[PEN-L:11622] Re: The Beats
Friends, I think that Jim Craven's attack on the "Beats" is a little overboard. It's hard to see how a radical person could not be moved by allen ginsburg's "America" or "kaddish" and many others. I'm not excusing the way they lived or some of their more outrageous acts of sexism, etc. But still a person can gain something from the writing without endorsing anything else. also, jim's view of anarchists is a little too strong in my view. During the spanish civil war, the anarchists converted churches into latrines. they can't be all bad! in solidarity, michael yates
[PEN-L:11625] Re: William S. Burroughs
Louis: I heard Burroughs speak at a rally in Grant Park, Chicago during the 1968 Democratic Convention, after the first police violence broke out. He was brilliant and penetrating. See the issue of Esquire in late 68 on the convention for more from the old reptillian reprobate. Ethan Young At 09:09 AM 8/5/97 -0700, you wrote: William S. Burroughs' death has been on my mind. Long before I was a Marxist, I was a youthful member of the beat generation. In 1960 I read Jack Kerouac's On the Road and a year or so later I read Burroughs' Naked Lunch. These two works deepened my outsider identity. It was the 1960s radicalization that transformed my outsider status into one of revolutionary as I became conscious of the social and economic forces that were arrayed against me and the working class. On the Road and Naked Lunch are two dialectically opposed works that add up to a penetrating critique of the Eisenhower era. On the Road emphasized the sunny, Whitmanesque, positive aspects of America where the open road, truck-stops, jazz clubs and automats serve as proof of the wonders of this country as long as you look in the right places. After reading On the Road I dedicated myself to a search for these right places. Naked Lunch offered a completely different view of the world. It was a cold-turkey nightmare of urban decay, sexual perdition and self-loathing. When I read Naked Lunch I was attuned to the essential clarity of Burroughs' vision. Yes, this also was America. From that moment on, I was always sensitive to the Kerouac-esque and Burroughs-esque dual nature of American society. What America certainly was not was the television lies of "Leave it to Beaver" or "Life With Father." Burroughs' literary landscape was inhabited by grotesque mechanical objects that took on a terrifying life of their own. Surgical instruments, suppositories, diesel engines, radios, etc. were transformed into ghoulish objects capable of torture and death. They grew arms and legs and stalked about the miserable apartments that the Naked Lunch characters--such as they were--inhabited. Oddly enough, there is a certain affinity between Naked Lunch and the gothic novels of Stephen King. King's novels' central device is to take inanimate objects and invest them with ghastly qualities, such as the homicidal car Christine. Certainly one can imagine the influence of Burroughs on King. As a English major at the University of Maine, he was taught by instructors who consciously identified with the beat movement. Occasionally you will see epigraphs to the chapters of his novels that are drawn from this outsider literature. Burroughs' relationship to the left was non-existent. As the ultimate misanthrope, it is difficult to imagine him speaking from the platform of a peace rally like Allen Ginsburg. It is also impossible to imagine him as a reactionary like Kerouac in his dying, alcoholic latter years. What Burroughs did articulate was a savage hatred for the destruction industrial society wrought on the United States. There is a powerful video that I saw once that simply consists of William S. Burroughs sitting on a chair ruminating on Thanksgiving. It is a jeremiad against the destruction of the Indians, buffaloes and forests in the name of Progress. The New York Times obituary concludes in this vein: "To the end of his life, Mr. Burroughs remained pessimistic about the future for mankind. In 'Ghost of a Chance,' he lamented the destruction of rain forests and creatures and wrote: 'All going, to make way for more and more devalued human stock, with less and less of the wild spark, the priceless ingredient--energy into matter. A vast mudslide of soulless sludge.'" Louis Proyect
[PEN-L:11626] Fwd: FW: Bill Gates
Another bill gates joke. maggie coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: FW: Bill Gates When Bill Gates became the proud father of a baby daughter earlier this year, a group of Usenet lurkers compiled the following list of similarities bewteen a typical Microsoft software release and the heir to Bill's fortune. 1. Neither can stand on its own two feet without a lot of third party support. 2. Both barf all over themselves regularly. 3. Regardless of the problem, calling Microsoft Tech Support won't help. 4. As they mature, we prey that they will be better than that which precede them. 5. At first release they're relatively compact, but they seem to grow and grow and grow with each passing year. 6. Although announced with great fanfare, pretty much anyone could have produced one. 7. They arrive in shaky condition with inadequate documentation. 8. No matter what, it takes several months between the announcement and the actual release. 9. Bill gets the credit, but someone else did most of the work. 10. For at least the next year, they'll suck. - Forwarded message: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (MRS STEPHANIE B MCAULIFFE) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 97-08-06 03:52:05 EDT ... Start of Forwarded message via Prodigy Mail From:Nancy S. Foss Subject: "Carla Woodcock": FW: Bill Gates Date:08/04 Time:01:56 PM Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 23]) 13:49:02 EDT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 13:39:19 -0400 Subject: "Carla Woodcock": FW: Bill Gates X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-43 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nancy S. Foss) Subject: FW: Bill Gates When Bill Gates became the proud father of a baby daughter earlier this year, a group of Usenet lurkers compiled the following list of similarities bewteen a typical Microsoft software release and the heir to Bill's fortune. 1. Neither can stand on its own two feet without a lot of third party support. 2. Both barf all over themselves regularly. 3. Regardless of the problem, calling Microsoft Tech Support won't help. 4. As they mature, we prey that they will be better than that which precede them. 5. At first release they're relatively compact, but they seem to grow and grow and grow with each passing year. 6. Although announced with great fanfare, pretty much anyone could have produced one. 7. They arrive in shaky condition with inadequate documentation. 8. No matter what, it takes several months between the announcement and the actual release. 9. Bill gets the credit, but someone else did most of the work. 10. For at least the next year, they'll suck. End of Forwarded message Stephanie McAuliffe Prodigy Distribution List TO: TXTG44A TO: TXTG44E
[PEN-L:11628] Hong Kong Voice Of Democracy
http://www.democracy.org.hk/ Mission Statement Founded on the premise that accurate information is absolutely critical to monitoring the way of life and the rights of the Hong Kong people after the transition to Chinese rule, we seek to create a space which chronicles the activities of the grass-roots democracy movement of Hong Kong and the political climate in which it operates through the period of transition and beyond. Given that, at the time of the founding of this organization, indications are that freedom of the press, whether by self-censorship or by direct government intervention, is under imminent threat, such an endeavor seems the only way to continue the free discussion of the performance of Hong Kong's government in safeguarding the fundamental rights of society. This site will maintain a porthole through which concerned observers throughout the world and the people of Hong Kong themselves can view the significant period in Hong Kong history. Francis T.L. Lau Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: (852) 2411 2094 Fax: (852) 2493 3953 Hong Kong Voice Of Democracy http://www.democracy.org.hk/ April Fifth Action http://members.hknet.com/~tllau/default.html
[PEN-L:11630] Re: rrpe and the Beats
The goal is to make the review more than just a venue for scholarly articles, to make it more useful to those who are not professors of economics. michael yates Response: I'm combining my responses on two issues: 1) on the above statement, it's about time. Often when I read articles in RRPE I have the same feeling I get when I read some of the "Beats"--So what? or what do I or the subjects of the piece do with this? Where does it take me? What is the use of taking on the neoclassicals by cranking out articles even more reductionistic, linear, technique-fetishistic, abstract and esoteric than what the neoclassicals put out. I sometimes get the feeling that RRPE represents for some a kind of market niche and a way to get "academic respectability" and CV notches by making RRPE similar to--and therefore as "respectable" as-- some of the "mainstream" journals while also being "progressive" (Oh I am part of the class struggle with my article re-examining Marx's theory of value). All I can say about these opinions, like my opinion about the "Beats" and anarchism in general (with all due and sincere reverence for the individual anarchists who have given lives and suffering in struggles against various forms of despotism), is to quote Dennis Miller: "That's just my opinion; of course I could be wrong." I think Kerouac's Institute for Disembodied Poetry was correctly named: disembodied from real conditions, real people, real concerns, real language, real struggles tied-in with the issues being alluded to in the poetry. I'm surprised the neoclassicals haven't used some of the "Beats", their poetry, lifestyles, elitist aloofness as models and "proofs" of some of the core neoclassical "axioms" about human nature, human propensities and human behavior. Again, that's just my opinion and of course, I could be wrong. Jim Craven *---* * "Those who take the most from the table,* * James Craventeach contentment. * * Dept of Economics Those for whom the taxes are destined, * * Clark College demand sacrifice.* * 1800 E. Mc Loughlin Blvd. Those who eat their fill, * * Vancouver, Wa. 98663speak to the hungry, * * (360) 992-2283 of wonderful times to come. * * Fax: (360) 992-2863Those who lead the country into the abyss,* * [EMAIL PROTECTED] call ruling difficult, * * for ordinary folk." (Bertolt Brecht) * * MY EMPLOYER HAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH MY PRIVATE/PROTECTED OPINION *
[PEN-L:11633] quote of the day
After indicating how swimmingly everything is going in the US economy: "True, CEOs and blue-collar workers share a sense of insecurity about jobs. But the former have platinum parachutes, while the latter often have their pick of new jobs from which to choose." -- Rudi Dornbusch, "Why This Recovery Won't Fall Off the Track Soon," BUSINESS WEEK, August 11, 1997, p. 20. He also says that "Median real family income, adjusted with a realistic measure of inflation, is also at its highest recorded level." Does "realistic" mean Boskinized? This all reminds me of a cartoon that was in BUSINESS WEEK within the last few months. It showed a bunch of happy economists raising their hands. Above it said: "It is now unanimous. All economists agree that there is no economic downturn in sight." Below it says: "Warning sign." in pen-l solidarity, Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ. 7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA 310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950 "It takes a busload of faith to get by." -- Lou Reed.
[PEN-L:11637] Request for Help
I will be leaving on August 19th, at the request of the Tribal Council, to work on the Piegan Blackfeet Reservation at Browning Montana; the work involves analysis of conditons and options for developing some Tribal lands and enterprises as alternatives to the usual highly volatile and corrupting gambling casinos. If anyone has done work or has references on the methodologies and econometrics involved in the [under]valuation of oil and gas reserves and extractions for purposes of [under]valuing royalties due to Indian Tribes and Nations (during Reagan/Bush over $5 billion in royalties due were not paid), or, work on the billions missing in the BIA Trust Fund Accounts, or, work on microcredit, I would really appreciate references to such work. Thanks for any assistance and no this is not another rant. Jim Craven *---* * "Those who take the most from the table,* * James Craventeach contentment. * * Dept of Economics Those for whom the taxes are destined, * * Clark College demand sacrifice.* * 1800 E. Mc Loughlin Blvd. Those who eat their fill, * * Vancouver, Wa. 98663speak to the hungry, * * (360) 992-2283 of wonderful times to come. * * Fax: (360) 992-2863Those who lead the country into the abyss,* * [EMAIL PROTECTED] call ruling difficult, * * for ordinary folk." (Bertolt Brecht) * * MY EMPLOYER HAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH MY PRIVATE/PROTECTED OPINION *
[PEN-L:11640]
More from the Teamster Website: Teamsters Union Monday, August 4, 1997 MEDIA ALERT "NEUTRAL" EMORY UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC RECEIVES UPS MONEY Emory University management professor Jeffrey Sonnenfeld who has portrayed himself to the media as an objective commentator on the Teamster strike at UPS is director of an organization that receives UPS Foundation money. Since 1992 the Center for Leadership and Career Studies at Emory University has received $1.125 million in grants from the UPS Foundation. The ties between the Center and UPS are strong. UPS Chairman and CEO Kent Nelson was a founding sponsor of the Center and its CEO college. In 1996, the Center gave Nelson its Legend in Leadership award. Teamsters News Release Tuesday, Aug. 5, 1997, 2 p.m. CAREY CALLS ON UPS TO RESUME NEGOTIATIONS TEAMSTERS PRESIDENT ASKS LABOR SECRETARY ALEXIS HERMAN TO CONTACT COMPANY NOW THAT UPS IS SHUT DOWN, "THERE'S NOTHING MORE FOR THEM TO WAIT FOR" Teamsters President Ron Carey today called on UPS to come back to the bargaining table to negotiate a contract that provides good jobs for American workers. Carey said that in a scheduled telephone call with Labor Secretary Alexis Herman this afternoon, he will ask Herman to see if the company is prepared to resume negotiations. "There is nothing more for them to wait for," Carey said. "The strike has shut them down. Now it's time for them to get serious about a settlement. "We are prepared to meet -- anytime, anywhere, with a mediator or without one -- to negotiate a contract that provides good jobs for working families." Carey made the announcement during a picket line news conference with Jesse Jackson in Burtonsville, Maryland. Jackson said UPS's lower-wage, part-time job strategy amounts to "work to welfare." He led union members in chanting, "Full-Time Jobs! Full-Time Jobs!" More than 185,000 Teamsters struck UPS at midnight Sunday night after the company refused for five months to negotiate a contract that makes major progress on several priority issues. UPS made more than a billion dollars in profits last year. Yet more than half the jobs at UPS are now lower-wage, part-time jobs. Management's last proposal demands the right to increase that percentage, while creating only 200 new full-time jobs per year. Teamster members are seeking to create thousands of new full-time job opportunities by combining existing part-time positions. The union is seeking subcontracting language that would ensure that UPS jobs grow as the company grows. But management continues to demand the right to subcontract Teamster work. Teamsters want pension improvements, while management is demanding control over union members' retirement money. Under the company's proposal, UPS -- instead of Teamster members -- could get the benefit of the income from pension fund investments.
[PEN-L:11641] Reuters Wire Copy on UPS Strike
Here are three Reuters News stories I pulled off the Web: - AFL-CIO says it would aid UPS strikers if asked 05:09 p.m Aug 06, 1997 Eastern CHICAGO (Reuter) - AFL-CIO President John Sweeney said Wednesday his union would provide unspecified monetary support to striking United Parcel Service workers, if asked. Speaking after a Teamsters union rally in Chicago, Sweeney said the AFL-CIO could provide loans or grants to the Teamsters strike fund, which was set to begin paying out at least $55 a week to each striker beginning at the end of next week. ``They haven't made any specific request,'' Sweeney told Reuters. ``But whatever they need.'' Told that paying 186,000 strikers each $55 per week amounted to more than $10.2 million a week, Sweeney replied that amount ''could be easily raised from (AFL-CIO) locals in loans and grants.'' During the last national election, the AFL-CIO devoted an estimated $30 million for an advertising campaign in support of Democratic candidates. A Teamsters spokesman in Washington said the strike that began Monday would not be compromised by the size of the union's strike fund. He also dismissed reports that the Teamsters national strike fund was virtually depleted at about $6 million. In Chicago, Teamsters Local 705 spokesman Paul Waterhouse said the local had accumulated $1 million in supplemental funds for its 11,000 members. Decisions about how to dole out the funds had yet to be determined and would depend on how long the strike was expected to last. Sweeney spoke forcefully to the striking union members in Chicago and praised them for having ``picked up the gauntlet on behalf of of all American workers and their families. Their struggle is now our struggle.'' Copyright 1997 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication and redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. New Pressure on UPS, Teamsters to Talk 04:14 p.m Aug 06, 1997 Eastern By David Morgan ATLANTA (Reuter) - United Parcel Service and its 185,000 striking workers came under growing pressure to restart stalled labor talks Wednesday as the effects of the biggest job action this decade rippled through the economy. But a day after Labor Secretary Alexis Herman urged UPS Chief Executive James Kelly and Teamster President Ron Carey back to the bargaining table, no new talks had been scheduled. Thousands of members of the Teamsters union, including drivers, package sorters and loaders, spent a third day on picket lines from Maine to California, while 50,000 non-union workers scrambled to keep parts of the huge UPS network running. The union also had backing from 2,000 unionized UPS pilots who have refused to cross Teamster picket lines. With more than 90 percent of UPS deliveries at a standstill, a group representing the chief executives of major retailers, including Sears and Kmart, called on President Clinton to personally encourage both sides to restart talks. Wall Street investors also got their first taste of the strike's direct impact on businesses. ``The economy, which is enjoying unprecedented sustained growth, could experience a sudden downward spiral if this strike continues for an extended period,'' the National Retail Federation said in a letter to Clinton. Retail sales of $2.5 trillion account for one-third of the nation's economy. About $50 billion of that is from catalog and mail order sales that rely heavily on UPS. But the president has so far ruled out intervening directly, saying there was no threat to national health and safety. He and members of his administration instead have urged UPS and the Teamsters to try to resolve differences over pay and benefits, especially pensions, and the company's growing use of lower-wage part-time workers. UPS controls 80 percent of the U.S. parcel delivery business, normally handling 12 million packages a day. The strike has caused escalating logistical problems and higher shipping costs for businesses, manufacturers and consumers who have relied on UPS deliveries to move their packages and documents. Sport-Haley Inc., for example, a Denver-based sportswear maker, told investors that a prolonged work stoppage could hurt its earnings by driving up shipping costs. Its stock tumbled $2.50 to $13.75 on Nasdaq, a drop of 15 percent. UPS, with annual sales of $22.4 billion, also said in a filing with securities regulators that the first national strike in its 90-year history would hurt earnings and cost it customers. Meanwhile, behind-the-scenes expectations for renewed talks appeared to be on the rise, as UPS facilities across the country remained idle and
[PEN-L:11642] Express yourself!
One way to supporter the Teamsters is to join an "electronic picketline." You can express an opinion to UPS concerning the contract negotiations and strike of UPS employees. Here are two e-mail addresses to which you can address your views: Customer Service:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Website Administrator: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In solidarity, Michael Remember: Solidarity begins with YOU!
[PEN-L:11643] Re: Barbara Ehrenreich
Max: I don't know about Hillary Clinton, but Ehrenreich's The Hearts of Men is one of the most insightful books I have read in the last five years. It argues quite credibly that the fifties -- whether the Beats or Playboy -- began the assault on the idea of the responsible family man, and it was carried thru the New Left. Whereas the media believe that the decline in marriage rates is because women are make other choices, it may well be that the real reason is that men are fleeing commitment. Ehrenreich's book goes along way in explaining why the latter has been quite noticeable. Robert Cherry
[PEN-L:11647] Re: overblown rhetoric - more clarifications
On Mon, 4 Aug 1997, Wojtek Sokolowski wrote: vis a vis that peculiar instituion. If we understand fascism as a peculiar form of authoritarianism that developed in Italy and germany ca. 1920 that definition implies a negative answer to that question. But if we define fascism as corporatist authoritarianism that might take different historical-cultural forms, and the Italian German developments were but two such forms, then of course the question "can it happen here" remains not only valid but pretty much open. As far as the court system is concerned, however, it brought the citizens not only civil rights, but also gives them considerable protection against corporate power. The corporate oligarchy is very unhappy with that, and they have been working very hard to gut the whatever legal protection we have. From the anti-terrorist bill sponsored by Clinton, to the subversion of local protective legislation under NAFTA, to the limitations on corporate liability, to gag rule, now passed by the state, that extend the libel law to corporate products -- that may not be as dramatic as Hitler's suspension of the constitution, but it is a slow but sure process of gutting the last protection we have against corporate power -- the legal system and the courts. Of course, I'm not arguing that even if the process of corporate assaul on democracy succeeds, we will have the same fascist rule as it existed in Germany or Italy. Again, I understand fascism as corporatist authoritarianism that can take many different, culturally determined forms. To be sure, I'm not making prediction that this will happen, all I'm saying this is lilely to happen if things stay on their present course. I'll butt into this conversation to support Wojtek's views about fascism, and the fascist-like realities which many Americans have to endure. But the courts are also fascist for many Americans. "Fascism" was, as Woj says, a culture dependent phenomenon of it's time. We can draw certain attributes of fascist societies, and claim, as we often sloppily do, that because of similar attributes in our own society(ies), that we are fascist or moving towards fascism. The fascisms of the 20's and 30's were part of the aftermath of the first world war. The alliances which emerged in that war must have led many Americans to become disappointed when the war ended. This is because the American government, with a political system which was naturally opposed to the monarchal systems of Europe, nontheless aligned itself with Great Britain and other monarchies whose systems of government remained unchanged after the war. Therefore, I think it's fair to conclude that American foreign policy during and after the first world war substantially reflected "balance of power" politics in a world scale instead of "form-of-government" imperialism. If post-war (ww1) world politics had been governed purely by form-of-government considerations as they were increasingly represented with paper constitutions, then socialist-communist Russia and Weimar Germany and other nations with new constitutions could arguably have been ascribed as "the most free", not the U.S. or Britain. Desirable attributes of "democracy" and "freedom" were subsequently, I presume, ascribed to countries like Britain and France, and anti-democratic attributes were ascribed elsewhere. Thus, the words "freedom", "democracy", "dictatorship", "totalitarianism", "fascism", and the like have since been thrown around like remnants of the world order during that historical period. As has been more or less stated in this discussion thread, the fascist countries can be said to have been fascist because they were run like tightly controlled corporations in order to be able to compete economically and militarily with the major victors of the first world war, and in the process to avoid experiencing a Russian style turnover. Thus, you saw certain types of consolidation (merger) between public and private power, with a broad range of civil rights taking the back seat since they did not contribute to the power and profit of the fascist corporate state. Civil liberties (as we used to dream about) were not an affordable insular phenomenon except through the spirit of the corporate state, which, in character, pursued "justice", or whatever, along international dimensions, and by state-sanctioned persecution of disfavored minorities, all in a way which would not ruin the *incentives* of favored citizens and interest groups to support the fascist powers-that-be. Freedom of expression, particularly against the Jewish people for example, was expanded into "freedom to punish" and freedom to engage in other irrational and even more extreme actions to which they fell victim. In the U.S., there is substantial consolidation between the government and exclusionary private interest groups, ala americana. Powerful corporations and government itself are in many ways front
[PEN-L:11649]
Teamsters News Release Wednesday, August 6, 1997 MEDIA UPDATE ON TEAMSTER UPS STRIKE These are some developments in the Teamster strike against UPS: Postal Workers Support Striking Teamsters by Refusing to Allow Postal Service to Hire Emergency Workers Postal workers are standing behind striking Teamsters at United Parcel Service by refusing a request from the U.S. Postal Service to hire emergency temporary workers to help handle the increased volume resulting from the shutdown of UPS. "We fully support the Teamsters in their struggle with UPS for good, full-time jobs for working families," said Moe Biller, president of the American Postal Workers Union. "There will be no waiver granted by the APWU to the Postal Service to increase the use and number of casuals at the national or local level." Under the APWU contract, the union has the right to approve the hiring of casual -- or temporary -- workers. Carey, AFL-CIO Pres. Sweeney Walk Picket Line in Chicago Teamsters President Ron Carey today was joined at a Chicago UPS picket line by AFL-CIO resident John Sweeney and other leaders of America's major unions. Sweeney said, "The driving issues behind this strike reach directly into the living rooms and the pocketbooks of every working family in America." Fedex Workers Rally at UPS Picket Line Indianapolis Federal Express workers involved in an ongoing campaign to organize with the Teamsters Union are joining UPS workers on the picket line today in Indianapolis at 4:00 p.m. "The UPS Teamsters are fighting for us, too, " said Leanna Cochran, a FedEx worker who's leading the drive to organize the delivery giant in Indianapolis. "We have to stop big companies from shifting to throwaway jobs that don't provide decent wages or the security our families need." Houston Police Announce "Zero Tolerance" for Management-Driven UPS Trucks Houston police officers, members of the Houston Police Patrolmen's Union, announced today that they would be on the lookout for UPS trucks driven by management personnel and would pull them over for any violations. "Once the HPPU member gets the vehicle stopped they are instructed to go into a 'zero tolerance' mode and cite each and every violation of the law they find," the union said in a statement.
[PEN-L:11648] RE: Puerto Rico, Democracy and Anti-colonial Struggle
Puerto Rico, Democracy and Anti-Colonialism in a Post-Colonial World? Ted Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I was disturbed by Victor Rodriguez's comment that: Recently, the Machetero Guerrilla Army which since its dramatic attacks during the 980s (including the bombing of several U.S. Air Force Corsair planes, FBI offices) has not conducted military operations, warned that it would retaliate if the sale was finalized. I can understand the frustration of statists who are frustrated when the democratic process goes against them, but if the elected government of Puerto Rico decides to sell its telephone company, this is not a moral justification for armed terrorism. I know Victor did not actually advocate this, but using it as a threat is also morally wrong in my view. Democracy is very important in Latin America as elsewhere, and people should respect the results of the democratic process. --- Ted is absolutely right when he says I am not advocating a military response I am just sharing information about the nature of anti-colonial dynamics in this wacky post-colonial, globalized etc. world. However, it seems to me the moral issue is quite different from the way Ted frames it. Particularly in these post-cold war times when the victorious capitalist consumer culture has even "commodified" Ernesto "Che" Guevara ( I saw a nice coffee cup the other day with chic red letters "Che!") who probably was the most eloquent proponent of military (violent etc.) response by the oppressed. Poet Adrienne Rich's recent piece rejecting the National Arts medal makes a call for re-understanding Marx, indeed Lenin's finance capital concept seems quite insightful today, maybe deserving of a critical re-reading. Maybe we need to think through some of the cliches about democracy in this new era? When is democracy truly democratic? Probably most would agree that the formal process of voting is a necessary but not a defining element of a democratic system. Most communist, and other capitalists dictatorships have had elections. At the very least a democratic process would insure that the will of the people is heard and implemented and that there is protection of dissenting views. Puerto Rico's colonial system does not satisfy these principles. First of all, at a time when the world nations are discussing the interdependence of national political and economic systems Puerto Rico is still grappling with the 19th century issue of colonialism or the lack of democracy (with the devolution of Hong King P.R. remains as the last major colonial possession). Puerto Ricans have served (been drafted) in to the U.S. armed forces in every military conflict (war) since 1917 however they have not voting representative in Congress. Puerto Rican land is held by U.S. armed forces for military outposts, communications centers etc. without any local sanction. Despite Puerto Rico's constitution prohibition and Puerto Rican cultural values abhorrence of the death penalty, federal law imposed it on federal-related cases. Puerto Ricans can't choose their currency, with whom they trade (unless permission is granted by a federal bureaucrat) or decide what kind of standards are applied to local, Puerto Rican (in Spanish) television and radio communication, environment, or health regulations unless a non-Spanish "American" authorizes it. To top this off, the process to "define Puerto Rico's status" (Young Bill in Congress) does not follow basic international law guidelines, including allowing "foreigners" (Non-Puerto Ricans residing in the island and whose resident status is determined by the U.S. not local "democratic" authorities) to vote in deciding the island's future but not allowing Puerto Ricans who had to migrate to the US. to vote (similar to tactics of settler states to dilute indigenous population strength). A significant portion of the exiles are in some sense political exiles who experienced repression in their own homeland by federal agencies (See Ronald Fernandez' "Disenchanted Island (1996)" particularly Ch 8 on FBI's Cointelpro's campaign
[PEN-L:11646] Re: William S. Burroughs
I wonder if some of these disputes can be narrowed. On WB I'm in enthusiastic agreement with Max and Louis on the subversive nature of his work and its comic intelligence. One of the things that may have made Burroughs and Ginsburg more insightful than say Kerouac is that they were gay men, were willing to think through what that meant w/o apology. _On the Road_ by contrast has a boy's-adventure quality to it that, while not devoid of homoerotic qualities, still takes the patriarchal family as a norm from which their road trip is a sort of vacation. Jim C really raises a much broader question of what we should ask of artists. I'd argue that we should be grateful if, as with Fela Kuti's work, there is something unsettling in what an artist offers. There's always been a fine line between rebellion and just copping an attitude it's the latter that gets commodified. Best, Colin
[PEN-L:11645] Conference of Possible Interest
This could turn out to be a very important conference. It has already received confirmation of attendance by a large number of major Latin American labor organizations. However, conference organizer Ed Rosario has appealed for help in recruiting qualified conference panel members, workshop presenters, keynoters, etc. You help by a) helping with some of organizational details, b) identifying possible participants, c) doing outreach to other colleagues and constituencies, d) lining up additional organizational endorsements. You may have other ideas of ways you can contribute, or ideas about others who could be recruited to this effort. As is always the case in such efforts, financial contributions are badly needed to defray the considerable expenses of this project. If you cannot attend but can make a contribution (or can do both) those contributions will go toward scholarships to subsidize those low income participants and foreign delegates whose attendance depends on financial assistance. Do whatever time and energy permit. Please accept my apology for possible duplications as this message has been cross-posted for widest possible exposure. Feel free to pass it along to lists to which you subscribe that may not have received it yet. Thanks, Michael == LETTER OF INVITATION TO WESTERN HEMISPHERE WORKERS¹ CONFERENCE Dear Brothers and Sisters: This letter is to invite you to join the California Labor Federation (AFL-CIO), the Bay Area labor movement, California statewide LCLAA, and countless other unions, environmental and community organizations from throughout the Americas in building and participating in the Western Hemisphere Workers¹ Conference Against NAFTA and Privatizations, which will be held November 14-16, 1997, at the Ramada Inn Civic Center in San Francisco. I am attaching a copy of the official conference materials. Please fill out the endorsement and registration coupon and send it in as soon as possible to the San Francisco Labor Council. If you who have already endorsed, many thanks and please don¹t delay in sending in your registration form and reserving a room at the Ramada Inn Civic Center. (We are encouraging everyone from out of town to sta y at this hotel. You should register by Aug. 15, if possible.) We would also appreciate receiving a financial contribution to our conference-building fund whether or not you are able to attend. The registration fees will cover only a portion of our overall expenses. We urgently need financial assistance to cover the cost of renting the conference hall, reprinting the conference packets, and ensuring proper translation into four languages of all sessions. Ch ecks should be made payable to Western Hemisphere Conference. To date the response to the Conference Call has been overwhelmingly positive, with endorsements coming in from major national federations and important unions and organizations across the hemisphere. The list of endorsers in the brochure gives only a glimpse of the support we have obtained. We have just received the endorsement of the United Farm Workers of America (UFW) and the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America (UE). We are also expecting the endorsement of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT) at any moment. In addition, we have just received the first list of delegates from Brazil who will be attending our conference. It reflects the wide spectrum of unions and viewpoints we are expecting from every country in the hemisphere. The list includes: Emanuel Melato, president, Autoworkers Union of Campinas; Edson Soares, president, National Glassworkers Union; Roque Ferreira, president, National Railwo rkers Union; Teresa Lajolo, former City Council member, Sao Paulo; Ismael Cesar, president, National Federation of Public Employees; Luiz Eduardo Greenhalg, federal deputy, Workers Party; Helio Bicudo, federal deputy, Workers Party (and president of the OAS Human Rights Commission); Gilmar Mauro, national coordinator, Movement of Landless Peasants, MST; Plinio de Arruda Sampaio, national agrarian secretary, Workers Party; and Francisco Nogueira, vice president, Dockworkers Union of Santos. As outlined in the Conference Call, our objective is to bring together unionists and activists from all countries and backgrounds to build a common fightback against the policies of NAFTA and privatizations. First, we wish to promote an exchange of information about the devastating effects of NAFTA and the other regional trade agreements on all working and poor people, and on the trade union movem ent in particular. We are soliciting country and regional reports from the unionists and activists building the conference, which can be compiled into a White Paper on the effects of ³free trade² and privatizations. These should be sent to the conference organizing committee in advance of the conference to ensure duplication and translation for the
[PEN-L:11644] Re: Barbara Ehrenreich
Glad a man said it first. On Wed, 6 Aug 1997, Robert Cherry wrote: Max: I don't know about Hillary Clinton, but Ehrenreich's The Hearts of Men is one of the most insightful books I have read in the last five years. It argues quite credibly that the fifties -- whether the Beats or Playboy -- began the assault on the idea of the responsible family man, and it was carried thru the New Left. Whereas the media believe that the decline in marriage rates is because women are make other choices, it may well be that the real reason is that men are fleeing commitment. Ehrenreich's book goes along way in explaining why the latter has been quite noticeable. Robert Cherry
[PEN-L:11639] beating the Beats some more
Max writes write: ... As for what the Beats didn't talk about, you might as well indict the entire pre-1972 left for male chauvinism Max is right. But I think we can learn from criticisms of the pre-1972 lefts -- and other groups, like the Beats -- as a way to avoid making similar mistakes in the future. I see no reason to be moralistic about it, though. For example, I see no reason to condemn Marx as Satan-spawn because it looks like he fathered his servant Lenchen's illegitimate child (that Engels took responsibility for). He, like the Beats, were products of his time. The key question is whether or not Marx's sins, errors, and omissions are organic parts of his theory, so that their removal causes the whole edifice to come crashing down. I think that his theory is actually strengthened by the removal of sexism or his tendency to make stereotyped references to various ethnic groups (including Jews), for example. I don't know enough about the Beats to say anything similar. in pen-l solidarity, Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ. 7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA 310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950 "It takes a busload of faith to get by." -- Lou Reed.
[PEN-L:11638] re: the Beats
From: James Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:11632] re: "the Beats" Not to beat this into the ground, but Barbara Ehrenreich wrote a book which I believe is titled HEARTS OF MEN, which argues at length that the Beats criticized family institutions (using both theory and practice) in a way that exempts themselves from responsibility of helping raise children, etc., without criticizing the inequalities of power in the usual family. Barbara's a fine lady but invoking her authority on this topic . . . you might as well ask Hillary Clinton. As for what the Beats didn't talk about, you might as well indict the entire pre-1972 left for male chauvinism. What does that have to do with, say, the merits of William Z. Foster? I don't recall whatever the criticism of family institutions in the Beats. I would say any such implied criticism was founded on a bigger dilemma, namely the moral and spiritual wreckage of society writ large -- the foundation for deformation of family relationships. It's also a little silly to criticize 1950's gays for failure to build nuclear families, since they were barely permitted to exist openly as individuals in the first place. I must admit I only glanced at the book, so if anyone has corrections I'd appreciated them. Only these few. Cheers, Max "People say I'm arrogant, but I know better." -- John Sununu === Max B. SawickyEconomic Policy Institute [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1660 L Street, NW 202-775-8810 (voice) Ste. 1200 202-775-0819 (fax)Washington, DC 20036 http://epn.org/sawicky Opinions above do not necessarily reflect the views of anyone associated with the Economic Policy Institute other than this writer. === Response: We see all sorts of retrospectives by the left such as "The Real History of the Atom bomb" or the Real History of... But we find little retrospective about the "real" left...(Again I do not include the Beats). So why is it we can critique everything but ourselves? I remember vividly, and was also part of the "left" where males acted like "working class heroes" while treating women like shit. All these male revolutionaries had so much compassion for Vietnamese, or African Americans or whatever, yet the women were relegated to the usual "women roles" (Go get the coffee honey, I'm busy doing class struggle) and we males often didn't see the glaring contradictions between our words/sympathies versus deeds. It is not enough to just say well that was then, now is now; often we see the same patterns evident in the left today. Again, even disregarding lifestyles for a moment, what exactly did the Beats do/talk about of real substance that really mattered to anybody other than someone teaching some esoteric poetry course? Just as not ideas are equal, so not all contributions/contributors are equal. My last comment on this issue [I was just writing what I felt] and I can hear the cheers, is that these so-called "Beats" represent exactly what the neoclassicals attempt to model as all human propensities: atomism, selfishness, egoism, narcissism, self- indulgence, intensely competitive (under unique guises), ultra-hedonism, ultra-individualism, ability to cynically calculate and "rationally" calculate ends and means, patriarchal, insolated, elitist ( often guised)... I think most of them were legends in their own minds and in the minds of a few seekers who link being "counter- culture" or freaky with automatically being revolutionary. Jim Craven *---* * "Those who take the most from the table,* * James Craventeach contentment. * * Dept of Economics Those for whom the taxes are destined, * * Clark College demand sacrifice.* * 1800 E. Mc Loughlin Blvd. Those who eat their fill, * * Vancouver, Wa. 98663speak to the hungry, * * (360) 992-2283 of wonderful times to come. * * Fax: (360) 992-2863Those who lead the country into the abyss,* * [EMAIL PROTECTED] call ruling difficult, * * for ordinary folk." (Bertolt Brecht) * * MY EMPLOYER HAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH MY PRIVATE/PROTECTED OPINION *
[PEN-L:11636] re: the Beats
From: James Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:11632] re: "the Beats" Not to beat this into the ground, but Barbara Ehrenreich wrote a book which I believe is titled HEARTS OF MEN, which argues at length that the Beats criticized family institutions (using both theory and practice) in a way that exempts themselves from responsibility of helping raise children, etc., without criticizing the inequalities of power in the usual family. Barbara's a fine lady but invoking her authority on this topic . . . you might as well ask Hillary Clinton. As for what the Beats didn't talk about, you might as well indict the entire pre-1972 left for male chauvinism. What does that have to do with, say, the merits of William Z. Foster? I don't recall whatever the criticism of family institutions in the Beats. I would say any such implied criticism was founded on a bigger dilemma, namely the moral and spiritual wreckage of society writ large -- the foundation for deformation of family relationships. It's also a little silly to criticize 1950's gays for failure to build nuclear families, since they were barely permitted to exist openly as individuals in the first place. I must admit I only glanced at the book, so if anyone has corrections I'd appreciated them. Only these few. Cheers, Max "People say I'm arrogant, but I know better." -- John Sununu === Max B. SawickyEconomic Policy Institute [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1660 L Street, NW 202-775-8810 (voice) Ste. 1200 202-775-0819 (fax)Washington, DC 20036 http://epn.org/sawicky Opinions above do not necessarily reflect the views of anyone associated with the Economic Policy Institute other than this writer. ===
[PEN-L:11635] Re: The Beats
Jim, I usually agree with or at least enjoy what you write, but I could not let aspects of your blindsiding rant go undisturbed. Historically, anarchists have done very little for anybody or any just causes; often they have served repressive powers-that-be as wreckers obsessed with their own self-centered concepts and states of "Liberty" Which anarchists ? Which times ? Which places ? There have been brief shining moments in history when revolutionary anarchism has had a mass basis to the great service of liberation. Obviously, as one person here commented, there's the Spanish Civil War. Revolutionary anarchism was the anti-traditionalist and anti-capitalist ideology of choice for a large segment of the working class based on their own history, not on the outside agitation of dilettante artists or some such imaginaries. Not only did they turn convents into latrines, but posh hotels into popular cantinas, and instituted workers' control in the mines, mills, and factories of a Republican Spain under seige (not that they didn't have their own problems ...) In Germany many of the anarchists were instrumental in wrecking united fronts against fascism and easily came over to the side of the Nazis and cut their own Faustian Bargains Whereas the CP and SDP of pre-Nazi Germany had all of their ducks in a row, illustrated by their petty feuds over social imperialism and fealty to the Comintern ... My point here is not to raise the black banner against the red, but just to complicate the picture a bit more ... John Gulick UC-Santa Cruz John, Thanks for your note. I wrote my note on RRPE and Beats before I read this message but as you can probably see from that note, I do agree with what you are saying here. Like any generalization, there are obviously notable exceptions and I would not want to depreciate in any way the concrete sacrifices and suffering by individual anarchists in history and in the present. I also did not mean to imply that only anarchists played a role in sabotaging united fronts against fascism; we could certainly include CPers, SDPers, rich Jews selling out poor Jews, labor aristocrats selling out workers etc-- e.g. in Germany. But I think on organizational levels (almost an oxymoron--organized anarchists) I think the anarchists in general have done a lot of talking and critiqueing but have contributed very little to build concrete alternatives or even smash anything concretely. I think the usual half-life of most anarchist organizations could be measured in weeks. In contrast to Max Sawicky's comment about being ML, to note that working effectively for progressive causes requires discipline, focus, commitment, energy, seriousness etc, is not a call for joining some ML organization necessarily, but rather just to note the obvious: what it really takes to do anything serious that makes any difference to anyone and I do not believe that only the members of ML organizations (which one is the true one?) exhibit such qualities. Jim Craven *---* * "Those who take the most from the table,* * James Craventeach contentment. * * Dept of Economics Those for whom the taxes are destined, * * Clark College demand sacrifice.* * 1800 E. Mc Loughlin Blvd. Those who eat their fill, * * Vancouver, Wa. 98663speak to the hungry, * * (360) 992-2283 of wonderful times to come. * * Fax: (360) 992-2863Those who lead the country into the abyss,* * [EMAIL PROTECTED] call ruling difficult, * * for ordinary folk." (Bertolt Brecht) * * MY EMPLOYER HAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH MY PRIVATE/PROTECTED OPINION *
[PEN-L:11634] another obituary -- Fela Kuti
Pen-L'ers, Amidst all the interpretive differences over the meaning of Burroughs' life, writings, and death, no one has mentioned the passing of another important -- in my mind, much more politically important -- "cultural worker" -- the self-styled Nigerian musician/dissident, Fela Kuti. Fela Kuti, despite the bizarre contradicitions of his personal life (e.g. he married all 30-or-so of his female backup singers in a ceremony in the late 70's), was a consistently harsh critic of the brutal policies imposed by the string of neo-colonial (and usually military) kleptocracies that have long ruled Nigeria. His rhythmic and orchestral compositions, which were unyielding in their populist satire of Nigeria's comprador class, were a great achievement of mixing art and politics. I don't know that much about Nigeria, or even the experience and work of Fela Kuti, but what little I do know, makes me mourn his passing. John Gulick UC-Santa Cruz
[PEN-L:11632] re: the Beats
Not to beat this into the ground, but Barbara Ehrenreich wrote a book which I believe is titled HEARTS OF MEN, which argues at length that the Beats criticized family institutions (using both theory and practice) in a way that exempts themselves from responsibility of helping raise children, etc., without criticizing the inequalities of power in the usual family. I must admit I only glanced at the book, so if anyone has corrections I'd appreciated them. in pen-l solidarity, Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ. 7900 Loyola Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90045-8410 USA 310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950 "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- K. Marx, paraphrasing Dante A.
[PEN-L:11631] Re: The Beats
Jim, I usually agree with or at least enjoy what you write, but I could not let aspects of your blindsiding rant go undisturbed. Historically, anarchists have done very little for anybody or any just causes; often they have served repressive powers-that-be as wreckers obsessed with their own self-centered concepts and states of "Liberty" Which anarchists ? Which times ? Which places ? There have been brief shining moments in history when revolutionary anarchism has had a mass basis to the great service of liberation. Obviously, as one person here commented, there's the Spanish Civil War. Revolutionary anarchism was the anti-traditionalist and anti-capitalist ideology of choice for a large segment of the working class based on their own history, not on the outside agitation of dilettante artists or some such imaginaries. Not only did they turn convents into latrines, but posh hotels into popular cantinas, and instituted workers' control in the mines, mills, and factories of a Republican Spain under seige (not that they didn't have their own problems ...) In Germany many of the anarchists were instrumental in wrecking united fronts against fascism and easily came over to the side of the Nazis and cut their own Faustian Bargains Whereas the CP and SDP of pre-Nazi Germany had all of their ducks in a row, illustrated by their petty feuds over social imperialism and fealty to the Comintern ... My point here is not to raise the black banner against the red, but just to complicate the picture a bit more ... John Gulick UC-Santa Cruz
[PEN-L:11629] Neoliberalism, Privatization: Puerto Rico
Neoliberalism and Latin America: Puerto Rico's Workers' Fight Back Martha's update on Argentina reminded me of Puerto Rico's workers recent response to privatization. Last July 11, tens of thousands of telephone company workers converged on the island's capital to protest the local colonial government's decision to sell the Puerto Rico Telephone Co. Contrary to the experience of other Latin American countries' the island's phone company was bought from ITT in 1974 when it became a public corporation. Since then, and despite earlier attempts (1990) to sell the public enterprise the phone company has become a profitable enterprise More than a million and a half Puerto Ricans have phones, Puerto Rico has the highest rate of Internet users in Latin America, extensive and modern fiber optic lines, cell phones, beepers etc. From 1993 to 1996 profits increased 33% for a total of more than a $1 billion dollars. However, blinded by the rush toward "free markets" the island's colonial government seems to believe that selling the island's national resources will aid in leveraging statehood for Puerto Rico as well as subsidize the deficit of other failed privatization efforts. All major labor federations have supported the call of phone workers to stop the "sellout" and have promised another national strike similar to one that brought the 1990 attempt to sell the public corporation process to a halt. As Puerto Rico prepares to "commemorate" 100 years of colonialism in 1998, the phone privatization process has also served as a catalyst for the island's nationalist and socialist forces that support Puerto Rican independence. The major left and nationalist forces have called for a national effort to stop the sale. Recently, the Machetero Guerrilla Army which since its dramatic attacks during the 1980s (including the bombing of several U.S. Air Force Corsair planes, FBI offices) has not conducted military operations, warned that it would retaliate if the sale was finalized. Victor M. Rodriguez Irvine, CA
[PEN-L:11624] Re: The Beats
From: "James Michael Craven" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:11616] "The Beats" James, At the risk of alienating even more people and in response to the No risk there; if you're beat you're already alienated. euologies on Burroughs and previously on Ginsburg, my personal opinion is that the so-called "Beats", revealed themselves through their writings and lifestyles to be largely: self-indulgent, pretentious, arrogant, narcissistic, petit-bourgeois, phillistine, ultra-individualistic, superifcial, elitist... Self-indulgent: no more than the rest of us. Pretentious: I don't see that; they were more reclusive than not. Arrogant: never saw a trace of this; more self-effacing Narcissistic: in the sense of self-involved, yes, like most artists Petit-bourgeois: this covers a broad area. The beats were not in hot pursuit of money, a leading p-b pastime; certainly not p-b in terms of morality; more communal than individualistic, I would say. It's hard to imagine a Beat with a house, mortgage, and kids, much running a business (unless it's a book/record store or a coffee house). Philistine: not sure what this means; the Beats were a reaction against mass culture, and elitist in this sense Individualistic: not quite; covered this above. Superficial: not at all to my way of thinking Elitist: not really. a better accusation could be romanticizing the lumpen-proletariat, a subtle type of elitism in the sense of reverse snobbery Historically, anarchists have done very little for anybody or any just causes; often they have served repressive powers-that-be as wreckers obsessed with their own self-centered concepts and states of "Liberty". Sure some of the poets have used metaphors and symbology Don't disagree in general, though there are different sorts of anarchists, as MIKEY notes. The problem here is not so much beat but art and the whole art is a weapon debate, which can simply be resolved as, 'sometimes it is, and sometimes it isn't.' to decry various forms of oppression but generally from detached, self-centered and elitist lofty heights of "culture" detached from concrete struggles and sacrifices of their subjects--oppressed people who generally will never read nor "truly understand" their esoteric poetry and literature. This sounds like English professors, not at all like the beats. In Germany many of the anarchists were instrumental in wrecking united fronts against fascism and easily came over to the side of the Nazis and cut their own Faustian Bargains; the S.A. in particular was full of them. More often than not when they called for personal liberty, they meant for themselves personally rather than a This is unfair in respect of the beats, whose brand of anarchism was more communal and especially anti- violence. Ginsberg and of course Leroi Jones/Amiri Baraka have been quite active politically. Baraka is a full-blown M-L but never severed his ties with the Beats. generalized condition which must be fought for with organization, discipline, focus, sacrifice, determination, compromise to build unity, humility, etc.--all qualities and capabilities that anarchists and libertarians (one version of anarchism) are not generally known to exhibit. Here you're basically knocking them for not being M-L revolutionaries, which is true but has no bearing on the value of their art. Of course there were some exceptions, but generally the Beats wrote for themselves or narrow circles of the faithful sycophants who fawned all over them, gave narcissistic/theatrical readings of their crap in cloistured "coffee houses"... Beat literature was always been circulated on a relatively low- cost basis, though more recently it has been commercialized to some extent. Coffee houses were always open places, in my experience, and public reading is a communal act not unlike declaiming from a soap box against the yoke of Capital. Moreover, poetry readings tend to be democratic -- unlettered, unpublished authors are typically able to participate. Jim D. mentioned male chauvinism. Burroughs had a mysogenistic streak but I recall no animosity towards women in Ginsberg, Corso, or Ferlinghetti. Bukowski and Neal Cassidy are another matter, but I would characterize them more as glorifying the pastime of promiscuous screwing than objectifying women in particular. They would not expect women to be any more faithful than they were. Bottom line: all of these guys (plus Diane Di Prima, among others) are still worth reading and will inspire some young people to incline towards the left. Cheers, MBS "People say I'm arrogant, but I know better." -- John Sununu === Max B. SawickyEconomic Policy Institute [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1660 L Street, NW 202-775-8810 (voice) Ste. 1200 202-775-0819 (fax)Washington,
[PEN-L:11623] Re: overblown rhetoric - more clarifications
Jim: Thanks for your response which turns this exchange into a quite interesting debate. While I belive that we do come from the same political and philosophical camp, we also differ on at least two points -- which I elaborate below. First, I think you misinterpret my position on the role of the government and related institutions vis a vis institutionalised racial/ethnic seggregation (or apartheid - let's call a spade a spade). It is my impression that you tend to view the behaviour of these institutions in a "psychologistic" (pardon the lack of a better terminology) fashion -- that is, behaviour resulting from "psychological" processes taking place within the actors' minds: tastes, preferences, reasons, calculations, emotions, etc. Moreover, you seem to attribute such an understanding to my arguments. That can be illustrated by your argument where you cite Plessy v. Fergusson to contradict my position that the courts were not as benign on race relations as my postings seem to imply. That indeed would be the case, if I argued that the Plessy decision was motivated primarily by the Supremes' personal tastes, convictions and kindred psychological states. The point is, however, that this is NOT the interpretation I assume and, I belive, I stated that in my previous postings (granted, you can also find imprecise, or over-blown, over-generalized statements in my postings, but this is more like a live debate than presenting carefully formulated position papers, therefore iterations of statements, queries, and clarifications are a part of normal dialectical process known as debating). My own interpretation implies "situational logic" -- that treats behaviour as resulting from another behaviour (rather than psychological processes within the actors' minds) or more generally, "situations." The Plessy case you cite is a perfect example to support that. As you know, Plessy came as a reaction to seggregation laws enacted in Louisiana other Southern states -- that required the provision of separate facilities for Blacks. To my knowledge, these laws received considerable popular support in the South, but were opposed by business, especially the railroad industry --because law-mandated seggregation imposed on them the additional burden of providing extra "separate but equal" cars when trains were passing through the affected territories. The case would have never reached the Supreme Court, if the railroads had not supported the plaintiff. That, I guess, falls in line with the "price logic" outlined by Milton Friedman, but there is more into it. The High Cout had a choice of siding either with Plessy the railroad industry that supported him, or with the racist sentiments that were running high during the Reconstruction era. The court chose the latter against the logic of capitalist "efficiency" -- which, BTW, supports my position expressed in my previous posting that business can't always have what it wants in courts. I am not an expert on the US history, but it looks to me that the political turf battles between the parties and branches of the government that developed during the Reconstruction period prevailed this time over the logic of capitalist accumulation. This is precisely what I call "situationism." The key players make their decisions on the "here and now" considerations in reaction to what the other players did or might do -- high or low motives are ascribed to their actions later, when the dust settles. The abolition of slavery by Lincoln can be viewed in a psychologistic fashion, as an expression of his abhorrence to this peculiar institution (which, to my knowledge, can be documented), but that looks pretty much like ex post facto rationalisation. A situationist interpretion would cite the expediency for the war effort as the main reason. In the same vein, the US war on Nazi Germany was hardly an exprerssion of moral opposition to the Holocaust, or even Naziism -- as many key figures in American oligarchy wholeheartedly supported Hitler (Henry Ford reportedly sent him a birthday present every year) -- it was a strategic move in imperial politics of world domination. The gambit paid off, and bourgeois historians could take a high moral ground and ascribe lofty motives (which, curiously, did not prevent the US from refusing to accept Jewish refugees during the war) for the US entry to WWII. From that standpoint, it matters little whether the opposition to slavery that came from the federal government (sometimes the congress, sometimes the executive, sometimes both) was motivated by "good intentions" -- a more realistic view is that it probably was not. What matters, from my standpoint, is that -- whatever its motives -- this oppostion had a peculiar effect on the American society, especially in the South: by destroying the formal institutions of racism, it drove racism "underground" to semi-formal and informal instituions, like churches, clubs, associations -- where it
