On Sunday, March 10, 2002 at 18:27:36 (-0800) Rakesh Bhandari writes: >> >>In economic terms, the "current rot" can be traced to a business >>backlash against gains made by labor after WWII. Galbraith and >>Ferguson point out that government policy was vastly better 40 years >>ago than it is today, despite, obviously, the horrid social relations >>then extant. > >Bill, how and why did govt policy get worse?
Macro policy changes. I'll dig up the paper tonight and try to summarize tomorrow. Bedtime stories call... >>And if we count as part of capitalism those who live and work within >>it but who seek to change it, they have been strengthened in many >>ways, as can be seen from the sorts of protest visible in Seattle, >>something largely unthinkable 40 years ago. > >Not all change of liberal, global capitalism points in emancipatory >direction. ... I couldn't agree more. > .... I think Seattle--or rather the AFL CIO's Seattle--was >complex in its meaning and effects: it set the stage for a nasty anti >China campaign which I think made the Chinese leadership so fearful >of an arbitrary loss of markets that it caved into the US WTO >demands, aka economic recolonization; heavy protectionist measures >against Cambodia, Africa; possibly the electoral victory of Bush; >reneging on promises made to Caribbean nations; and the recent steel >decision. Can't answer your points, but even if I grant them (no reason to believe you are wrong) I still believe my point holds --- the protests in Seattle were something largely unthinkable 40 years ago, particularly the scale and the scope of the groups represented in protest, and it is, though as you say complex, I think, a very positive thing. Bill
