Hi ECOFEMers!
Does anyone have the full citation--and a review if possible--of a
new book entitled __Feminism/Postmodernism/Development? The editors
are Marianne Marchand and Jane Parpart. Thanks in advance!
Stefanie S. Rixecker
Centre for Resource Management
Lincoln University
Canterbury
Aotearoa New Zealand
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Aug 14 16:04:12 1995
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 16:08:19 -0600 (MDT)
From: Catherine Lavender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: INFO: New List - IROQEC-L (Iroquois Nations Development)
Thought this might interest those studying Native American ecology.
Cathy
"The weed, like the red-eyed anarchist, is the symptom and not the cause
of a disturbed order."--Paul Sears
-------------------------------------------
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
IROQEC-L on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The IROQEC-L list was formed to serve as a vehicle for (1) discussion of
topics related to Native American community in ecology and economic
development with an emphasis on a culturally specific group, the Iroquois
nations, and (2) collection of any information related to this topic.
Archives of IROQEC-L and related files are stored on the IROQEC-L
FILELIST. To receive a list of files send the command `INDEX IROC-L'
(without the `') to LISTSERV@UBVM or [EMAIL PROTECTED] via a
mail message (again, as the first line in the body of the mail, not the
subject line).
To subscribe to IROQEC-L, send the command
SUB IROQEC-L your name
to LISTSERV@UBVM on BITNET or [EMAIL PROTECTED] via a mail
message (again, as the first line in the body of the mail, NOT the
subject line).
For example: SUB IROQEC-L John Doe
Owner: John Mohawk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Aug 14 17:27:11 1995
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 19:29:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: Bertina Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: distribution of wealth
In-Reply-To: <A10ZVWTE58JN*/R=DER/R=A1/U=RUSHANAN_A/@MHS>
The problem with such an issue is that it is thoroughly political. The
answers to distribution of wealth are varied and controversial. No one
answer can possibly be right. The 80s were prosperous to many but
yielded ultimately the problems we face now and in the future-i.e, the
exploded deficit problem. I think that is why some think we should go
back to the 80s style of economics-tax and spend. Reagan helped the rich
in the 80s but also during the time the number of Welfare, Medicare and
Medicaid recipients nearly trebled. I guess that was the definition of
trickle-down economics.
I doubt that many would want to return to the 80s style of
economics, nor do I believe its a solution.
My .02 worth
Bertina Miller
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
