me:
>> Joan Robinson really did say the thing about "being exploited is
>> better than not being exploited." (I'm looking for the reference.) I
>> understood it as saying that _under unfettered capitalism_ it's better
>> to be in the active army of labor (employed) than being part of the
>> reserve army (unemployed).

raghu:
> Especially when even organized labor does nothing to support the
> unemployed or the Third World poor.

Do you think that organized labor in the US has the power to do this
in 2009-10? [*]

Have the first world or third world capitalists, organized labor's
organized opposition, been really supportive of the unemployed or the
3rd world poor (when the unemployed or poor don't struggle to force
the provision of support)?
-- 
Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own
way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante.

[*] I can't talk about organized labor outside the US, but even when
it was relatively strong (from the 1940s to the 1960s), the AFL-CIO
leadership supported US imperialism (wholeheartedly). Perhaps, they
_believed_ that they were supporting the unemployed and Third World
poor, but IMHO that belief was misguided at best.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to