[PEN-L:12631] Re: Third World economic decline (fwd)
To claim that capital formation is weak or not there is a complete mis-reading of the Asian situation. While these countries may not become like imperialists in the military sphere, economic imperialism is already quite evident. Historically Japan is the classic example of a rise of a new imperial power. Its presence is felt in Asia in a big way even though it has little military muscle to flex. As for predicting who may or may not become new powers, let's not forget the state of powerful Britain and the Soviet Union! Anthony P. D'Costa Associate Professor Senior Fellow Comparative International Development Department of Economics University of WashingtonNational University of Singapore 1900 Commerce Street10 Kent Ridge Crescent Tacoma, WA 98402-3100 USA Singapore 119260 Ph: (253) 692-4462 Fax: (253) 692-4414 On Sat, 27 Sep 1997, Louis N Proyect wrote: On Sat, 27 Sep 1997, Dennis R Redmond wrote: But what about the 2.5 billion people of Thailand, Malaysia, Chile, Vietnam, Indonesia, and the vast subcontinents of India and China, all of which have seen enormous economic growth from 1985-95? Decline in capitalism is always relative to the productive forces being unleashed somewhere else in the world-system. I left China out because it is--still--a socialist country. My point is still basically valid. Except for Asia, the Third World has been experiencing economic crisis over the ten years cited. There are no capitalist "miracles" in sub-Saharan Africa. Chile experienced greater growth under Allende than it did under Pinochet. Leaving aside the question of growth per se, the real question is capital formation. Indonesia and the "tigers", etc. will never join the first rank of imperialist nations. This is historically precluded. Louis P.
[PEN-L:12630] Re: Russian help
See July/August _Dollars and Sense_ "Why Did the USSR Fall?" You might take a look at the topic Big Government vs Privatization in my conference econ. democracy on PeaceNet where several recent newspaper articles re Russia are posted as well. If you don't have access to PeaceNet give me your e-mail address and I'll forward the info to you. Cheers, Curtis Moore facilitator of the conference econ.democracy on PeaceNet Econ.democracy posts a model constitution for a democratic economy. At 02:30 PM 9/27/97 -0700, Rebecca Peoples wrote: Hi folks, I desperately need help on Russia today: recommended books, artcles sites, etc. Rebecca
[PEN-L:12629] Chinese unemployment (fwd)
UNEMPLOYMENT A SERIOUS PROBLEM IN PRC September 18, 1997 - Source: Central News Agency (Taiwan) According to the Central News Agency (Taiwan), unemployment in China is reaching serious levels as 135 million people are now officially out of work. Although economic growth in China has been, according to the World Bank, "spectacular" the job market has shrunk substantially, with only 36 million job opportunities in cities for 54 million new job seekers and 22 million laid-off workers. The Chinese labor force of 723 million people is 1.9 times the total of that of developed countries and 29 percent of the world's total, CNA reports.
[PEN-L:12628] Re: ethnic terminology
On Sat, 27 Sep 1997, James Devine wrote: Doug reports poll results: half of "American Indians" called themselves that, 37% "Native American"; My wife has worked a lot with the "Native community." She finds that most of them call themselves "American Indians," thinking that "Native American" is too academic. On the other hand, a lot would rather have whites call them "Native American" until they get to know trust you. Native American is more encompassing, she says, since it includes the Inuits (Eskimos) whereas American Indian traditionally does not. One of my colleagues who has worked on rights of indigenous peoples told me that the preferred term was Indians and not Native Americans in the eastern US as well as elsewhere for decades. He explained to me that the predominant feeling was that the latter term was regarded as almost insulting because it implied that they had the same status as all other hyphenated Americans when, in fact, they were here first. Ellen Ellen J. Dannin California Western School of Law 225 Cedar Street San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: 619-525-1449 Fax:619-696-
[PEN-L:12627] Re: Third World economic decline
My impression is that the "economic miracles" of East Asia, including that of market-Stalinist China, are based to a large extent on the grossest abuses of the natural environment (not to mention of workers). Yes, I know that the UK and US did likewise when they had their "industrial revolutions" (a.k.a., "takeoffs"). But aren't we a bit closer to global environmental disaster than we were in the 19th century? So these miracles can't last... Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/fall%201997/ECON/jdevine.html "Elvis is god." -- religion for the 1990s.
[PEN-L:12625] Re: Third World economic decline (fwd)
Louis Proyect wrote: Leaving aside the question of growth per se, the real question is capital formation. Indonesia and the "tigers", etc. will never join the first rank of imperialist nations. This is historically precluded. I tend to agree with this, but the "Asian miracle" is a big question, and I'd like to see more discussion of this issue, comments on recent books, etc. Bill Burgess
[PEN-L:12624] Re: Culture
On Sat, 27 Sep 1997, Doug Henwood wrote: For some reason, it's popular in PC copyediting circles to capitalize Black but not white. I've never understood the reason for this. I asked editors at two now-defunct publications, the Guardian and CrossRoads, why they did this, and neither could explain it. Isn't this because (at least in the US) Black is a nationality while white is not? If the context makes this political designation appropriate there is good reason to capitalize. Bill Burgess
[PEN-L:12623] Re: Third World economic decline (fwd)
On Sat, 27 Sep 1997, Dennis R Redmond wrote: But what about the 2.5 billion people of Thailand, Malaysia, Chile, Vietnam, Indonesia, and the vast subcontinents of India and China, all of which have seen enormous economic growth from 1985-95? Decline in capitalism is always relative to the productive forces being unleashed somewhere else in the world-system. I left China out because it is--still--a socialist country. My point is still basically valid. Except for Asia, the Third World has been experiencing economic crisis over the ten years cited. There are no capitalist "miracles" in sub-Saharan Africa. Chile experienced greater growth under Allende than it did under Pinochet. Leaving aside the question of growth per se, the real question is capital formation. Indonesia and the "tigers", etc. will never join the first rank of imperialist nations. This is historically precluded. Louis P.
[PEN-L:12626] ethnic terminology
Doug reports poll results: half of "American Indians" called themselves that, 37% "Native American"; My wife has worked a lot with the "Native community." She finds that most of them call themselves "American Indians," thinking that "Native American" is too academic. On the other hand, a lot would rather have whites call them "Native American" until they get to know trust you. Native American is more encompassing, she says, since it includes the Inuits (Eskimos) whereas American Indian traditionally does not. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/fall%201997/ECON/jdevine.html "Elvis is god." -- religion for the 1990s.
[PEN-L:12610] Re: Culture
I've had an instructive offlist correspondence with the irascible Bill L and will try to clarify a couple of points. 1. I sought in my last post to offer a very broad definition of culture as ditinct from say economics or biology, not of what marks the boundaries of one culture as opposed to another. What I sought indeed to suggest was that the nature of culture in general, if considered carefully, made it rather difficult to wall up the world into separate cultural compartments. 2. What riles Bill is what he sees as the assertion that one cannot criticize something someone else does without sharing in their culture. That, in those general terms, is not what I am arguing nor what I read Ajit to be saying. I am arguing that in specific contexts these critiques are used to push other agendas, as in the last century Mill's influential portrayal of the treatment of women in India was used very directly to support colonial rule. Perhaps the main thing Bill I disagree on is whether we disagree, as I like Bill's statements of principle. I'm happy to let anyone criticize anything they like, but when it comes to deciding which to take seriously I do worry about critiques that seem both minimally informed and to repeat a long line of lurid and distancing portrayals of 3rd world culture. To me this seems to be a particular concern; Bill perhaps still sees it as overly general. But I do think we can agree on the importance of understanding each particular situation and the politics implicated in it. Best, Colin
[PEN-L:12612] Re: Culture
William S. Lear wrote: I have one final question. I'm not very consistent in my treatment of the words "black", "blacks", "white", "whites", etc. when referring to black persons, black "culture" (I still don't know what this is exactly), etc. Is it the accepted practice to capitalize these words? For some reason, it's popular in PC copyediting circles to capitalize Black but not white. I've never understood the reason for this. I asked editors at two now-defunct publications, the Guardian and CrossRoads, why they did this, and neither could explain it. And another style issue: why is African American generally not hyphenated but Italian-American is? Doug PS: LBO house style is to capitalize neither and hyphenate both.
[PEN-L:12613] me in Toronto
I'm going to be in Toronto early this coming week on a whirlwind self-promo tour (including some big morning TV show on Tuesday whose name escapes me). Any locals want to have a beer or something on Monday or Tuesday evening/night? Doug
[PEN-L:12616] Re: Culture
J Cullen wrote: So what do you call people of Latin American descent? Latino, Hispanic, Latin American? Or do you try to break it down to where they came from? And what do you call "Anglos," which I've always found a little offensive, being of Irish descent? European Americans? A survey reported in the Sept 1996 Monthly Labor Review, part of the effort to redesign the racial/ethnic categories for the 2000 Census, shows that the terms fashionable on the left are way at odds with what the population uses. 58% of "Hispanics" preferred that term, and just 12% "Latino"; 62% of "whites" liked that word, just 2% "European-American," and 1% "Anglo"; 44% of "blacks" called themselves that, 28% "African-American," 12% "Afro-American," and 3% "Negro; half of "American Indians" called themselves that, 37% "Native American"; and just 2% of the U.S. population self-identified as "multi-racial." When people were asked to volunteer a "race" rather than selecting from a list, words like "Christian," "Mason," "Black Muslim," and even "rebellious teenager" showed up. Respondents found the question "Do you think there's any difference between race, ethnicity, and ancestry" too abstract to answer; few repondents could define the word "ethnicity," and some confused it with a question about their ethical standing. I'm not sure what this all means, except maybe that we're all very confused. Doug
[PEN-L:12617] Disney sub hassles Haiti union (fwd)
Urgent Call: Haiti Union-Busting id CAA22767; Sun, 21 Sep 1997 02:42:42 -0400 Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit source: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Sep 19 00:39:17 1997 STOP UNION BUSTING BY DISNEY SUBCONTRACTOR! URGENT CALL IN SOLIDARITY WITH HAITIAN FACTORY WORKERS September 18, 1997 Reports from Batay Ouvriye, an independent Haitian workers organization, indicate that management at B.V.F. Apparel Manufacturing, s.a., has recently stepped up its offensive against the union representing workers at that plant. B.V.F., located in Port-au- Prince, Haiti, is a clothing subcontractor for the Connecticut based Waterbury Corporation, a Disney licensee. B.V.F. pays workers 28c an hour to produce clothes bearing various Disney labels. Under horrible conditions, the workers are forced to fill impossible quotas for starvation wages. Since the beginning of September, the management at B.V.F. has fired three workers who were the top officers of the union at that plant: the president, the secretary, and the treasurer of the union. They also have made it clear that they intend to continue this campaign of repression and intimidation through additional firings. These union busting practices by the management are not new. On the very same day that the union was formed at that plant, about a year ago, management responded by firing and laying off union members. Since then, management has been consistently stalling to avoid negotiations with the union. This is clearly an overt and unabashed attempt at union busting and it is imperative that it be swiftly condemned. The workers at that plant in Haiti stand poised to protest and demand the reinstatement of the fired workers and will very soon be taking actions to respond to the illegal and repressive practices of the management at B.V.F. Apparel Manufacturing, s.a.. It is urgent that people of conscience, progressives and activists, human rights groups, labor solidarity groups, and unions take an active stand in solidarity with the Haitian workers, to condemn these practices aimed at repressing the burgeoning labor movement in Haiti. Let us demand from the management at B.V.F. Apparel Manufacturing, s.a. that it: 1. Rehire the fired union workers; 2. Stop all acts of intimidation and all future firings against union members; 3. Stop its stalling tactics and begin engaging in good faith negotiations leading to better working conditions and the respect of workers' rights. Let us also demand that the U.S. companies benefitting from the exploitation of these workers issue public statements asking their business partners in Haiti to stop their acts of reprisal against union workers. Please call, write, or send your faxes in protest to: In Haiti: Mr. Alain Villard, Director B.V.F. Apparel Mfg. Rues Lumumba Cineraire Delmas, Port-au-Prince Haiti, (W.I.) Tel./Fax: 011-(509) 46-41-99 Mr. Alain Villard, Director c/o Classic Apparel Co. Route de l'Aeroport Port-au-Prince, Haiti (W.I.) Tel.: 011-(509) 46-18-37 Fax: 011-(509) 46-18-87 Mr. Alain Villard, Director c/o ADIH (Association of Industry Owners of Haiti) Route de Delmas Port-au-Prince, Haiti (W.I.) Tel. 011-509-46-45-09 Fax: 011-509-46-22-11 In the United States: Michael Eisner, CEO Walt Disney Company South Buena Vista Street Burbank, CA 91521 Tel. 818-560-1000 Fax: 818-846-7319 The Waterbury Garment Corporation 1669 Thomaston Ave. Waterbury, CT 06704 Tel. 203-574-3811 Please cc your letters and faxes to: BATAY OUVRIYE P.O. Box 13326 Delmas, Port-au-Prince Haiti (W.I.) Tel./fax: 011-509-22-67-19 THE DISNEY / HAITI JUSTICE CAMPAIGN VILLAGE STATION, P.0. BOX 748, NY, NY 10014 (212) 592-3612 [EMAIL PROTECTED] = NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us 339 Lafayette St., New York, NY 10012 http://www.blythe.org e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] = samples-09.21.97-02:42:56-14999
[PEN-L:12621] Re: Russian help
On Sat, 27 Sep 1997, Rebecca Peoples wrote: I desperately need help on Russia today: recommended books, artcles sites, etc. Check out Boris Kagarlitsky's 1995 "The Mirage of Modernization", a serviceable global overview of Stalinism and its (equally global) aftermath. As far as economics goes, crazy as it may sound, the best source I've found for concrete, hard-hitting analysis of the Russian scene seems to be the pages of the Institutional Investor (check the last couple of years for articles on Russia's emerging financial-industrial groupings). They had one recent article outlining where foreign investment is going, the wars between the oil barons, links between financial groups, etc. The II's political line is noxious, but they name names, cite numbers, and rely on facts, unlike the bulk of Western analyses of Russia nowadays, which are mostly recycled Kremlinology air-painted white, red and blue. Hope that helps some! -- Dennis
[PEN-L:12620] Re: Third World economic decline (fwd)
On Sat, 27 Sep 1997, Louis N Proyect wrote: The Third World, as the figures above show, has been in steep economic decline over the past decade. Furthermore, the causes of the economic decline are endemic. But what about the 2.5 billion people of Thailand, Malaysia, Chile, Vietnam, Indonesia, and the vast subcontinents of India and China, all of which have seen enormous economic growth from 1985-95? Decline in capitalism is always relative to the productive forces being unleashed somewhere else in the world-system. -- Dennis
[PEN-L:12622] Re: Third World economic decline (fwd)
Dennis R Redmond wrote: But what about the 2.5 billion people of Thailand, Malaysia, Chile, Vietnam, Indonesia, and the vast subcontinents of India and China, all of which have seen enormous economic growth from 1985-95? Decline in capitalism is always relative to the productive forces being unleashed somewhere else in the world-system. Capitalism can cause spurts in GNP, but I doubt that it has been an unmixed blessing for the 2.5 billion people. Many people have been left behind in this triumphant march to the market. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 916-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[PEN-L:12618] Re: Culture
Whatever it can be, we're suffering, nowadays, the natures's fighting against culture. Such is the so called and mystifying "market economy". RK
[PEN-L:12615] Third World economic decline (fwd)
My sharp polemics with a member of the British Revolutionary Communist Party, publishers of Living Marxism. Louis P. -- Forwarded message -- Date: Sat, 27 Sep 1997 14:38:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Louis N Proyect [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Third World economic decline World Bank Statistics on the 47 poorest capitalist countries (from WWW.WORLDBANK.ORG) Pop. GNPPoverty Life Illiteracy in Growth % Expct. rate Mill. 85-95 1 Mozambique 16.23.6n/a 4760 2 Ethiopia 56.4 -0.333.84965 3 Tanzania 29.61.016.45132 4 Burundi6.3-1.3n/a 4965 5 Malawi 9.8-0.7n/a 4344 6 Chad 6.4 0.6n/a 4852 7 Rwanda 6.4-5.445.74640 8 Sierra Leone 4.2-3.6n/a 40 n/a 9 Nepal 21.52.453.15573 10 Niger 9.0 n/a61.54786 11 Burkina Faso 10.4 -0.2n/a 4981 12 Madagascar13.7 -2.272.352 n/a 13 Bangladesh119.8 2.1n/a 5862 14 Uganda19.22.750.04238 15 Guinea Bissau 1.1 2.087.03845 16 Haiti 7.2-5.2n/a 5755 17 Mali 9.8 0.8n/a 5069 18 Nigeria 111.3 1.228.95343 19 Yemen 15.3n/an/a 53 n/a 20 Cambodia 10.0n/an/a 5335 21 Kenya 26.70.150.25822 22 Mongolia 2.5-3.8n/a 65 n/a 23 Togo 4.1-2.7n/a 5648 24 Gambia1.1 n/an/a 4661 25 Ctl.Afr.Rep. 3.3-2.4n/a 4840 26 India 929.4 3.252.56248 27 Laos 4.9 2.7n/a 5243 28 Benin 5.5-0.3n/a 5063 29 Nicaragua 4.4-5.443.86834 30 Ghana 17.11.4n/a 59 n/a 31 Zambia9.0-0.884.64622 32 Angola10.8 -6.1n/a 47 n/a 33 Georgia 5.4 -17.0n/a 73 n/a 34 Pakistan 129.9 1.211.66062 35 Mauritania2.3 0.531.451 n/a 36 Azerbaijan7.5 -16.3n/a 70 n/a 37 Zimbabwe 11.0 -0.641.05715 38 Guinea6.6 1.426.344 n/a 39 Honduras 5.9 0.146.56727 40 Senegal 8.5 n/a54.05067 41 Cameroon 13.3 -6.6n/a 5737 42 Ctte d'Ivoire 14.0n/a17.75560 43 Albania 3.3 n/an/a 73 n/a 44 Congo 2.6-3.2n/a 5125 45 Kyrgyz4.5-6.918.968 n/a 46 Sri Lanka 18.12.64.0 7210 47 Armenia 3.8 -15.1n/a 71 n/a total population 1739.1 Comments: 1) Poverty percentage is defined as percentage of people living on less than $1 per day. 2) Of the 47 countries listed, 38 were able to provid figures on GNP growth rate. 17 reported positive growth, while 21 reported negative growth. 3) In the 16 high-income countries, only 3 reported negative growth rates in the 85-95 period (Sweden, Finland and United Arab Emirates). Japan, with 125.2 million people, had a growth rate of 2.9 and Italy one of 1.8. Their life expectancies were 80 and 78 respectively. Illiteracy rates and poverty rates were too low to compare to poorer countries. 4) James Heartfield's Revolutionary Communist Party is a peculiar organization. It shares optimism about Third World economic growth and social improvement with publications like the Wall Street Journal or the Economist. This optimism is, of course, nonsense. The Third World, as the figures above show, has been in steep economic decline over the past decade. Furthermore, the causes of the economic decline are endemic. These comrades, who tend to be middle-class professionals and academicians, are allowing their privileged social position to cloud their understanding of the real world. There is also a grave theoretical error they have committed. They have applied a schematic understanding of the Communist Manifesto to the Third World. Their Marxism has little use for what Lenin called Imperialism, a curious oversight for people living in the twentieth century. The dynamism that Marx and Engels were talking about in the 19th century was based on the existence of a revolutionary class --the bourgeoisie-- which was spearheading the elimination of feudal relations. The net result of the bourgeois revolution was capital accumulation and rapid technological and industrial transformation. This has nothing to do with the situation of countries such as Madagascar and Cameroon, with negative growth rates of -2.2 and -6.6. The net effect of economic stagnation is human suffering. This is the reality for Third World peoples. It is shocking that a "revolutionary communist" does not perceive it.
[PEN-L:12614] Re: Culture
William S. Lear wrote: I have one final question. I'm not very consistent in my treatment of the words "black", "blacks", "white", "whites", etc. when referring to black persons, black "culture" (I still don't know what this is exactly), etc. Is it the accepted practice to capitalize these words? For some reason, it's popular in PC copyediting circles to capitalize Black but not white. I've never understood the reason for this. I asked editors at two now-defunct publications, the Guardian and CrossRoads, why they did this, and neither could explain it. And another style issue: why is African American generally not hyphenated but Italian-American is? Doug PS: LBO house style is to capitalize neither and hyphenate both. My AP stylebook is 17 years old and when it was published they hyphenated Afro-American (apparently African American was not in use at that time), lower-cased black as a synonym for Negro and white as a synonym for Caucasian and did not address ethnic groups such as Italian Americans. I lower-case black and white when referring to races and only hyphenate ethnic groups when the term modifies something else, such as Italian-American businessman. Otherwise the person is an Italian American, African American and so on. But I think one should be consistent in the use of these terms. So what do you call people of Latin American descent? Latino, Hispanic, Latin American? Or do you try to break it down to where they came from? And what do you call "Anglos," which I've always found a little offensive, being of Irish descent? European Americans? -- Jim Cullen THE PROGRESSIVE POPULIST James M. Cullen, Editor P.O. Box 150517, Austin, Texas 78715-0517 Phone: 512-447-0455 Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Home page: http://www.eden.com/~reporter
[PEN-L:12611] Re: Culture
On Sat, September 27, 1997 at 07:58:39 (-0700) Colin Danby writes: I've had an instructive offlist correspondence with the irascible Bill L and will try to clarify a couple of points. Let me add some rascibility, then. ... the nature of culture in general, if considered carefully, ma[kes] it rather difficult to wall up the world into separate cultural compartments. Quite right. 2. What riles Bill is what he sees as the assertion that one cannot criticize something someone else does without sharing in their culture. That, in those general terms, is not what I am arguing nor what I read Ajit to be saying. I'm fine with this, if in fact Ajit is not saying that. I am arguing that in specific contexts these critiques are used to push other agendas, as in the last century Mill's influential portrayal of the treatment of women in India was used very directly to support colonial rule. I don't disagree here with your historical example, but could you clarify what you mean by "these critiques"? If you say "critiques from outside" a particular culture, I may have to get irascible again. Let me twist history a bit (by, inter alia, condensing it to one sentence). Suppose that at the time Mill made his criticism of the treatment of women in India that he was factually correct, that women were indeed being terribly abused throughout Indian society. Perhaps we can separate our criticism of Mill into two categories: 1. His "correctness" of argument and supporting facts; 2. His moral decision to spend his time criticizing victims of his country's oppression, similar to that of those who carped only at the relatively minor abuses of the Sandinistas while the US supported a far greater crime in attacking them. Perhaps we can simply say that he may have been perfectly correct in his criticisms of the abuse (1), but his moral choice (2) to offer this criticism while largely ignoring the much greater crime, for which he bore partial responsibility, is reprehensible. But, then suppose Mill saw the error of his ways, and wrote a much longer, more detailed and penetrating critique of his own country's actions, his responsibility in perpetrating the crimes, etc. To this, he appends his original criticism of the abuse of women in Indian society. I presume you would not then find this (a criticism by a white male from outside India of Indian "culture") objectionable? Perhaps the main thing Bill I disagree on is whether we disagree, as I like Bill's statements of principle. I'm happy to let anyone criticize anything they like, but when it comes to deciding which to take seriously I do worry about critiques that seem both minimally informed and to repeat a long line of lurid and distancing portrayals of 3rd world culture. To me this seems to be a particular concern; Bill perhaps still sees it as overly general. But I do think we can agree on the importance of understanding each particular situation and the politics implicated in it. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "distancing" (criticism implies distance, does it not?), but I basically agree with this. I have one final question. I'm not very consistent in my treatment of the words "black", "blacks", "white", "whites", etc. when referring to black persons, black "culture" (I still don't know what this is exactly), etc. Is it the accepted practice to capitalize these words? There, are we best pals again? Bill
