>>A pseudo-internationalism that thwarts the immediate needs of the
national working class (yes, this certainly includes Native American
workers too, Lou's tart rejoinder notwithstanding)to keep its labor
marketable at better than a mere subsistence wage, is not progressive
at all. It is the insinuation of the capitalist desire for
acccumalation into labor's discourse, however inadvertent. <<
I think the comrade fails to follow through consistently with his
argument.
It is not just foreigners who are a threat to American labor. What
about Blacks, hispanics, and so on, not to mention women?
Blacks, for example, could be restricted by law to spheres like
digging ditches, sanitary engineering and so on.
Hispanics, of course, to stoop labor in the fields.
Women to domestic services, teaching (below the university level),
nursing and, er, certain sectors of the entertainment industry.
Jews ...
Well you know what to do about Jews.
The again, maybe all the Blacks, Hispanics, Jews, Chinese and women
should just get together and offer up brain-dead racist capitalist
bootlickers like this asshole.
Jos�
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2000 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: [CrashList] Re: Communist Internationalist Position on
Immigration and Travel
I think Lou is right that this issue is too important to ignore. On
the other hand, I consider his response a textbook example of what
happens when one attempts "socialist" theorizing while ignoring the
central dialectic of the class struggle.
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
