Re: Ecology and value free Marxism
Dear friends, Those who have been following Louis' posts on ecology will be interested in knowing that the 1998 Socialist Scholars Conference will feature a panel on "Marxist Contributions to Ecological Theory" with John Bellamy Foster, University of Oregon Stephen Jay Gould, Harvard University Joan Roelofs, Hampshire College It has been tentatively scheduled for Saturday morning March 21. The Conference will be held at the usual place, Borough of Manhattan Community College, 199 Chambers Street in New York City from March 20 to 22. For more information about the Socialist Scholars Conference, check out our web page at www.soc.qc.edu/ssc or email the Conference at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hope to see you (and many young people) there, Robert Saute On Sat, 21 Feb 1998, Louis Proyect wrote: Any young person who was becoming politicized around ecological issues would find Boucher's argument deeply repellent. As it turns out, tens of thousands of young people have developed inchoate anticapitalist ideas because of what corporations have been doing to dolphins and other endangered species. If you gave that young person a sample of Boucher's prose, they'd retreat in horror. There is empirical evidence for the sort of disjunction between Marxism and the young generation I am describing. Next month many of us will attend the annual Socialist Scholars Conference in New York, where we will see about a thousand middle-aged white people. Inevitably we will turn to an old friend and say something like, "God, everybody is so OLD." Meanwhile, at a conference on globalization held at the Riverside Church 2 years ago, there were twice as many participants and the average age was probably in the mid-20s. I have no doubt that if you asked the average attendee what the official Marxist position on ecology was, they'd say it was something like the position that Boucher puts forward. Louis Proyect
Complexity
Someone mentioned Brian Arthur and his part in Mitchell Waldrop's book "Complexity". That book had a fairly interesting and novel (novel to me anyway) critique of the mathematical "culture" of Economics. The critique originates from a group of physicists called to the Santa Fe institute to do their interdisciplinary thang in a seminar with a group of economists. Both groups introduced themselves via a tour of the mathematical models used in each profession. Waldrop recounts that the physicists were somewhat taken aback by the economists. They seemed quite technically proficient but the economist's use of models seemed somewhat alien to them. (If anyone else read this critique and understands it better please contribute what you remember of it.) What I remember about the critique is that physicists seem to spend alot of effort trying to come up with models that fit phenomenon as they observed them but that the economists spent much more effort deriving their models from first principles. Another implication of this was that the physicists were much more willing junk the models in the face of new evidence. If that is true, I wonder if a case could be made that this is approach is much more prone to ideological "contamination" than the sort of modeling physicists do (the difference in subject matter is relevant, of course). Any thoughts??? -Paul Meyer
Re: literary question
This is the epigraph to "Pere Goriot". Louis P. At 09:34 PM 2/22/98 -0800, you wrote: Where did Balzac write: "Behind every fortune lies a grand crime."? Thanks. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Boucher's entire article
From: Louis Proyect [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Boucher's entire article A VISION OF ECOLOGICAL CATASTROPHE is becoming increasingly prominent in leftist thought. . . . Thanks for uploading this splendid article, though obviously you and others don't see it that way. The depiction of environmental problems as one of imminent crisis, or of certain limited damage (such as the loss of a species) as costly beyond reckoning propitiates an environmental movement which will necessarily and logically place such concerns before the mundane preoccupations of the working class with jobs and income. Thus the ecological prescriptions of the ruling class will be accepted, even while viewed as second best next to some unattainable red-green nirvana. So the environmentalists will (and do) tend to be anti-worker and workers, listening to equations of environmentalism with leftism, will (and have) turn right. We will end up with a marxism devoid of workers, beyond the occasional cheerleading for infrequent, albeit important labor actions like the UPS strike. The "left" will redefine as bourgeois greenies and we happy few PEN-L oddballs. Then we're really screwed, and so is the ecology. We've been here before. Out of frustration with the lack of any crisis or insurgency among the U.S. working class, some people -- the Weather underground being the most extreme example -- lost whatever grip they may have had on class. In the face of an infernal calm, in terms of the amoral workings of capitalism, we cast about for signs of economic collapse and now ecological catastrophe. As (if) the labor movement develops, it should become more environmentally conscious. But you can't get there from here, here being environmentalism as a movement. Green will never run into red. Imagining heroic deeds and epochal victories in a crisis is easy. More difficult is infusing such spirit and goals into the routine of everyday life and its struggles. Cheers, MBS "Save the planet. Kill yourself." -- bumper sticker sold in WDC === 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://tap.epn.org/sawicky Opinions above do not necessarily reflect the views of anyone associated with the Economic Policy Institute other than this writer. ===
Re: Balzac query (fwd)
== From a member of balzac-l comes a somewhat contrary reply. valis Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 16:15:53 GMT From: Joe Carson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Balzac query The passage that most immediately comes to mind, tho' it does not fit the translation exactly, is in _Le Pere Goriot_ (ed. Citron, Garnier Flammarion, 1966, p. 116). It comes at the end of Vautrin's conversation with Rastignac. Unsurprisingly, the utterance is Vautrin's: "Le secret des grandes fortunes sans cause apparente est un crime oublie, parce qu'il a ete proprement fait." Joe ... Please remind me where Balzac's most quoted mot appears: "Behind every great fortune lies a great crime." Merci,
Synthesis of First and Second Contradictions of Capital
February 23, 1998 Drought in Borneo Feeds Fear of New Asian Fires By SETH MYDANS SAMARINDA, Indonesia -- The eastern coast of Borneo, dry after a year of drought, is bursting into flame again, raising fears that a wave of choking smoke could soon blanket Southeast Asia as it did last fall. Desperate to survive as food shortages and bankruptcies spread in Indonesia, both small farmers and large plantation owners have apparently resumed their slash-and-burn land clearing, despite a government ban on burning and in defiance of pleas by neighboring countries. The fires and the continuing drought -- which has been broken in much of the country by only sporadic rain showers -- are bringing added misery to a nation that is suffering its worst economic and political crisis in decades. The drought has ruined crops and added to the unemployment and food shortages that are causing price riots around the country in a social parallel to last year's wildfires. From hilltops here in East Kalimantan province, plumes of smoke can be seen in every direction. As the wind shifts unpredictably, flames eat their way through the forests, driving birds and animals ahead of them. Farmers with machetes rush to cut fire breaks. Clouds of sweet smoke sting the eyes and bring an early dusk to villages. "I was up all night fighting a fire near my home," said Badui, a farmer who sweated as he hacked underbrush at the edges of a crackling fire a few miles north of Samarinda. "Now I'm helping my friend save his home. It was the same thing last year." At a tracking station here, brightly colored computerized satellite images show hundreds of shifting hot spots. Most are clustered here in the country's driest province. But recently two new clusters have appeared in northeastern Sumatra, the other Indonesian island that was a source of last year's regionwide haze. "If the meteorology predictions are right, the dry season may be longer than last year," said Longgena Ginting, coordinator of forestry advocacy at Walhi, an environmental lobbying group. "If that happens, I am quite sure the fires will be worse than they were last year. It really depends on the weather." Singapore, Malaysia and the Philippines have already voiced their concern. Malaysia is particularly worried about the possibility that smoke could ruin its plans to play host to the Commonwealth Games in September. Last fall, Kuala Lumpur, the Malaysian capital, was thick with smoke from the Indonesian fires and children sat at their school desks wearing surgical masks. The smog affected six Southeast Asian nations, forcing the closing of airports, contributing to ship collisions, and cutting deeply into the tourism industry. It also caused widespread health problems and led to the evacuation of many foreign diplomats and businessmen. The root cause of the problem has not changed, Longgena said. "In Kalimantan, the fires are mostly caused by plantations and timber estates that have started to clear land again." The cheap clearing of land by burning will be harder than ever to stop given the economic hardships that make it less likely that plantation owners will shift to more expensive mechanized methods, several experts said. In addition, said Charles Barber, a senior researcher for the World Resources Institute: "The government has no money now to do enforcement or oversight. This is a problem in all areas of environmental management. It's a very unfortunate confluence of events: the drought, a boom in land clearing, which never had very good oversight, and now less money to focus on what goes on out in the field. "And combine that with a large amount of dead and dry biomass, which is lying around from incompletely burned areas from 1997 and you could have some real rough fires. It could be worse in May than it was even last September." Ludwig Schindler, who monitors fires in Samarinda for the Department of Forestry, said virtually all fires in Indonesia are started by people. Dry lightning, the leading cause of fires in the western United States, is not part of the weather system here, he said. Government development programs, corruption and weak law enforcement are at the root of the problem, Schindler said. "Those companies, they are protected, many of them, because they have good relations, or they are owned by people who own the country," he said. "And so that is why we have the saying that law enforcement in Indonesia is quite slow and weak." Indonesia has set a target for early in the next decade to become the world's leading exporter of wood pulp. "There is an enormous program to convert forest into timber plantations as well as oil-palm and rubber-tree plantations," Schindler said. "These companies have targets to fulfill," he added. "For two or three years it was very wet and they fell behind. Last year was very dry and everyone tried to catch up and burn what they could burn, and this is what caused the haze." For the people of
the Titanic
Over the weekend, I heard an album by the anarchist-singer U. Utah
Phillips, where he suggested that the (U.S.) Democratic Party, and by
implication liberalism in general, involves simply "rearranging the
deck-chairs on the Titanic." This, plus our current torrential rains,
brought my fevered brain back to thoughts of pen-l. This cliche' had also
shown up in the discussion of the comparison between capitalism and the
movie version of the Titanic.
Despite agreeing with much or all of the critique of the liberals and
Democrats, I think it's a bad metaphor that should be dropped (along with
"hey hey ho ho this {fill in the blank} has got to go").
Sure capitalism gets itself into serious, world-shaking, crises -- the
Depression of the 1930s, the environmental mess, the current global "race
to the bottom" to lower wages, conditions, social benefits, and
environmental standards. But it's not like the Titanic sinking. It's true
that those who steer capitalism's helm are a bit like the designers and
captains of the T, but the fact is that if capitalism is going to be
collapse, it will have to involve some pushing.
Capitalism is a system that, despite its rampant injustice and
destructiveness, shows amazing resilience. The Collapse of the early 1930s
led to a decade or more of stagnation and war, while it's quite possible
that ecocide will have similar effects. (Wojtek pondered the possibilities
of war awhile back, in late December.)
But absent strong, democratic, and deeply-rooted mass movements capable of
replacing capitalism with socialist, the demise of capitalism will lead to
either (a) an eventual recovery of capitalism; or (b) a Hobbesian war of
each against all, or what Marx and Engels termed "the common ruin of the
contending classes," Luxembourg's "barbarism"; or (c) some new class system.
Liberalism aims to reform capitalism to save it, but it's not just to avoid
socialism, but to avoid transition to (b) or (c), just as the late-Soviet
reformers tinkered with the planning system to avoid chaos or capitalism.
Can anyone think of a better metaphor than the Titanic one?
I haven't read the discussion of Boucher's article, but the above seems
relevant to it.
in pen-l solidarity,
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://clawww.lmu.edu/1997F/ECON/jdevine.html
"Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let
people talk.) -- K. Marx, paraphrasing Dante A.
Re: boucher, epi and coal
From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: boucher, epi and coal Max's defense of Boucher was not surprising. EPI has raised serious questions about the Clinton approach to global warming, from the perspective of the coal miners. Let's try to be a little more precise here, at least for a moment. Later on we'll get a little messy. Everybody at EPI is not of the same mind in general, and on environmental issues this goes double. I'm the resident smokestack baron on these issues. Please reserve all your green obloquy for me alone. Rob Scott of EPI did a short paper on the subject of cost estimates of anti-global warming policies. Nowhere did he say that such costs were sufficiently great to justify a neglect of such policies. Even so, anybody who wants to criticize that work ought to read it first. You have to wander pretty far from the topic of economics to argue that costs are irrelevant. In fact, you have to believe that the costs of any environmental damage are infinite, as I pointed out in my previous post. We've done a number of reports (all much more elaborate than the above-mentioned piece) which environmentalists find quite congenial to their views. Three just came out this past fall. Interested parties should consult our web site (EPINET.ORG). . . . Here is a real and serious environmental problem. The corporations will make out with their emissions trading and the workers will be left in If government gives away emissions permits, then clearly corporations do not benefit as a group, since one firm's sale is another's purchase. If the government sells them, corporations are net losers in the aggregate. This does not mean of course, that the trading scheme would effectively address pollution, but that's not what you were talking about either. the cold. I recall driving through W. Virginia during the 1960s, seeing coal miners on the porch with no alternatives. Their homes had no value since no alternative jobs existed. To move would entail a serious capital loss. [Think of Andrew Oswald's interesting note in the Journal of Economic Perspectives.] What would the miners have as an alternative? Yet, as they stand, the coal industry can self-rightously argue about their great concern for the welfare of their workers. In effect, they become the hostages for the anti-greens. Yes, hostage to the anti-greens, and victims of the greens. This isn't a simple matter of greens versus coal industry, with workers hostage to the latter. Environmentalism in the large is about raising the costs of consumption that is most susceptible to taxation under current circumstances. The rich will be able to shelter their consumption to some extent, and beyond that consume what they want in any event. They're rich, remember? Reduced consumption also conduces to employment shrinkage, wage stagnation, deflation, and right-wing populism, with all the associated interests of Capital in play. Associating environmental skepticism with the Right? Uncovering specious links between Harvey and the victim of tendentious posts known as Rethinking Marxism? It is to laugh. . . . Cheers, MBS === 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://tap.epn.org/sawicky Opinions above do not necessarily reflect the views of anyone associated with the Economic Policy Institute other than this writer. ===
Re: the Titanic
On Mon, 23 Feb 1998, James Devine wrote: Can anyone think of a better metaphor than the Titanic one? How about all those Spaceship Earth metaphors, i.e. a more eco-leaning Titanicity, where we're all supposed to be our own deck chairs? They're still kind of incomplete, because spaceships are basically manufactured satellites, is all, and it's hard to epitomize world history with a few microships and solar panels from Raytheon. Late multinational capitalism is just so unliterary. -- Dennis
Re: boucher, epi and coal
Max B. Sawicky wrote: From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: boucher, epi and coal Max's defense of Boucher was not surprising. I did not mean this as a criticism of you. EPI has raised serious questions about the Clinton approach to global warming, from the perspective of the coal miners. We've done a number of reports (all much more elaborate than the above-mentioned piece) which environmentalists find quite congenial to their views. Nobody thought otherwise. If government gives away emissions permits, then clearly corporations do not benefit as a group, since one firm's sale is another's purchase. If the government sells them, corporations are net losers in the aggregate. This does not mean of course, that the trading scheme would effectively address pollution, but that's not what you were talking about either. They make out by being able to continue to pollute at a relatively low cost. I understand that corporations are already eyeing mothballed Russian factories for their pollution rights. Environmentalism in the large is about raising the costs of consumption that is most susceptible to taxation under current circumstances. The rich will be able to shelter their consumption to some extent, and beyond that consume what they want in any event. They're rich, remember? Reduced consumption also conduces to employment shrinkage, wage stagnation, deflation, and right-wing populism, with all the associated interests of Capital in play. The poor are the objects of the pollution. Residents of the toxic alley in La. might pay more, but their lives might be spared. Besides, I suspect that since so little attention has been paid to the alleviation of pollution, in many cases, the firms will make money in the process of limiting pollution. Associating environmental skepticism with the Right? Guilty as charged and proud of it. Uncovering specious links between Harvey and the victim of tendentious posts known as Rethinking Marxism? I don't understand. It is to laugh. Good. We should be having fun. . . . Cheers, MBS === 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://tap.epn.org/sawicky Opinions above do not necessarily reflect the views of anyone associated with the Economic Policy Institute other than this writer. === -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 916-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: boucher, epi and coal
If government gives away emissions permits, then clearly corporations do not benefit as a group, since one firm's sale is another's purchase. If the government sells them, corporations are net losers in the aggregate. This does not mean of course, that the trading scheme would effectively address pollution, but that's not what you were talking about either. They make out by being able to continue to pollute at a relatively low cost. I understand that corporations are already eyeing mothballed Russian factories for their pollution rights. Sure, but compared to present circumstances they are not better off, except to the extent trading schemes substitute for regulations and 'bite' harder than the regs. . . . The poor are the objects of the pollution. Residents of the toxic alley in La. might pay more, but their lives might be spared. Besides, I suspect that since so little attention has been paid to the alleviation of pollution, in many cases, the firms will make money in the process of limiting pollution. To the best of my knowledge there is little evidence that pollution reduction helps the poor more than others. The exception would be blatant domestic cases of 'toxic imperialism,' to which you allude. At the same time, the costs of policies to reduce pollution are typically regressive as well. All in all, ecological programs could be well-taken in some general sense but typically have a distributional burden to overcome. . . . Uncovering specious links between Harvey and the victim of tendentious posts known as Rethinking Marxism? I don't understand. That wasn't a reference to you, but to Brother LP's detective work. MBS === 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://tap.epn.org/sawicky Opinions above do not necessarily reflect the views of anyone associated with the Economic Policy Institute other than this writer. ===
The Sins of Harvey (was Re: Boucher's entire article)
At 09:58 AM 2/23/98 -0500, Louis wrote: In "What is to be Done" Lenin cites 3 examples of what tasks a "vanguard" should undertake... Lous, why did you feel the need to cite Lenin chapter verse to argue that sectarianism is bad? Harvey draws a dichotomy between proletarian concerns: working conditions, wages, rights to a job, etc. He sneers at the "middle class" concerns raised on Earth Day in 1970. But it _was_ organized around middle class concerns--at least, that's what I remember back in elementary school, when I participated. :) And that was a real problem. Nice middle class people like me had legitimate concerns, but it was pretty elitist to push a strategy where blue collar jobs would be on the line middle class jobs weren't. Had someone pointed that out to me at the time and suggested a strategy that would save trees, dolphins, _and_ people, I would've been very happy (and I might have stayed active in the environmental movement). His latest book is a highly sophisticated attempt to set directions for Marxist participation in the green movement. Anybody who took his advice to heart would soon alienate green activists. It is filled with lectures about the need to break with green reformism. Deep ecologists are regarded with barely disguised hostility. The problem is that any social movement--feminism, gay liberation, black liberation--has its own dynamics. You can not project "correct" Marxist schemas on such movements from the sidelines. That is what the Spartacist League does. But criticizing green reformism or deep ecologists is hardly an outside activity. Various wings of the environmentalist movement fight each other all the time. I know plenty of environmental activists who think green reformism ala the cuddling up with Clinton turned out to be a real disaster and many who think that the deep ecology folks are off the deep end. Just because Harvey calls himself a Marxist (assuming he does these days) writes books that badly need editing is no reason to ban him from the intra-envrionmental fray. I look forward to seeing your close reading of Harvey--supplemented by that wonderful scanner of yours. In Solidarity, Anders Schneiderman P.S. For the record, I think Harvey is a very smart guy--one of the most interesting lefty theorists around. I just wish he wrote more clearly. However, Harvey is also one of the few theorists who gets down dirty in politics. I remember a prof at UC Berkeley who sneered at Harvey because he did door-knocking, getting-out-the-vote, and other unglamorous work, which in my book is a pretty cool thing for a theorist to do.
Re: Publishing in URPE for Tenure
In a message dated 98-02-22 13:50:11 EST, Jason Hecht writes: When one goes up for tenure, do NCs (and PB committee members) regard URPE publications as "legitimate?" When I was at the New School, it was clear that faculty publications in URPE were not considered "valid." Actually, this contradiction applies to the whole range of heterodox journals: Feminist Economics, ROPE, ROSE, etc. I think the publication position of most departments changes depending on whether they want the person tenured or not. At least this is what I hear from those who have and are seeking tenure. Specifically at the New School, there were professors tenured with publications ONLY in "lefty" journals and professors denied tenure with publications in a wide range of journals, and professors tenured with almost no publications in any journals. A little like Alice Through the Looking Glass -- the rules changed constantly so she could never win. (h, notice how I 'slipped' into a female example -- do you think this is freudian?) Aside from those rather snide comments, I think the more interesting question is how to get some of these lefty journals talking to each other and the rest of the profession rather than addressing their little piece of audience. Feminist Economics was named one of the year's best journals primarily because it appeals to a broad spectrum of feminist economics. I think if the debate amongst other heterodox journals became more interactive, there would be not choice but for the rest of the profession to join in the debate. maggie coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Earth Day and Lenin
The John Birch society used to make a big deal that Earth Day was celebrated on Lenin's birthday. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: boucher, epi and coal
Max brings up an interesting challenge. I disagree with him, but I do not have enough factual evidence to clinch my case. I am sure that the poor are hurt more by pollution than they are helped by the decrease in costs. Any suggestions? -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
information about pen-l
From time to time, listproc drops people from pen-l, or people need to postpone or change their status. Well, here is the relevant material: Dear Penners, This is an occasional reminder of some of the listserv commands at your disposal. The commands have been capitalized for emphasis. These commands should be sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you are going to be away and want to postpone messages from pen-l send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and in the message type: SET pen-l MAIL POSTPONE== postpones one's mail SET pen-l MAIL ACK == unpostpone one's mail To unsubscribe from pen-l, please mail listproc the message UNSUB pen-l == two word command Most common mistakes: 1. The inclusion of personal names with the unsub request. 2. Punctuation marks near the two wordsE.g., "unsub pen-l" rather than unsub pen-l unsub pen-l rather than unsub pen-l unsub pen-l. rather than unsub pen-l unsub pen-l rather than unsub pen-l 3. Trying to unsubscribe from an (internet) .edu address when your subscription is registered under a .bitnet address. To determine the address under which you are subscribed, send [EMAIL PROTECTED] the two word request. This request will also give you a list of all subscribers. REVIEW Pen-l If your efforts to unsub have been frustrated, please write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] rather than taking your problem to the list. It is helpful to forward a copy the of mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED] that shows the source of your problem. If you would like to receive pen-l messages in batches or digests several times per week instead of message-by-message, send the following command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] SET pen-l MAIL DIGEST If you want to return to message-by-message mail, use the command SET pen-l MAIL ACK If you want to see an index of the logs of past messages and other files send (to [EMAIL PROTECTED]) the command INDEX pen-l The list of files returned from the index command are retrievable with the get command. If, for example, you are interested in messages from January 97, you send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and in the body of the message type GET pen-l JAN97 For friends who would like to subscribe, please have them send the four/five word cmd SUB pen-l Firstname Lastname REMEMBER: All of these commands should be sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: boucher, epi and coal
These are the issues that Tom Athanasiou covers in "Divided Planet." Also, check out Mark Dowie's "Losing Ground", a stinging critique of the pro-corporate drift of mainstream groups. Finally, everybody who has even the slightest interest in these questions should subscribe to Counterpunch, edited by Ken Silverstein and Alex Cockburn. Louis Proyect At 03:10 PM 2/23/98 -0800, you wrote: Max brings up an interesting challenge. I disagree with him, but I do not have enough factual evidence to clinch my case. I am sure that the poor are hurt more by pollution than they are helped by the decrease in costs. Any suggestions? -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Publishing in URPE for Tenure II
Jim Craven's acerbic comment on academic patois was necessary but ultimately futile, for this is an old problem that never really changes. What follows is - in case you can't tell - a cri de coeur on the subject from a member of Berkeley's Bad Subjects Collective. valis Public Intellectuals Joe Sartelle Bad Subjects, Issue #3, November 1992 Copyright (c) 1992 by Joe Sartelle. All rights reserved. This text may be used and shared in accordance with the fair-use provisions of U.S. copyright law, and it may be archived and redistributed in electronic form, provided that the editors are notified and no fee is charged for access. Archiving, redistribution, or republication of this text on other terms, in any medium, requires the consent of the author and the notification of Bad Subjects. _ I have a confession to make. In the essay I wrote for last month's issue of Bad Subjects, "Cynicism and the Election," I engaged in an unnecessary and perhaps even gratuitous use of theory: I made reference to the works of cultural theorists Peter Sloterdijk and Slavoj Zizek in order to explain the concepts of "cynical reason" and "cynical spectatorship." It wasn't necessary for me to mention them in order to make my argument effectively and clearly. However, I am a graduate student in the English Department at UC-Berkeley, and as such I am accustomed by training, habit, professional incentive and plain old peer pressure to feeling that unless I can drop a few theoretical references into my discussion, my arguments are going to seem weak, unimpressive ,inadequate. In other words, Sloterdijk and Zizek are there primarily to impress you, not to enlighten you -- that latter task could have been accomplished quite well without the academic phrasings. And the term "academic" pretty much gives the game away: finally, I am simply confessing to writing like an academic. From the perspective of academia itself, of course, this is hardly a sin to be confessed and atoned for; indeed, the practice of legitimating one's argument by studding it with theoretical terms and references is a sign of one's promise, a measure of how much one has succeeded in assimilating to the interests, protocols and conventions of the profession. As a graduate student, an academic in training, I am supposed to seek to impress my colleagues (peers and superiors) with my knowledge of the latest models or revivals of European theory -- "theory" meaning simply the multiple philosophical and critical perspectives with which academics in the humanities, especially those who do "cultural studies," construct meanings from the increasingly various objects or "texts" that we study. "Theory" is certainly not all I am expected to know, but effective command over at least one or two theoretical "languages" is one of the main criteria by which the profession determines who qualifies for the top ranks and thus receives the best rewards, in the form of faculty support and sponsorship, fellowships, opportunities to speak at prestigious conferences and publish in prestigious journals, and -- this is what it's finally all about, selling your labor power in a competitive market -- who gets the best jobs at the best institutions. I sometimes think that the professional hierarchy of prestige goes like this: those who "do theory" well, those who "do theory" at all, and those who don't "do theory." I have read far too many articles and heard far too many talks -- especially when the talks are by individuals seeking academic employment -- in which there is an argument, often a very interesting one, that might have been effectively and sharply presented in half the space and time that was actually taken, but which was overburdened with strictly academic terms and references because of the very real need to Impress The Audience, which in academia means Getting In As Many Theoretical References As Possible Without Showing Off Too Much. For it is not entirely a cynical joke within academia that the more obscure and difficult your argument is, the more impressed (or intimidated) your audience will be. Since I am convinced that most of us claim, in varying degrees, to read and understand more theory than we actually do, when confronted with a theoretically dense and
Re: boucher, epi and coal
Emissions trading is a crock. If you want to give polluction credits, why not give everybody an equal credit instead of rewarding people for historical patterns of pollution? In the case of Southern California, companies buy old junked cars, under the assumption that the hulk would run and spew out pollution for another decade. All you have to do is tow a heap to the site, start the engine and collect your money. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 916-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Red vs Green
This isn't the whole story of the NDP, loggers and the environmental movement, Paul. As part of its pandering to business and right wing labour, the BC NDP government actually labelled Greenpeace "enemies of BC". When enviros were arrested for blocking logging in the Carmanah watershed a couple of years back (this is -- was? -- a pristine valley of old growth) they were charged with _conspiracy_ for Chrissake. In further pandering to the loggers (who have helped organize notoriously anti-labour, right wing groups like the Share folks), the government has encouraged logging in very fragile watersheds, jeopardizing the water supply in areas like the Slocan Valley. The NDP's environmental record may look good from afar. But here on the ground it looks like the shits. Sid Shniad Max talks about the conflict between the coal miners and ecologists in the US. Here in Canada, there has been a major conflict between loggers and ecologists, particularly in BC where the forest industry is the key to the provincial economy. This has led to major problems for the NDP both electorally and in policy making. The NDP relies on the unions for both financial and electoral support but also on ecologist for support and election workers. The forest industry keeps yelling, if you protect old growth forests and oppose clear cutting you (the loggers) will lose your jobs. So vote Liberal (the right-wing party currently so you can keep your jobs. (or federally, vote for the unltra right Reform (sic) Party). As a result, the NDP government which has done more for the ecology (increased parks, introduced more forest restrictions, etc.) than any other jurisdiction in Canada, is teetering on the electoral edge, while still being roundly condemned by the environmentalist who would prefera right-wing ecological collapse to gradual improvement in forest practice. It is all very discouraging for us Red-Greens. Paul Phillips Economics, University of Manitoba
Re: boucher, epi and coal
At 05:54 p.m. 2/23/98 -0800, you wrote: Emissions trading is a crock. If you want to give polluction credits, why not give everybody an equal credit instead of rewarding people for historical patterns of pollution? In the case of Southern California, companies buy old junked cars, under the assumption that the hulk would run and spew out pollution for another decade. All you have to do is tow a heap to the site, start the engine and collect your money. there was a excellent expose' about this in the NEW TIMES, a Los Angeles free weekly within the last month. Among other things, one of the technicians who had been working with the program has quit in disgust, arguing that it's a total sham. in pen-l solidarity, Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/1997F/ECON/jdevine.html
Developments in South Africa
The Daily Telegraph Sunday 22 February 1998 ANC GUERRILLAS TURN TO CRIME By Alec Russell in Johannesburg In a nightmare for post-apartheid South Africa, former African National Congress guerrillas have become disillusioned with their political masters and turned to crime. With a demoralised and corrupt police and a limitless supply of weapons from the region's many recent wars, President Mandela's society has long been seen by international criminal syndicates as ripe for exploitation. Now as former ANC guerrillas tire of waiting for their government to keep its promises, the crime-lords have on tap a desperate and ruthless source of manpower to do their dirty work. Over the last few months South Africa has been hit by a spate of military-style raids on bank vans. More than a dozen guards have been killed and more than 10 million stolen. In the bloodiest hit, which left six guards dead, the attackers cordoned off a major highway with a spiked chain before ambushing a bank van. They first sprayed it with armour-piercing bullets then stopped it by ramming into it with a commandeered 20-ton lorry. It was a professional job with echoes of the tactics township defence units used against the police in the apartheid era. Few South Africans were surprised when Collins Chauke, a former member of the ANC's armed wing, Umkhonto we Size, was identified as a prime suspect. The government has claimed that he was an exceptional case. But the inmates of Devon military camp 60 miles east of Johannesburg tell a very different story. Left to fester in their brick blockhouses they are simmering with resentment at the government. They also leave little doubt that many ex-colleagues are resorting to crime. "The government promised us heaven and earth and they have not delivered," said Sipho Mavundla, a 32-year-old veteran of the "liberation" war who spent four years in exile in Tanzania. "I can survive on the 600 rands (80) a month they pay us. But some can't. I won't say my comrades are robbing banks, but if you had army training, no job, and were desperate to feed your family, what would you do?" On a fire-extinguisher behind him someone had scratched: "This government is driving us to crime. They force us to rob banks." A cartoon strip on an adjacent wall rammed home the message. In the first picture, three soldiers are marching up and down in freshly pressed uniforms. In the second, a duck labelled the "commissioner" struts around in a parody of a general out of touch with his men. In the third a man in a balaclava with an AK-47 on his back is running with a television in his arms. Peter Swarahle, a wiry 25-year-old, is the unofficial spokesman for those in the Devon camp. He joined Umkhonto we Size in the late Eighties and after the briefest of training fought in his local township, Hammanskraal, north of Pretoria, against the apartheid security forces. At the end of the apartheid era in May 1994 he was among thousands of ANC soldiers who were promised a career in the army or training to adapt to civilian life. He opted for the latter. But since then he says all he has done is sleep and eat and collect his 20 rands (2.50) a day. Last month he decided enough was enough. Now he and 11 colleagues are preparing to sue the government for breach of contract for failing to prepare them for civilian life. "Most of us have been here for three years and all we have to show for it is a certificate of a few weeks' training," he said. "We've written to the government and no one has replied." Ronnie Kasrils, the deputy minister of defence and a former Umkhonto we Size leader, told The Telegraph that frustration was not widespread. The reality, he said, "does not fit the picture of ex-combatants being thrown out on the streets and becoming highway robbers. If we find there are former [Umkhonto we Size] members involved in crime it shouldn't surprise anyone. Every country in the world has seen former policemen and soldiers finding it hard to return to civilian life". The British-monitored integration of the old white-led army and black guerrillas has been widely praised as one of the triumphs of South Africa's transition. But that is no consolation in Devon and other camps for demobilised freedom fighters. "We were helping to set our country free," shouted one man who would only give his nickname, Triple M. "Now we are bounced around like a rubber ball. No one ever comes here. People call us criminals. But we have been forgotten."
Solidarity tours for Detroit strikers
SPRING OFFENSIVE TOURS Knocked down but not knocked out. Detroit's locked-out newspaper workers are continuing their thirty-two month long fight against the Detroit News and the Detroit Free Press and for their jobs and a good union contract. 2000 Detroit newspaper workers struck the Detroit Free Press and the Detroit News in July 1995. Following nineteen months on the picket line their unions offered the Detroit's newspaper bosses an unconditional return to work in February of last year only to have the newspaper bosses leave the large majority of them locked-out while the scabs who had crossed their picket lines during the strike continued to do their jobs. More than 1,400 workers remain locked out while the approximately 600 workers who have been allowed to return to work are "locked-in" working without a contract in intolerable conditions. Meanwhile the courts have ruled that Detroit's newspaper bosses bear full responsiblity for the strike because they bargained in bad faith. But the same courts have failed to compel Detroit's newspaper bosses to remove the scabs and give all the locked-out workers back their jobs. It is in this context that an informal network of local union leaders and worker activists in Canada and the U.S. have are launching a "Spring Offensive" comprised of an ambitious series of speaking tours. These tours will mobilize support for Detroit's locked-out newspaper workers and send out a message that the fight in Detroit is the fight of workers everywhere and that we are determined to do what we can to ensure that all of Detroit's courageous newspaper workers win back their jobs and return to work in dignity with a good union contract firmly in place. There will be three "Spring Offensive" Tours. The first tour will take place across Southern Ontario and coincide with International Women's Day events in Toronto. The second tour will span almost the entire U.S. West Coast. The third tour will feature a series of events in British Columbia and Alberta and include participation in a Canadian Union of Public Employees convention in Alberta. Tour events are scheduled for: Tour 1 March 3 in Windsor, Ontario March 4 in St. Catharines, Ontario March 5, 6 7 in Toronto, Ontario Tour 2 March 7-12 in San Francisco, CA. March 13 in Portland, Oregon March 14 in Salem, Oregon March 15 in Corvallis, Oregon March 16 17 in Seattle, WA. Tour 3 March 17-19 in Vancouver, B.C. March 20 in Lethbridge, Alberta March 21 24 in Calgary*, Alberta March 22-23 25-26 in Edmonton, Alberta March 27 28 in Harrison, B.C. * March 24 appearance at a concert by Chumbawamba. For further details about events in your town contact: For general information about the tour: (905) 934-6233 or [EMAIL PROTECTED] To learn more about the Action Coalition of Strikers and Supporters in Detroit contact: (810) 447-2716 or (810) 574-9539 or write: ACOSS 5750 15-Mile Rd. Box 242, Sterling Heights Michigan 48310-5777
Linguistic reform in the EU
CREDIT: Lila Kingsland, Calgary The European Union commissioners have announced that agreement has been reached to adopt English as the preferred language for European communications, rather than German, which was the other possibility. As part of the negotiations, the British government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a five-year phased plan for what will be known as EuroEnglish (Euro for short). In the first year, "s" will be used instead of the soft "c". Sertainly, sivil servants will resieve this news with joy. Also, the hard "c" will be replaced with "k". Not only will this klear up konfusion, but typewriters kan have one less letter. There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year, when the troublesome "ph" will be replaced by "f". This will make words like "fotograf" 20 per sent shorter. In the third year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Governments will enkorage the removal of double letters, which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil agre that the horible mes of silent "e"s in the languag is disgrasful, and they would go. By the fourth year, peopl wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th" by "z" and "w" by " v". During ze fifz year, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vords kontaining "ou", and similar changes vud of kors be aplid to ozer kombinations of leters. After zis fifz yer, ve vil hav a reli sensibl riten styl. Zer vil be no mor trubls or difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi tu understand ech ozer. Ze drem vil finali kum tru. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Re: boucher, epi and coal
Max B. Sawicky wrote: If government gives away emissions permits, then clearly corporations do not benefit as a group, since one firm's sale is another's purchase. If the government sells them, corporations are net losers in the aggregate. For every tradable pollution permit policy in which the government sells the permits there is an "equivalent" pollution tax policy that yields the exact same outcomes: same overall reduction in pollution, same individual reductions for each polluter, same overall cost of reduction to polluters as a whole, same individual cost of reduction to each polluter, same gain in government revenue (from permits sales in one case, from taxes paid in the other). EXCEPT... One must assume that the permit market is competitive and functions perfectly smoothly finding its theoretical equilibrium infintely quickly, etc. etc. -- the usual convenient and unrealistic assumptions, where no such assumptions are necessary for the pollution tax to be efficient. The above means there is always a pollution tax policy that is equal to or superior to any permit policy on purely technical grounds. When the government gives away permits to polluting corporations they implicitly award legal ownership of the environment to polluters rather than pollution victims. They make a summary judgement entirely in favor of polluters regarding the last remaining common property resource (and therefore still disputed property) on the planet. When the government gives away pollution permits to corporations it is like the government giving away not only the right of way land to the railroads in the 19th century, but all of the land within a thousand miles of either side of the track they lay. Except in this case we don't even get a railroad track! Pollution permit give-away programs have NO technical or efficiency advantages over pollution taxes, may be technically inferior (due to realistic probabilities of market failure), and are the worst imaginable policy on equity grounds. When governments do not collect pollution taxes (or sell permits), but instead give permits away for free to polluters -- model citizens that they have proven to be -- and therefore collect other taxes from other people to finance government programs, just who do you think they collect those taxes from? Last I heard the common working stiff not only held a job but paid more than his/er share in taxes as well!
Re: Publishing in URPE for Tenure
Aside from those rather snide comments, I think the more interesting question
is how to get some of these lefty journals talking to each other and the rest
of the profession rather than addressing their little piece of audience.
Feminist Economics was named one of the year's best journals primarily because
it appeals to a broad spectrum of feminist economics. I think if the debate
amongst other heterodox journals became more interactive, there would be not
choice but for the rest of the profession to join in the debate.
maggie coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Response: Or, perhaps better than the various "heterodox" journals
talking to each other, perhaps they might try "talking" [with rather
than to] the subjects/objects of "heterodox" analysis--"the great
unwashed masses". Perhaps also, they might try linking/deriving
concrete theory with concrete struggles that matter in the scheme of
things. Perhaps they might try sounding less like Talcott Parsons
(saying what everybody knows in language nobody except a few insiders
can undrstand) and less waxing esoteric and start speaking/writing in
comprehensible language on comprehensible issues. Perhaps they might
try using math as a tool to illuminate when necessary and to
the extent necessary rather than as an instrument for dressing up
banal ideas, as an end in itself or an instrument of "respectability"
among the "mainstreams."
*---*
* "Filling holes by digging bigger and *
* James Craven bigger holes...cannot be continued*
* Dept of Economics indefinately. Finding a way out of the*
* Clark College maze of the global capital system's *
* 1800 E. Mc Loughlin Blvd. contradictions through a sustainable *
* Vancouver, Wa. 98663 transition to a very different social *
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] order is therefore more imperative*
* (360) 992-2283 (Office)today than ever before, in view of the*
* (360) 992-2863 (Fax) ever more threatening instability." *
* ("Beyond Capital", by Istvan Meszaros)*
* MY EMPLOYER HAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH MY PRIVATE/PROTECTED OPINION *
Re: The Sins of Harvey (was Re: Boucher's entire article)
R. Anders Schneiderman: Lous, why did you feel the need to cite Lenin chapter verse to argue that sectarianism is bad? Because I am in the process of collecting my thoughts for a more formal reply to Harvey. Harvey tries to stake out a classic Marxist position on social movements, but I will argue that it is only classic sectarianism. But it _was_ organized around middle class concerns--at least, that's what I remember back in elementary school, when I participated. :) And that was a real problem. Nice middle class people like me had legitimate concerns, but it was pretty elitist to push a strategy where blue collar jobs would be on the line middle class jobs weren't. Had someone pointed that out to me at the time and suggested a strategy that would save trees, dolphins, _and_ people, I would've been very happy (and I might have stayed active in the environmental movement). Earth Day 1970 was the brainchild of a Wisconsin liberal senator Gaylord Nelson, who while thumbing through a copy of Ramparts magazine focusing on ecology, decided that action was needed. He proposed a day of action. This is identical to what happened with the Vietnam Moratorium in the same year. 2 liberals proposed the action and Marxists got involved with it and pushed it in a left direction. If it hadn't been for Marxists, the Moratorium would have retained flabby, middle-class politics. Since Marxists have avoided the ecology movement, the results have been flabby, middle-class politics. But criticizing green reformism or deep ecologists is hardly an outside activity. Various wings of the environmentalist movement fight each other all the time. I know plenty of environmental activists who think green reformism ala the cuddling up with Clinton turned out to be a real disaster and many who think that the deep ecology folks are off the deep end. Just because Harvey calls himself a Marxist (assuming he does these days) writes books that badly need editing is no reason to ban him from the intra-envrionmental fray. The fight in the ecology movement is between grass-roots radicals and the corporate oriented mainstream groups like the Sierra Club. What is missing from the mix is socialism. There is not much of a socialist presence in the movement. I am not for banning Harvey. I am for fighting sectarianism. Louis Proyect
Red vs Green
Max talks about the conflict between the coal miners and ecologists in the US. Here in Canada, there has been a major conflict between loggers and ecologists, particularly in BC where the forest industry is the key to the provincial economy. This has led to major problems for the NDP both electorally and in policy making. The NDP relies on the unions for both financial and electoral support but also on ecologist for support and election workers. The forest industry keeps yelling, if you protect old growth forests and oppose clear cutting you (the loggers) will lose your jobs. So vote Liberal (the right-wing party currently so you can keep your jobs. (or federally, vote for the unltra right Reform (sic) Party). As a result, the NDP government which has done more for the ecology (increased parks, introduced more forest restrictions, etc.) than any other jurisdiction in Canada, is teetering on the electoral edge, while still being roundly condemned by the environmentalist who would prefera right-wing ecological collapse to gradual improvement in forest practice. It is all very discouraging for us Red-Greens. Paul Phillips Economics, University of Manitoba
Re: boucher, epi and coal
At 03:46 PM 2/23/98 +, Max wrote: Environmentalism in the large is about raising the costs of consumption that is most susceptible to taxation under current circumstances. Maybe DC is populated mostly with bone-headed liberal environmentalists whose version of "environmentalism" would fit that definition, so maybe that's mostly who you've met. But that's only one wing of the environmental movement. For example, Silicon Valley Toxics, Citizens for a Better Environment, etc. work fairly closely with labor and push for projects that reduce toxics _and_ create jobs. Similarly, most of the "environmental justice" crowd spends their time trying to stop corporations who kill poor folks--particularly poor folks of color--by offering them a choice between no jobs vs. shitty jobs a toxic waste dump in their backyard. Some of them have been very active in going after corporate welfare deals of the like that Intel has gotten in New Mexico, where they create a handful of jobs in return for huge subsidies, a dangerous amount of water, and the right to screw up the environment poison people. None of these folks believe that the only way to save the environment is to screw the working class through regressive taxes on consumption. For that matter, even in some of the more conservative wings of the movement, such as Ducks Unlimited (pardon the pun), who're made up of duck hunters for the environment, are a hell of a lot smarter than that. For ex, I heard that DU has been working with an innovative plan for changing subsidies that farmers get so that bird habitats near rivers are maintained _and_ small farmers get a leg up. Even when it comes to miners, what kind of sense does it make to say, we're going to screw up the environment so we can keep jobs? Didn't Lewis used to say that ultimately the point of the UMW was to get people out of the mines, which kill or cripple the bodies of an insane number of workers? Instead of taking the line the AFL is forced to take because of internal political reasons, why not fight for conversion? Why not say, yes, we've got to get out of the coal business over time, but we have to do it in a way that leaves behind healthy communities w/ thriving economies? The environmental movement has changed a lot in the last ten years, Max. You might want to check it out sometime. Anders Schneiderman
Re: the Titanic
In a message dated 98-02-23 15:57:51 EST, you write: Can anyone think of a better metaphor than the Titanic one? Well, Jim, since you asked, how about Dante's Inferno. An eternity of crises. maggie coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: the Titanic
Here's Phil Ochs' definition of liberalism, from back in the day: As for a short aphorism about the future of capitalism (rather than a metaphor), how about "Socialism or Barbarism." I think that's usually credited to Rosa Luxemburg. http://www.cs.pdx.edu/~trent/ochs Love Me, I'm a Liberal By Phil Ochs C I cried when they shot Medgar Evers Am Tears ran down my spine C I cried when they shot Mr. Kennedy D G As though I'd lost a father of mine C But Malcolm X got what was coming F He got what he asked for this time C FC G C F C So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal I go to civil rights rallies And I put down the old D.A.R. I love Harry and Sidney and Sammy I hope every colored boy becomes a star But don't talk about revolution That's going a little bit too far So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal I cheered when Humphrey was chosen My faith in the system restored I'm glad the commies were thrown out of the A.F.L. C.I.O. board I love Puerto Ricans and Negros as long as they don't move next door So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal The people of old Mississippi Should all hang their heads in shame I can't understand how their minds work What's the matter don't they watch Les Crain? But if you ask me to bus my children I hope the cops take down your name So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal I read New republic and Nation I've learned to take every view You know, I've memorized Lerner and Golden I feel like I'm almost a Jew But when it comes to times like korea There's no one more red, white and blue So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal I vote for the democtratic party They want the U.N. to be strong I go to all the Pete Seeger concerts He sure gets me singing those songs I'll send all the money you ask for But don't ask me to come on along So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal Once I was young and impulsive I wore every conceivable pin Even went to the socialist meetings Learned all the old union hymns But I've grown older and wiser And that's why I'm turning you in So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal Notes: Lerner Golden were both columnists with left-leaning tendencies. Harry Golden, a humorist, wrote some marvelous books and short stories. One I recall is his plan for integration in schools in the south (this was back when). Since the Southerners didn't mind blacks standing next to whites when making purchases in stores, he proposed that they take out all the chairs in the schools and let the students stand to learn. He called this "vertical integration". Les Crane had a talk show in the south. (Nothing virulent like the current ones!) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jello Biafra and Mojo Nixon did a cover of this song with some updated lyrics. Mojo Nixon sang this updated version solo on Comedy Central during their 1996 State of the Union show. Chords supplied by Guy Matz 6 Jul 97 trent -- _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Michael Pearlman email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] J.R. Masterman School [EMAIL PROTECTED] 17th and Spring Garden Sts.fax: (215) 299-3581 Philadelphia PA 19130phone: (215) 299-3583 (215) 299-3583/299-4661 Money for Schools, not Prisons!Hasta la victoria siempre! _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
the Titanic
--- Forwarded Message Follows ---
Date sent: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 11:06:54 -0800
Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: James Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:the Titanic
Over the weekend, I heard an album by the anarchist-singer U. Utah
Phillips, where he suggested that the (U.S.) Democratic Party, and by
implication liberalism in general, involves simply "rearranging the
deck-chairs on the Titanic." This, plus our current torrential rains,
brought my fevered brain back to thoughts of pen-l. This cliche' had also
shown up in the discussion of the comparison between capitalism and the
movie version of the Titanic.
Despite agreeing with much or all of the critique of the liberals and
Democrats, I think it's a bad metaphor that should be dropped (along with
"hey hey ho ho this {fill in the blank} has got to go").
Sure capitalism gets itself into serious, world-shaking, crises -- the
Depression of the 1930s, the environmental mess, the current global "race
to the bottom" to lower wages, conditions, social benefits, and
environmental standards. But it's not like the Titanic sinking. It's true
that those who steer capitalism's helm are a bit like the designers and
captains of the T, but the fact is that if capitalism is going to be
collapse, it will have to involve some pushing.
Capitalism is a system that, despite its rampant injustice and
destructiveness, shows amazing resilience. The Collapse of the early 1930s
led to a decade or more of stagnation and war, while it's quite possible
that ecocide will have similar effects. (Wojtek pondered the possibilities
of war awhile back, in late December.)
But absent strong, democratic, and deeply-rooted mass movements capable of
replacing capitalism with socialist, the demise of capitalism will lead to
either (a) an eventual recovery of capitalism; or (b) a Hobbesian war of
each against all, or what Marx and Engels termed "the common ruin of the
contending classes," Luxembourg's "barbarism"; or (c) some new class system.
Liberalism aims to reform capitalism to save it, but it's not just to avoid
socialism, but to avoid transition to (b) or (c), just as the late-Soviet
reformers tinkered with the planning system to avoid chaos or capitalism.
Can anyone think of a better metaphor than the Titanic one?
I haven't read the discussion of Boucher's article, but the above seems
relevant to it.
in pen-l solidarity,
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://clawww.lmu.edu/1997F/ECON/jdevine.html
"Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let
people talk.) -- K. Marx, paraphrasing Dante A.
Response: Actually the classroom exercise involved finding 'aspects'
of the Titanic episode as a metaphor for 'aspects' of capitalism.
Further, although liberalism or conservatism might be seen as also
involving something like trying to find the 'optimum' arrangement of
deck chairs on the Titanic, the specific reference was to so-called
"mainstream economics."
To extend the list, the White Star executive who kept pushing to
"establish new records" and wound up hiding in a lifeboat supposedly
for "women and children only" might be seen as a metaphor for those
capitalists whose core and derivative imperatives of profits for
power and power for profits cause massive misery for the many while
they attempt to escape the conditions generated by the inner logic of
capitalism to isolated and protected enclaves of privilege protected
by the State, private police and the illusion of privilege of the few
being the "natural order of things."
The character Jack, the poor and footlose Irishman, who won a ticket
on the Titanic, can be seen as a metaphor for all those who buy into
the system, look for corners of privileges, rationalize their
false consciousness and illusions and do ad hoc yet cumulative
Faustian bargains that add up to the ultimate Faustian bargain.
Yes the capitalist system has a plethora of tools, mystifications,
traps, enticing Faustian bargains etc that add to its historically
unprecedented resilience and ability to gloss over/manage
contradictions inherent in the inner and defining core of the
"system". And yes, it is not enough to sit by and let the "dialectic
unfold". Absolutely true.
It was only a classroom exercise that has produced considerable
thought by my students and myself. No suggestion was made that the
Titanic in its "totality" was a concentrated microcosm or metaphor
for the "totality" of capitalism. Some aspects fit, some don't.
Jim Craven
*---*
* "Filling holes by digging bigger and *
* James Craven bigger holes...cannot be continued*
* Dept of Economics indefinately. Finding a way out of the*
* Clark College maze of the global capital system's *
* 1800 E. Mc Loughlin Blvd.
Boucher's background
I just got word from somebody who can place Boucher and these disputes into some kind of context. He said that he believes that Boucher comes out of a group associated with RETHINKING MARXISM, which includes others who are all pursuing a similar line. There was an article by Blair Sandler in RM a few years ago attacking O'Connor and John Bellamy Foster. Louis Proyect
boucher, epi and coal
Max's defense of Boucher was not surprising. EPI has raised serious questions about the Clinton approach to global warming, from the perspective of the coal miners. Here is a real and serious environmental problem. The corporations will make out with their emissions trading and the workers will be left in the cold. I recall driving through W. Virginia during the 1960s, seeing coal miners on the porch with no alternatives. Their homes had no value since no alternative jobs existed. To move would entail a serious capital loss. [Think of Andrew Oswald's interesting note in the Journal of Economic Perspectives.] What would the miners have as an alternative? Yet, as they stand, the coal industry can self-rightously argue about their great concern for the welfare of their workers. In effect, they become the hostages for the anti-greens. If David Harvey is trying to work through such complexities, then his work will be invaluable. If he is doing no more than Louis reported, then it is a shame. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 916-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Boucher's entire article
I'd be interested to hear your analysis of Harvey's position. Again, from what you cite here, it hardly seems like a sectarian sin. Isn't Harvey's complaint about exactly the kind of problem that led to the Environmental Justice movement? Anders Schneiderman In "What is to be Done" Lenin cites 3 examples of what tasks a "vanguard" should undertake. He says that the German Social Democracy of Kautsky was a model. It did the following: --defended the rights of artists to write or paint without censorship. --backed the right of a liberal politician to be seated in the legislature over the objections of the Junkers. --defended the rights of universities to select their own rectors. The point that he was making was that narrow, "economistic" demands should not exclusively make up the socialist program. He made these points in the context of a polemic with the Russian "economist" wing of the Social Democracy, but they remain true today. Harvey draws a dichotomy between proletarian concerns: working conditions, wages, rights to a job, etc. He sneers at the "middle class" concerns raised on Earth Day in 1970. While I regard Harvey as one of the most important Marxist theorists on the scene today--especially around the question of the role of "spatiality" in capital formation--, I regard him as a political novice. His latest book is a highly sophisticated attempt to set directions for Marxist participation in the green movement. Anybody who took his advice to heart would soon alienate green activists. It is filled with lectures about the need to break with green reformism. Deep ecologists are regarded with barely disguised hostility. The problem is that any social movement--feminism, gay liberation, black liberation--has its own dynamics. You can not project "correct" Marxist schemas on such movements from the sidelines. That is what the Spartacist League does. The great misfortune of the US Marxist left is that it treated this movement with disdain or hostility from its inception. This means that anti-Marxists, either of the liberal or anarchist variety, have had a field-day. Marxists should participate with an open mind and even attempt to learn from green activists. I certainly have. Harvey's book, unfortunately, is an agenda for trying to "correct" the movement. I have been reading selections over the past couple of weeks and plan to go through it systematically when I have the time. It has not gotten much notice in the left press and it is important to have a discussion over it. It represents an important contribution to the green-red dialectic and can not be ignored. Louis Proyect
