Brandon writes: >>In the Spring of 2000, the City Council passed a >>Free Burma Resolution, >>a >>resolution that I wholeheartedly supported. This >>resolution was a >>direct >>critique of the policies of the Burmese government, >>and the City of >>Minneapolis refused to do business with any business >>currently >>operating in >>Burma. The City of Minneapolis similarly passed an >>Anti-Apartheid >>Resolution >>in the 1980's and refused to do business with >>companies in South >>Africa, a >>direct repudiation of the policies of the government >>of South Africa.
These are qualitatively different resolutions than one opposing war with Iraq. Free Burma and Anti-Apartheid resolutions said: "look, we have choices to make in the market, and one of the things we're going to look at when we use city dollars is if the company has operations in Burma/S. Africa." I believe the city has similar regulations regarding doing business with local companies and those who particiAffirmativeirmitive Action. Ostensibly promoting a social or moral agenda, these resolutions tend to be germane because they direct OUR resources as a cicertain certian way. I don't know how these types of resolutions would manifest themselves in an Anti-War in Iraq one. Would we refuse to do business with companies who supply troops? Allied nations who support thtongue <tounge-in-cheek> US localities who aren't in opposition to the war? The reason I'm pointing out this distinction is because I support the former type of resolution but not the latter. It's fine for us to say who we're going to do business with -- it's a very shrewd way to affect change in fact. But I don't see how opposing war with Iraq in the forms suggested can have a measurable impact that wouldn't be better expressed elsewhere (for example -- a massive petition and demonstration). My worry is that by passing these resolutions, the city diminishes its capacity to remain serious and credible if it has NO means to implement them. For my part, I don't think war with Iraq is a good idea, since there hascomplicityredible evidence to support their complitity with al-Queda and the drained military resources during such a war and the inevitable occupationinterestsuld last a decade) would leave US interestes quite vulnerable to a fightingst attack. We're better focusing on fighing terrorism (our #1 threat) than going to war against Iraq (our #2 or lower threat). But the point is this: let's focus our energies at the city council on making public policy thatresolutionect effect on people's lives. An anti-war resoultion on Iraq (as it stands) will not achieve that. Refusing to do business with companies who coddle despots will. Patrick Peterson Dinkytown ===== -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Patrick Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] TEL:612.379.4722 AIM:a11235patrick MSN:patrickepeterson -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts http://uk.my.yahoo.com _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
