectives. During their junior and senior year students have the opportunity to take a trip during Spring break to visit a sister college in Nicaragua where they can see how co-operative enterprises work. Finally, all majors in economics have a capstone course that has a community service component. Our ethos is to provide students with the capability to engage and understand both neoclassical and the range of heterodox approaches and then let them make their own choices. The Department brings in outside speakers three or four times a year. This past year we had John R. Commons, Joan Robinson, and Friedrich Hayek as guest speakers. We also have a faculty monthly seminar. For further information about the Department go to our website: http://www/lvc.econ.edu. Try to keep the description under 200 words. Please e-mail me the description of your department by October 1, 2004. The list will first be published in the URPE Newsletter and the distributed widely via my e-mail list. Sincerely, Fred
Re: Marxist Fianancial Advice
sartesian wrote: And I stand by what I said: behind every free market, behind every investment instrument there's a death squad. Plain and simple. Well yeah, so? Do you have a pension plan at the railroad? Do you think people should spend their golden years eating catfood? Doug
query: trickle-down economics
does anyone know of a good synonym for trickle-down economics besides supply side economics or Reaganomics or horse and sparrow economics? jd
Re: Marxist Fianancial Advice
One more thing, and I promise to come off it The query about Marxist financial advice devolved, or evolved, into a discussion of efficient markets, as if somehow markets were an abstraction from the social relations that drive free exchange; as if in fact, free markets did not require compulsion, force, and death squads to enforce their ultimate rationality. Markets, and efficiency, are thus fetishized... to the point that some who claim to be Marxists actually advocate buying emerging market country bonds, and Venezulean bonds in particular. Now that's rich, really a friggin knee slapper. Where years ago rock stars, Treasury Secretaries, jubilee celebrators, were urging cancellation of the debt, here come our efficent market Marxists urging others to become debt holders. Brilliant, absolutely brilliant. Proudhon got nothing on these guys, absolutely nothing. - Original Message - From: Carrol Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2004 8:09 PM Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Marxist Fianancial Advice sartesian wrote: Keerist, can't we at least spell financial correctly? And then terminate this thread? Oh come off it. True the initial question, as phrased, was perhaps not very interesting, but a lot of different topics came up under the heading. And ultimately, maillists are conversation, not the formal meeting of the Political Committee of the Central Committee of The Sixth International. And a serious point, that's been bugging me for 35 years. The most chaotic parts of various regional and national conferences back during the '60s and early '70s were when someone started talking about what we should be talking about. It only led to talking about talking about what we should be talking about, which only led to talking about . . . . Carrol
Re: Marxist Financial Advice
Sartesian: The query about Marxist financial advice devolved, or evolved, into a discussion of efficient markets, as if somehow markets were an abstraction from the social relations that drive free exchange; I don't think anyone engaged in this discussion claims or thinks that markets are an abstraction from the social relations. Efficient Market Hypothesis, as the name suggests, is just an hypothesis within the realm of neoclassical finance. Some take it seriously as this guy does: http://www.ima.umn.edu/public-lecture/2003-04/ross/ross.ppt Some like me don't! I don't give any financial advice to people, Marxist or otherwise. As a Turkish saying goes: If the bold had known how to cure boldness, he would have cured himself first! Best, Sabri
Re: Marxist Fianancial Advice
sartesian wrote: One more thing, and I promise to come off it The query about Marxist financial advice devolved, or evolved, into a discussion of efficient markets, as if somehow markets were an abstraction from the social relations that drive free exchange; as if in fact, free markets did not require compulsion, force, and death squads to enforce their ultimate rationality. Markets, and efficiency, are thus fetishized... to the point that some who claim to be Marxists actually advocate buying emerging market country bonds, and Venezulean bonds in particular. Oh right, Marx would never have been interested in writing about bourgeois economic theory. Doug
