[PEN-L:9909] RE: Re: Re: Re: TINAF Special on Washington Nazi Demo --
The famous quote from Hitler, and I don't have it available for exact quote, but it said that only one thing could have stopped the nazis and that is if the enemies of fascism had early on understood their true nature and intentions and those of the nazi programs)and had resolutely struggled to smash them in the early stages of the movement. The problem is that nazis use free speech in the particular (and they celebrate and laugh about using "bourgeois freedoms"--in the sense of their use of the term "bourgeois"--in order to smash them and those who even support those 'bourgeois freedoms" for the nazis) in order to construct the kind of malignant society in which there will be no free speech for anyone in general. As a matter of pure logic, support of the general right of free speech means, denial for some, of free speech in the particular, so as to preserve free speech in general. Of course this concept is often used against leftists with the claim that like nazis, they seek denial of free speech in general and therefore must be curbed and smashed in the particular--but no leftist can never hope for any acceptance or honest portrayal by the bourgeoisie or indeed real free speech in general or in the particular under capitalism or fascism etc. Allende in Chile made the argument that the Patria y Libertad fascist groups should be left to expose and impeach themselves through self-impeaching rhetoric and machinations, whereas the MIRistas argued for arming the workers and armed struggles against the fascists; history records the inevitable outcome of the Allende argument in Chile and the arguments of those in Germany, Jewish and non-Jewish, who said the nazis are so crazy that their having free speech can only destroy them by exposing their ugly and barbaric natures. Jim Craven -Original Message- From: Charles Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 1999 2:54 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:9908] Re: Re: Re: TINAF Special on Washington Nazi Demo -- Wojtek Sokolowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/10/99 05:00PM At 04:35 PM 8/10/99 -0400, Charles Brown wrote: I believe your conclusion below is that we should do nothing about fascistic racist groups, no ? Is this the line that the best way to respond to such groups is to ignore them ? Charles, they are boogie men not because they are not vicious, but because they do not pose any serious threat to the political system inth eus (in the way the nazis did in 1930 germany). Charles: When would have been the time to effectively stop the Nazis in Germany ? Before they became a serious threat to the political system or after ? After they became a serious threat, IT WAS TOO LATE. There is no premature anti-fascism. Fascism is one ideology that we can justify nipping in the bud. ( Despite their rhetorics - I do not think that neo-nazi, religious right and other lunatic right groups are about to take power or even gain any major influence in the us. If that wre about to hapen - you would see the whole hell breaking loose, FBI, CIA, NSA - you name it - going after them. ((( Charles: The fascists are kept in a proto-state by the U.S. ruling class , so that they can be brought to full form if there is a crisis. The FBI et al. will not necessarily be against them in a time of economic crisis in the future. The democratic-republican form is the best shell for capitalism ( See _State and Revolution_) , but the finance capitalists developed fascism to put down working class revolution in times of extreme crisis for the capitalist system. Hitler and his group were a crackpot, fringe sect too, at one point. He got financing from the bourgeoisie when the communist and workers' movement was getting strong enough to threaten for power. ((( If you hear of the existence of such groups, it is because the powers that be want you to hear about them, and direct your hatred in that direction. They are the Orwellian 5-minutes of hate, a decoy designed to divert public anger from real miscreants (mainstream politicos, corporate bosses, etc.). Charles: No, I think it is to continue polluting the thinking of vulnerable working class people who are angry about their situation. The KKK claims and emphasizes that Black people and other "mud people" have a privileged life as compared with whites, and this "affirmative action" is the reason for the sad plight of down and out white people. The ruling class keeps these fascists afloat and legal as a way of keeping racist ideology alive. The bourgeois wants both extreme and mild forms of racism seeping into the mass consciousness. The bourgeois need racism to persist as a ruling class. I even say racism/colonialism is as much definitional of the capitalist mode of production as wage labor. This is a modification of Marx (!). See . anti-dogmatism. (( I do not mean to sound like a conspiracy theorist - but diversion and provocation are
[PEN-L:9905] Re: Re: Re: TINAF Special on Washington Nazi Demo --
At 04:35 PM 8/10/99 -0400, Charles Brown wrote: I believe your conclusion below is that we should do nothing about fascistic racist groups, no ? Is this the line that the best way to respond to such groups is to ignore them ? Charles, they are boogie men not because they are not vicious, but because they do not pose any serious threat to the political system inth eus (in the way the nazis did in 1930 germany). Despite their rhetorics - I do not think that neo-nazi, religious right and other lunatic right groups are about to take power or even gain any major influence in the us. If that wre about to hapen - you would see the whole hell breaking loose, FBI, CIA, NSA - you name it - going after them. If you hear of the existence of such groups, it is because the powers that be want you to hear about them, and direct your hatred in that direction. They are the Orwellian 5-minutes of hate, a decoy designed to divert public anger from real miscreants (mainstream politicos, corporate bosses, etc.). I do not mean to sound like a conspiracy theorist - but diversion and provocation are perhaps the oldest tricks on the book the powers that be use to defuse discontent. I'd rather see the Left collecting funds to buy political influence, rather than engaging intotally futile theatrics of counter-demonstration against nazi (or kindred) boogie men. Charles: I happen to have a paper on this. In fact and at law, the First Amendment in U.S. history has protected KKK and Nazis and has very rarely protected the Left. The first Supreme Court case (Schenck)on the First Amendment was not until WWI when, in the famous opinion in which Justice Holmes says the First Amendment does not protect crying "fire" falsely in crowded theatre, Holmes decided that the First Amendment did not protect the Socialist Charles Schenck from handing out leaflets opposing WWI as a capitalist war in which workers were doing all of the dying. Schenck, Eugene V. Debs and others went to prison unprotected by the First Amendment. Then came the Palmer Raids in the early twenties against the Communist Party, and a Communist Party member was jailed in _Whitney_ despite Justice Brandeis' opinon which was a paen to free speech. Great words. Bad results. Then in the late 40's the whole leadership of the Communist Party was not protected by the First Amendment ag! ainst Smith Act convictions. Even when the Communists were released from jail the rationale was not such as to strike down the Smith Act as unconstitutional. No fascistic racists have been convicted or unprotected by the First Amendment that I have found. My point is that the left has not been protected by the First Amendment, so the typical scenario that the Left will not be protected if the Right is not protected is poor reasoning. In the history above, the Fascists were protected throughout, but it did not result in the Left being protected. So, the current period of grace for the Left is not dependent upon the Fascists' protection. Even if that is 100% true, that does not mean that the nazis run the show in the us. If anything, they are useful tools of th epowers that be from time to time - like police dogs. They may be unleashed on the crowd from time to time and never punished for attacking humans, but that does not mean they run police departments. You do not attack police dogs, but people who unleashed them. wojtek
[PEN-L:9903] Re: Re: TINAF Special on Washington Nazi Demo --
I believe your conclusion below is that we should do nothing about fascistic racist groups, no ? Is this the line that the best way to respond to such groups is to ignore them ? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/10/99 01:54PM Charles wrote: But then if neo-Nazis in the U.S. are so harmless, who shot Rickie Byrdsong in Illinois ? The Boogie man ? Took less than four people to blow up the Oklahoma City Federal Building. But people like those killers can't be opposed by yelling and screaming at them, since they work under cover. ((( Charles: There is reason to believe that the undercover killers are often part of groups that are public before they kill. The counter-demonstrations is to try to discourage people joining the groups, bolster anti-racist sentiment. The Nazi demo in DC, on the other hand, shouldn't be opposed (by the government) since it brings the Nazis out in the open where they are exposed and can be ridiculed. ( Charles: It is not clear to me that the U.S. mass mentality is so clear today as to know to ridicule Nazis. We need a campaign to remind many of what the Nazis actually were. Your argument here is a piece of the famous opinion of Justice Brandeis ( and someone said Locke) that the best way to treat noxious doctrine is to release it into the air, the anti-festering metaphor. I prefer the anti-toxic gas metaphor: don't release it into the air; bury it. We shouldn't side with government repression of the Nazis (for being Nazis, as opposed to for blowing up buildings and/or killing people and the like) since the same laws that repress the Nazis will be applied to what's left of the left as soon as it starts growing again. The last thing we need to do is to strengthen the repressive apparatus of the state. ( Charles: I happen to have a paper on this. In fact and at law, the First Amendment in U.S. history has protected KKK and Nazis and has very rarely protected the Left. The first Supreme Court case (Schenck)on the First Amendment was not until WWI when, in the famous opinion in which Justice Holmes says the First Amendment does not protect crying "fire" falsely in crowded theatre, Holmes decided that the First Amendment did not protect the Socialist Charles Schenck from handing out leaflets opposing WWI as a capitalist war in which workers were doing all of the dying. Schenck, Eugene V. Debs and others went to prison unprotected by the First Amendment. Then came the Palmer Raids in the early twenties against the Communist Party, and a Communist Party member was jailed in _Whitney_ despite Justice Brandeis' opinon which was a paen to free speech. Great words. Bad results. Then in the late 40's the whole leadership of the Communist Party was not protected by the First Amendment ag! ainst Smith Act convictions. Even when the Communists were released from jail the rationale was not such as to strike down the Smith Act as unconstitutional. No fascistic racists have been convicted or unprotected by the First Amendment that I have found. My point is that the left has not been protected by the First Amendment, so the typical scenario that the Left will not be protected if the Right is not protected is poor reasoning. In the history above, the Fascists were protected throughout, but it did not result in the Left being protected. So, the current period of grace for the Left is not dependent upon the Fascists' protection. (( The only way to oppose Nazi demos is with counter-demos. Charles: This seems to contradict your first statement above. CB
[PEN-L:9901] Re: Marx site
Jim Devine wrote: Thanks to Louis for the passage from Marx. BTW, in my web search for the passage, I hit upon the fact that going to http://www.marx.org/ just brings up a blank page. What's going on? Ken Campbell used to maintain that on a server in a closet in the Toronto Star building. He seems not to be maintaining it anymore. You can also get it at http://csf.colorado.edu/psn/marx/. Doug
[PEN-L:9898] Marx site
Thanks to Louis for the passage from Marx. BTW, in my web search for the passage, I hit upon the fact that going to http://www.marx.org/ just brings up a blank page. What's going on? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html
[PEN-L:9897] Re: query
Ch. 7 of 18th Brumaire: The small-holding peasants form an enormous mass whose members live in similar conditions but without entering into manifold relations with each other. Their mode of production isolates them from one another instead of bringing them into mutual intercourse. The isolation is furthered by France's poor means of communication and the poverty of the peasants. Their field of production, the small holding, permits no division of labor in its cultivation, no application of science, and therefore no multifariousness of development, no diversity of talent, no wealth of social relationships. Each individual peasant family is almost self-sufficient, directly produces most of its consumer needs, and thus acquires its means of life more through an exchange with nature than in intercourse with society. A small holding, the peasant and his family; beside it another small holding, another peasant and another family. A few score of these constitute a village, and a few score villages constitute a department. Thus the great mass of the French nation is formed by the simple addition of homonymous magnitudes, much as potatoes in a sack form a sack of potatoes. Insofar as millions of families live under conditions of existence that separate their mode of life, their interests, and their culture from those of the other classes, and put them in hostile opposition to the latter, they form a class. Insofar as there is merely a local interconnection among these small-holding peasants, and the identity of their interests forms no community, no national bond, and no political organization among them, they do not constitute a class. They are therefore incapable of asserting their class interest in their own name, whether through a parliament or a convention. They cannot represent themselves, they must be represented. Their representative must at the same time appear as their master, as an authority over them, an unlimited governmental power which protects them from the other classes and sends them rain and sunshine from above. The political influence of the small-holding peasants, therefore, finds its final expression in the executive power which subordinates society to itself. Louis Proyect (http://www.panix.com/~lnp3/marxism.html)
[PEN-L:9895] Pro-War Socialists (Help!)
I spotted the following inquiry on h-labor (an e-list for labor historians). The project described below sounds very interesting. Can anyone help him? Yoshie * Dear H-labor members, I'm doing research on the "political identity" of socialists who supported the war effort in America during WWI. I find this minority within a minority a fascinating subject. Does anyone know of some valuable sources that I could use for this research? I have access here at Ball State to the APPEAL TO REASON/NEW APPEAL during that time period. Also, Indiana State University, which is near by, has on microfilm a copy of the Socialist Party of America papers. I'm interlibrary loaning information on the American Alliance for Labor and Democracy as well as Social Democratic League. Joseph S. Townsend Ball State University "Joseph S. Townsend" [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
[PEN-L:9892] The Iron Giant
It is 1957. Home alone, the 10 year old Hogarth Hughes is eating Twinkies and watching television, while his waitress mother is at work. He is enrapt by a scene in a scary late-night science fiction movie about brains crawling across a laboratory floor. Since reports have been circulating about the arrival of a UFO into the ocean waters near his small seacoast town of Rockwell, Maine, the self-reliant Hogarth is prepared for nearly anything. When all of a sudden the reception on the television begins to fade, he goes to the rooftop and investigates. Somebody or something has taken a huge bite out the antenna. After noticing immense tracks in the dirt leading away from his house, he descends in the woods with a BB gun in hand to confront what must be a space monster. So begins a powerful animated film titled "The Iron Giant," based on a novel by Ted Hughes, England's poet laureate, written in 1968. Hughes, who died in 1998, wrote "The Iron Man" to comfort his young son after the death of his mother, the poet Sylvia Plath, in 1963. It is about, among other things, the persistence of life in the midst of death. Surely enough he discovers an immense iron giant robot eating metal parts from an electrical power station in the dead of night, as languidly as a gorilla nibbling on vegetation. When the iron giant accidentally touches a generator, he is jolted by a huge electrical charge which threatens to kill it. Making a snap decision--one that sets the plot in motion for the remainder of this great animated film--Hogarth runs through falling metal and arcs of high-voltage electricity to shut down the power. After the iron giant regains consciousness, he follows Hogarth home. Although immensely powerful, the giant is like a small child needing protection in an unfamiliar setting. As it turns out, the iron giant is the source of the rumors flying about Rockwell since it is he who has plunged into the ocean a few days earlier and swum to shore. Wandering about the woods of rural Maine, he has been subsisting on metal wherever he can find it--in parked cars or power stations. Hogarth soon learns that Kent Mansley, a government agent and the villain of the movie, is on the tracks of the iron giant, since anything un-American in 1957 is considered a threat to national security, whether it comes from Russia or outer space. After discovering that the giant is harmless unless attacked, Hogarth becomes his best friend and protector. Hidden away in the barn next to his house, the boy is teaching the robot the ways of the planet earth mainly through comic books like Superman and Mad. As he turns through their pages, we learn that their omnipresent theme is the threat of nuclear war. In one story, Superman defends the planet earth against a radioactive monster. The iron giant, who is slowly learning to speak, tells Hogarth that he wants to be like Superman. At school, the threat of nuclear war is every bit as real as it is in the comic books and in science fiction movies. They watch a movie called "Duck and Cover" that shows children how easy it is to survive a nuclear attack. Just duck and cover. Hogarth finds an unlikely ally in the local beatnik sculptor Dean, who lives and works at a junkyard. He works there because he can use the scrap iron in his "far out" sculpture. After Hogarth has introduced him to the iron giant, Dean wastes no time putting him to work. He directs the giant to stack old cars one on top of another in a monumental sculpture. Those that aren't used in the artwork go directly into the giant's stomach. Dean, who is the polar opposite of Mansley, is a forerunner of the cultural and political changes that would emerge in the 1960s. He was one of the rebels "who distributed Supercommunist pamphlets in Union Square weeping and undressing while the sirens of Los Alamos wailed them down," as Allen Ginsberg put it in the landmark poem "Howl". This film has all the appeal of "ET" or "Terminator part two". The myth of a child taking an extraterrestrial or dangerous monster under his wing and teaching him the ways of his world is vastly alluring. What gives "The Iron Giant" additional appeal is that this relationship is set against the very real backdrop of global annihilation in the 1950s, when the threat of all-out nuclear war was very much on the mind of all children, including myself. Hogarth Hughes was exactly the kind of animated feature character I could have identified with, and one, I'm sure, that contemporary ten year olds, both male and female, can identify with. The movie offers an alternative to the sentimental pap of the Disney studio as well. Instead of presenting challenges drawn from the world of fairy tales with a "politically correct" overlay, director Brad Bird confronts the real evil that lived and lives in American society. The voice of Hogarth Hughes is done by 12 year old Elie Marienthal, while Harry Connick Jr. is Dean and Christopher MacDonald is the government agent Mansley.
[PEN-L:9891] Corporate Welfare and International Investment Rules
New at Foreign Policy In Focus Corporate Welfare and U.S. Foreign Policy by Janice Shields U.S. aid for international investors, exporters, and importers exceeds $32 billion annually and benefits such "needy" recipients as General Motors, Citibank, Archer Daniels Midland, and Boeing. The Market Access Program (MAP), for example, uses taxpayer money to reimburse=20 corporate foreign advertising costs. Proponents of MAP contend that these=20 subsidies generate $16 in export revenue for every $1 in taxpayer costs. Yet,=20 U.S. General Accounting Office studies could not document any increase in=20 exports due to MAP expenditures.=20 To read the complete report: www.foreignpolicy-infocus.org/papers/cw/index Are International Investment Rules and the Environment Stuck in the Mud?=20 Written by Lyuba Zarsky, Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainable Development In the MAI (Multilateral Agreement on Investment) process, which the U.S. initiated and led, environmental and social concerns were initially not even on the radar screen. Even after a storm of public criticism, environmental issues made only a minor appearance. Yet the evidence shows that regulation=97or the lack of it=97matters. Foreign investment, both direct and portfolio, could act to promote ecological sustainability, which is=97or should be=97a strategic U.S= .. foreign policy goal. www.foreignpolicy-infocus.org/briefs/vol4/v4n22env
[PEN-L:9889] Re: Re: TINAF Special on Washington Nazi Demo --
At 10:32 AM 8/10/99 -0400, Max Sawicky wrote: ANTI-FASCIST VICTORY IN WASHINGTON Nazis Lose Another Fuehrer In Wake of Cancelled Demo . . . What a waste of effort. A great fuss was made about this march by the media and the city (the latter spending a million or so for police mobilization). Four nazi demonstrators showed up. Their leader, a pathetic creature who changed his name to "David Wolfgang Hawke," has parents by the names of Hyman and Peggy Greenbaum. A bunch of boojie politicians and clergy inveighed against Nazism from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. In the 60's we had "peace crawls." Now we have boogie man marches. The real miscreants get a free ride. Ditto. A larger issue is the effectiveness of "culture wars" and boogie men in diverting attention from real issues - i.e. corporate bosses lining up for public handouts (aka "privatization). Somebody did a real good diversion job here. The phony specter of four nazis accomplished what no other issue - from US being at constant de facto war since Bush administration, to public handout to corporate bosses (aka privatization) - could. If fighting boogie men is what defines the Left - no wonder it is not taken seriously anymore, and the so-called "centre" is defined form the Right. wojtek
[PEN-L:9888] Re: TINAF Special on Washington Nazi Demo --
Yes, their time would have been better spent denouncing that true proto-Hitler in Yugoslavia. But then if neo-Nazis in the U.S. are so harmless, who shot Rickie Byrdsong in Illinois ? The Boogie man ? Took less than four people to blow up the Oklahoma City Federal Building. Charles Brown Max Sawicky [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/10/99 10:32AM ANTI-FASCIST VICTORY IN WASHINGTON Nazis Lose Another Fuehrer In Wake of Cancelled Demo .. . . What a waste of effort. A great fuss was made about this march by the media and the city (the latter spending a million or so for police mobilization). Four nazi demonstrators showed up. Their leader, a pathetic creature who changed his name to "David Wolfgang Hawke," has parents by the names of Hyman and Peggy Greenbaum. A bunch of boojie politicians and clergy inveighed against Nazism from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. In the 60's we had "peace crawls." Now we have boogie man marches. The real miscreants get a free ride. mbs
[PEN-L:9886] U.S. Bombs Iraq For Second Day
Tuesday August 10 7:16 AM ET U.S. Air Force Bombs Iraq Sites For Second Day BERLIN (Reuters) - U.S. planes bombed two Iraqi communication centers near the northern city of Mosul Tuesday after being fired upon by Iraqi anti-aircraft artillery, the U.S. Air Force's European Command said. The attacks on sites to the north and northeast of Mosul, the second U.S. strike in the region in as many days, took place between 10:30 a.m. and 11:30 a.m. Iraqi time, the German-based command said in a statement. It said all aircraft charged with monitoring the no-fly zone over northern Iraq returned safely. It added that the extent of damage caused by the F-15 and F-16 jets, which dropped laser-guided bombs on the targets, was still being assessed. The bombings are the latest in a series of incidents involving American and British jets and Iraqi air defenses after Baghdad said in December it would not recognize Western-enforced no-fly zones set up after the 1991 Gulf War. The monitoring of the northern no-fly zone, codenamed Operation Northern Watch, is a joint U.S., British and Turkish operation.
[PEN-L:9911] Good News!!!
I just hit on a scheme to turn the U.S. from being dominated primarily by caucasians to being dominated by Indigenous Peoples. I sent a book to my friend Mike Levine (I urge all to visit his website and download some of his very penetrating stuff)who is doing research on the Inuit and the Thule Society for a screenplay. In that book on the Inuit, from such an authorative source as the Smithsonian Series on Indigenous Natins and Tribes he recounts the following: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 1999 1:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: part 2 German tourists and Indian Country Jim: Pretty weird stuffIn the book you gave me I read that the Inuits believe that White men came from the interbreeding of Inuit women and sled dogsI like that one Well, if one accepts this theory of the origins of Whites, all whites would be perhaps 50% Inuit (at least the official 25% blood-quantum necessary) (50% sled-dog) and could immediately apply for "Official Certification" as "True-U.S.-Government-Certified-Blue-Ribbon" Indigenous Peoples and we could change the demographics of the U.S. overnight. What would happen to "Affirmative-Action" then? Everybody White or part-white, write for your BIA Cards immediately. ;-) Jim C
[PEN-L:9910] Re: Re: Re: TINAF Special on Washington NaziDemo--
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/10/99 05:21PM who is going to do the burying? the US government? is there any reason for the Left to trust that institution? or is it the left that will do the burying? with what shovel? ((( Charles: By this approach, we would not have had the Civil War or the Civil Rights Movement, in which the U.S. government buried slavery and then Jim Crow. Or we would not have had the U.S. governement fighting the acutal Nazis in Germany. For that matter, you are trusting the U.S. government to protect the Left's First Amendment rights. Why do you trust the U.S. government to do that , when it has such a treacherous history of protecting the KKK and busting the Communists ? You seem to trust the U.S. Supreme Court to be logically consistent: if Nazis have free speech, Communists must have it too. But that hasn't been the history of the U.S. Supreme Court. ( We shouldn't side with government repression of the Nazis (for being Nazis, as opposed to for blowing up buildings and/or killing people and the like) since the same laws that repress the Nazis will be applied to what's left of the left as soon as it starts growing again. The last thing we need to do is to strengthen the repressive apparatus of the state. I happen to have a paper on this. In fact and at law, the First Amendment in U.S. history has protected KKK and Nazis and has very rarely protected the Left. The first Supreme Court case (Schenck) on the First Amendment was not until WWI when, in the famous opinion in which Justice Holmes says the First Amendment does not protect crying "fire" falsely in crowded theatre, Holmes decided that the First Amendment did not protect the Socialist Charles Schenck from handing out leaflets opposing WWI as a capitalist war in which workers were doing all of the dying. Schenck, Eugene V. Debs and others went to prison unprotected by the First Amendment. Then came the Palmer Raids in the early twenties against the Communist Party, and a Communist Party member was jailed in _Whitney_ despite Justice Brandeis' opinon which was a paen to free speech. Great words. Bad results. Then in the late 40's the whole leadership of the Communist Party was not protected by the First Amendment against Smith Act convictions. Even when the Communists were released from jail the rationale was not such as to strike down the Smith Act as unconstitutional. JIm D. Once again, this tells us not to trust "our" government. I didn't say that the government would hold back from repressing the left until they were given more repressive power. Rather, I said that allowing them to ban Nazi speech would encourage them to do the same to us (even more than they already have done). But we should protest any cases where the government lets the Nazis or Klan off the hook, especially when that same hook is used to impale Leftists. It's useful to point to contradictions between different government actions or between government rhetoric and actions. ((( Charles: I don't think demanding banning Nazi speech will encourage them to do the same to us such as to tip some balance that by which they were protecting the left some now. The two are independent, and factually and historically they have been independent. ((( No fascistic racists have been convicted or unprotected by the First Amendment that I have found. weren't Nazi sympathisers jailed during WW2, simply for being Nazis? ( Charles: Maybe. If they were spying. I don't know of any purely ideological jailings. (( Aren't you advocating that they should be convicted by law or unprotected by the First? ((( Charles: Yes, I am saying make an exception to First Amendment protection. The ant-fascistic racist law would be a non-constitutional criminal statute. France, Germany and Canada have these laws. Speech denying the Holocaust is a crime in France. So this type of law is not incompatible with a Western "democratic" system. The socialist countries had them. (9 Why do you trust the government to hold back from repressing the Left (more than it's done already) if given the ability to do it to the loony Right? after all, some Trotskyists were jailed during WW2 (under the Smith Act, I believe) as part of the war effort. (( Charles: I don't trust the government to hold back from repressing the Left, given the history I describe above. I just don't think that the Government's holding back from repressing the fascists is what is holding it back from repressing the Left. They aren't linked. Why do you trust the government to hold back from repressing the Left because it is "holding back" from repressing the Right ? Or why do you trust the government to hold back from repressing the Left PERIOD ? Seems to me you are trusting the government too, that somehow it will honor the First Amendment with respect to the Left. Isn't that trusting the
[PEN-L:9918] Power + Success of the Anti-Abortion Right (was TINAF Special onWashington Nazi Demo)
Wojtek wrote: Charles, they are boogie men not because they are not vicious, but because they do not pose any serious threat to the political system inth eus (in the way the nazis did in 1930 germany). Despite their rhetorics - I do not think that neo-nazi, religious right and other lunatic right groups are about to take power or even gain any major influence in the us. If that wre about to hapen - you would see the whole hell breaking loose, FBI, CIA, NSA - you name it - going after them. A right-wing movement can do great damage to us even without taking full control of state power. The anti-abortion movement is a good example. While the politically respectable wing of this movement couldn't overturn Roe v. Wade, they have been successful at chipping away the right to abortion, as shown in imposition of parental notification, mandatory counseling, etc. More importantly, *the lunatic fringe of this movement has been even more successful*, in that they have *terrorized doctors and other medical workers* enough to make abortion providers scarcer and costlier than otherwise. (The average age of abortionists is sixty something, and young doctors are scared away from learning + providing this service.) In this sense, it is not true to say that lunatic right groups have no "major influence in the US" as Wojtek asserts. * 8/7/99 -- 12:33 AM Activist, tired of struggle, sells her abortion clinics MELBOURNE - One of the best- known figures in the battle over abortion rights in Florida has sold her clinics. Patricia Baird Windle says 10 years of struggling with antiabortion activists have worn her out. She sold her clinics here and in West Palm Beach. ``It has taken 10 years for the antis to force me out of the field as a provider,'' said Windle, 64. ``But I am not out of the work.'' Windle, who said she has suffered from failing health, plans to write and lecture on abortion rights. There are also lawsuits she is involved in, both as plaintiff and defendant. The sidewalk outside her Melbourne clinic was used as a training ground by the militant antiabortion group Operation Rescue National in the early and mid- 1990s. Demonstrators came from all over the country and from Canada. The protests led to a 1994 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court saying women seeking abortions or any medical service have a right not to be harassed by protesters. The court upheld the use of ``buffer zones'' to keep demonstrators away from patients. Windle's opponents were pleased to hear she had sold her clinics. ``This is a victory for God. It is not anything we did, it is what God did,'' said Meredith Raney of Christians For Life. Its members regularly offer sidewalk counseling outside the Melbourne clinic. ``I pray that it is a sign of things to come - more clinics closing.'' ``She is gone because Christians came there with the Gospel ... that is the key,'' said the Rev. Flip Benham, director of Texas- based Operation Rescue National. * For more info and stats, see the website of Medical Students for Choice http://www.ms4c.org/. Yoshie
[PEN-L:9908] Re: Re: Re: TINAF Special on Washington Nazi Demo--
Wojtek Sokolowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/10/99 05:00PM At 04:35 PM 8/10/99 -0400, Charles Brown wrote: I believe your conclusion below is that we should do nothing about fascistic racist groups, no ? Is this the line that the best way to respond to such groups is to ignore them ? Charles, they are boogie men not because they are not vicious, but because they do not pose any serious threat to the political system inth eus (in the way the nazis did in 1930 germany). Charles: When would have been the time to effectively stop the Nazis in Germany ? Before they became a serious threat to the political system or after ? After they became a serious threat, IT WAS TOO LATE. There is no premature anti-fascism. Fascism is one ideology that we can justify nipping in the bud. ( Despite their rhetorics - I do not think that neo-nazi, religious right and other lunatic right groups are about to take power or even gain any major influence in the us. If that wre about to hapen - you would see the whole hell breaking loose, FBI, CIA, NSA - you name it - going after them. ((( Charles: The fascists are kept in a proto-state by the U.S. ruling class , so that they can be brought to full form if there is a crisis. The FBI et al. will not necessarily be against them in a time of economic crisis in the future. The democratic-republican form is the best shell for capitalism ( See _State and Revolution_) , but the finance capitalists developed fascism to put down working class revolution in times of extreme crisis for the capitalist system. Hitler and his group were a crackpot, fringe sect too, at one point. He got financing from the bourgeoisie when the communist and workers' movement was getting strong enough to threaten for power. ((( If you hear of the existence of such groups, it is because the powers that be want you to hear about them, and direct your hatred in that direction. They are the Orwellian 5-minutes of hate, a decoy designed to divert public anger from real miscreants (mainstream politicos, corporate bosses, etc.). Charles: No, I think it is to continue polluting the thinking of vulnerable working class people who are angry about their situation. The KKK claims and emphasizes that Black people and other "mud people" have a privileged life as compared with whites, and this "affirmative action" is the reason for the sad plight of down and out white people. The ruling class keeps these fascists afloat and legal as a way of keeping racist ideology alive. The bourgeois wants both extreme and mild forms of racism seeping into the mass consciousness. The bourgeois need racism to persist as a ruling class. I even say racism/colonialism is as much definitional of the capitalist mode of production as wage labor. This is a modification of Marx (!). See . anti-dogmatism. (( I do not mean to sound like a conspiracy theorist - but diversion and provocation are perhaps the oldest tricks on the book the powers that be use to defuse discontent. I'd rather see the Left collecting funds to buy political influence, rather than engaging intotally futile theatrics of counter-demonstration against nazi (or kindred) boogie men. (( Charles: Capitalism is a system, not a conspiracy or a policy, but within the system there are many conspiracies ( assassinations, stolen elections , etc.). The opposition to fascistic racists is not the only or even the main task of the Left, but it is one of them. The importance of the opposition is similar to opposing _The Bell Curve_ and the like in academe. It is messy , but a necessary task. Charles: I happen to have a paper on this. In fact and at law, the First Amendment in U.S. history has protected KKK and Nazis and has very rarely protected the Left. The first Supreme Court case (Schenck)on the First Amendment was not until WWI when, in the famous opinion in which Justice Holmes says the First Amendment does not protect crying "fire" falsely in crowded theatre, Holmes decided that the First Amendment did not protect the Socialist Charles Schenck from handing out leaflets opposing WWI as a capitalist war in which workers were doing all of the dying. Schenck, Eugene V. Debs and others went to prison unprotected by the First Amendment. Then came the Palmer Raids in the early twenties against the Communist Party, and a Communist Party member was jailed in _Whitney_ despite Justice Brandeis' opinon which was a paen to free speech. Great words. Bad results. Then in the late 40's the whole leadership of the Communist Party was not protected by the First Amendment ag! ainst Smith Act convictions. Even when the Communists were released from jail the rationale was not such as to strike down the Smith Act as unconstitutional. No fascistic racists have been convicted or unprotected by the First Amendment that I have found. My point is that the left has not been protected by the First
[PEN-L:9906] Re: Re: Re: TINAF Special on Washington Nazi Demo--
Charles writes: I believe your conclusion below is that we should do nothing about fascistic racist groups, no? Is this the line that the best way to respond to such groups is to ignore them ? as Bill Lear notes, that's not what I said at all. Originally, Charles wrote: But then if neo-Nazis in the U.S. are so harmless, who shot Rickie Byrdsong in Illinois ? The Boogie man ? Took less than four people to blow up the Oklahoma City Federal Building. I wrote: But people like those killers can't be opposed by yelling and screaming at them, since they work under cover. Charles now ripostes:There is reason to believe that the undercover killers are often part of groups that are public before they kill. The counter-demonstrations is to try to discourage people joining the groups, bolster anti-racist sentiment. sure, I'm in favor of counter-demonstrations, as I said. But I think that the main reason why people like Timothy McVeigh (of the Oklahoma City bombing) do what they do is largely rural white-male resentiment toward women, "minorities," Jews, city-folk, yuppies, the corporate-government complex, etc. It's too bad, but counter-demos against Nazi-type groups is not going to drive such folks away from resentiment and violence. If we had a mass socialist movement, however, maybe some of these folks could be educated about who their real enemies are. With luck, anti-Nazi demos might contribute to the development of a new movement of this sort... The Nazi demo in DC, on the other hand, shouldn't be opposed (by the government) since it brings the Nazis out in the open where they are exposed and can be ridiculed. It is not clear to me that the U.S. mass mentality is so clear today as to know to ridicule Nazis. We need a campaign to remind many of what the Nazis actually were. that sounds good to me. I didn't rule that out. What I'm opposing is increased state repression. And if we're going to educate people against Naziism, I think a mass democratic socialist movement (or even the fragmented actually-existing Left) would do a better job than the public schools. Your argument here is a piece of the famous opinion of Justice Brandeis ( and someone said Locke) that the best way to treat noxious doctrine is to release it into the air, the anti-festering metaphor. I prefer the anti-toxic gas metaphor: don't release it into the air; bury it. who is going to do the burying? the US government? is there any reason for the Left to trust that institution? or is it the left that will do the burying? with what shovel? We shouldn't side with government repression of the Nazis (for being Nazis, as opposed to for blowing up buildings and/or killing people and the like) since the same laws that repress the Nazis will be applied to what's left of the left as soon as it starts growing again. The last thing we need to do is to strengthen the repressive apparatus of the state. I happen to have a paper on this. In fact and at law, the First Amendment in U.S. history has protected KKK and Nazis and has very rarely protected the Left. The first Supreme Court case (Schenck) on the First Amendment was not until WWI when, in the famous opinion in which Justice Holmes says the First Amendment does not protect crying "fire" falsely in crowded theatre, Holmes decided that the First Amendment did not protect the Socialist Charles Schenck from handing out leaflets opposing WWI as a capitalist war in which workers were doing all of the dying. Schenck, Eugene V. Debs and others went to prison unprotected by the First Amendment. Then came the Palmer Raids in the early twenties against the Communist Party, and a Communist Party member was jailed in _Whitney_ despite Justice Brandeis' opinon which was a paen to free speech. Great words. Bad results. Then in the late 40's the whole leadership of the Communist Party was not protected by the First Amendment against Smith Act convictions. Even when the Communists were released from jail the rationale was not such as to strike down the Smith Act as unconstitutional. Once again, this tells us not to trust "our" government. I didn't say that the government would hold back from repressing the left until they were given more repressive power. Rather, I said that allowing them to ban Nazi speech would encourage them to do the same to us (even more than they already have done). But we should protest any cases where the government lets the Nazis or Klan off the hook, especially when that same hook is used to impale Leftists. It's useful to point to contradictions between different government actions or between government rhetoric and actions. No fascistic racists have been convicted or unprotected by the First Amendment that I have found. weren't Nazi sympathisers jailed during WW2, simply for being Nazis? Aren't you advocating that they should be convicted by law or unprotected by the First? Why do you trust the government to hold back from repressing the Left (more than it's done
[PEN-L:9904] Re: Re: TINAF Special on Washington Nazi Demo --
On Tuesday, August 10, 1999 at 16:35:18 (-0400) Charles Brown writes: I believe your conclusion below is that we should do nothing about fascistic racist groups, no? Is this the line that the best way to respond to such groups is to ignore them ? Charles, Jim clearly believes we should do something, not ignore them. Reread the post, it's crystal clear. Bill
[PEN-L:9902] Feedback from Socialist Register mailing-list on Coca-Cola andcoaine
As an aside to LP's excellent articles on Columbia, the 3rd of which mentioned the inclusion of cocaine in Coca-Cola earlier this century. A few thoughts about Coca-Cola and the invisible hand. It is well known that after cocaine was removed from the formula for Coca-Cola the company continued to purchase raw Coca leaf in huge quantities and is still the single largest legal buyer in the world. The reason given is that they still use other extracts of the plant for "flavouring" the drink. Two issues come of out of this: 1. What are these substances? Coca-Cola say they are a trade secret. It is said that just three people know the precise formula/process. Only the US parent company makes up the concentrate of the drink which is then distributed under high security to all bottling/canning franchises world-wide. (Just add water!) In any associated set of plant alkaloids from which active drug compounds are derived there are other substances of similar chemistry. Often these are of different potency but have a similar or related action. My feeling is that they would not use the stuff unless it was addictive enough to be worthwhile. When you think about it, to the uneducated palette Coca-Cola does not taste very nice, (fizzy, soapy water with sugar?). It is an acquired taste. Mind you, once you have acquired the taste. Ever met "Coke" addicts? - I have. My intuition (nasty suspicious leftwing socialist mind) tells me that in addition to kola (which is high in caffeine) and "flavours" there are some cocaine related substances that although not as potent are very commercially useful in creating and sustaining the Coke drinking habit. Come to think of it ... what are "flavourings"? Are they nuroactive compounds that stimulate the taste and smell receptors of the CNS? Do certain flavours become things of habit? Do we get conditioned to certain "flavours"? Tobacco companies put "flavourings" like chocolate in cigarettes to create brand loyalty. Chocolate is another nuroactive substance which mimics some of the nurochemistry of the human sexual orgasm. 2. What do Coca-Cola do with the (now unwanted) cocaine, which has to be extracted from the leaf and separated from the "flavourings"? Since modern drugs have been invented to replace it in clinical use the legitimate world market for pure pharmaceutical grade cocaine is very small (a few kilos per year). It is used in some research activities for calibrating other synthetic compounds and surgically for a few people who have allergies to the synthetics. So we have the dubious prospect that we could choose to believe what Coca-Cola say they do about this. Coca-Cola say that they "destroy it". Is that plausible? Has capitalism ever been able to resist such stupendous profits? Would the surplus (destroyed) Cocaine be worth a significant percentage of Coca-Cola sales world-wide, or as much, or much more? I also wonder about the role of Coca-Cola in the supply and demand regime for the leaf during this century. They may be more pivotal than we can appreciate but it goes deeper than one company. After all, who would have thought that the CIA was so closely connected to all the global drug trades. Churning a countries politics though manipulating the drug trade is one thing. Interdicting drugs is another thing, making a mess of a control program is another, criminal corruption or even high political corruption is another. Right wing elements directing drugs into radical politicised communities is another but control of the thing... now there is a thought. From an unprincipled capitalist geopolitical point of view, it is much better to control it or at least be the biggest player whilst being perceived to be struggling with it. We are not just talking megabucks we are talking gigabucks. Surely this is the equivalent of Dark Matter in astronomy. This is the source of dark money. This is the invisible hand of the "free market". A few books on related issues. Whiteout: The CIA, Drugs and the Press; Alexander Cockburn, et al Dark Alliance : The CIA, the Contras, and the Crack Cocaine Explosion; Gary Webb Cocaine Politics : Drugs, Armies, and the CIA in Central America Peter Dale Scott, Jonathan Marshall The Politics of Heroin : CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade; Alfred W. McCoy Tim Murphy Louis Proyect (http://www.panix.com/~lnp3/marxism.html)
[PEN-L:9900] Political Economy Principles Supplement
Hey folks, Charles Sackrey, Janet Knoedler and I have recently completed a manuscript entitled "Essays in Political Economy." The manuscript is intended to be used as a supplement to a principles of economics course. The supplement includes chapters on Marx, Veblen, Keynes, and Sweden (the chapter is framed so that students see the practical application of the ideas of Marx, Veblen and Keynes in Sweden's economic system), and a chapter that explains to students the importance of studying political economy. Here is the table of contents: Chapter 1: The Marxist System Chapter 2: Thorstein Veblen on the Predatory Nature of Capitalism Chapter 3: John Maynard Keynes Chapter 4: The Middle Way: Swedish Democratic Socialism Chapter 5: A Political Economy Critique of Mainstream Economics If you would like a copy, please send me your snail mail address. We have used the chapters on Marx, Veblen and Sweden successfully in the classroom and we believe the other chapters should also work. The manuscript came about because of our general dissatisfaction with the textbooks out there. It is our hope that, with the help of others (many thanks to Jim Craven for sharing his classroom exercises), we can develop a significant body of teaching materials that can be used to offset the drivel that passes for economics texts in most courses today . Cheers, Geoff Schneider Geoffrey Schneider Assistant Professor of Economics Bucknell University Lewisburg, PA 17837 Phone: (570) 577-3446 Fax: (570) 577-3451 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web page: http://www.facstaff.bucknell.edu/gschnedr/
[PEN-L:9899] Dee-fense
It's finally happened. Republican proposed defense spending
is below both Clinton's and the Congressional Democrats.
Put that together with the last eight years of military
activities and the Dems are now the party of a strong
defense (sic), while the GOP edges back to it's pre-1940's
alignment. To some extent, the outyear numbers are more
a matter of political posturing, but postures can have
their own significance.
[Nathan Newman, call your office.]
As I've said in the past, all the proposals are below
the schedule of spending that would maintain its constant
dollar value ("current services").
The totals are below, and the annual numbers are attached
in a lotus spreadsheet, for those with a taste for such things.
mbs
P.S. Check out McNeil-Lehrer tonite. You might see something
out of the ordinary.
Defense Spending Proposals (Outlays)
Billions, current dollars
Fiscal Years 00-04 00-09
Current Services (OMB, 8/99) 1,542 3,310
Clinton Proposal (8/99)1,477 3,268
GOP Budget Resolution (4/99) 1,471 3,052
Congressional Democrats (4/99) 1,469 3,110
defense.wk1
[PEN-L:9896] query
can someone tell me where Marx's analysis of the (lack of) political potential of the French peasants (amplifying the Manifesto's comment on the idiocy of rural life) is? thanks ahead of time. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html
[PEN-L:9894] Re: Re: TINAF Special on Washington Nazi Demo --
Charles wrote: But then if neo-Nazis in the U.S. are so harmless, who shot Rickie Byrdsong in Illinois ? The Boogie man ? Took less than four people to blow up the Oklahoma City Federal Building. But people like those killers can't be opposed by yelling and screaming at them, since they work under cover. The Nazi demo in DC, on the other hand, shouldn't be opposed (by the government) since it brings the Nazis out in the open where they are exposed and can be ridiculed. We shouldn't side with government repression of the Nazis (for being Nazis, as opposed to for blowing up buildings and/or killing people and the like) since the same laws that repress the Nazis will be applied to what's left of the left as soon as it starts growing again. The last thing we need to do is to strengthen the repressive apparatus of the state. The only way to oppose Nazi demos is with counter-demos. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html
[PEN-L:9893] BLS Daily Report
BLS DAILY REPORT, MONDAY, AUGUST 9, 1999
__Private businesses expanded their payrolls by a hefty 310,000 in July,
producing the picture of an economy that has yet to cool its expansion,
according to data released by BLS. As payrolls grew, employers also
reported a 3.8 percent rise in average hourly earnings over the year ended
in July, raising fears about inflation. ... Manufacturing employment gained
31,000 in July. ... In her testimony before the JEC, Commissioner Abraham
said that "in several durable goods industries [including autos], the
employment declines that typically occur in July were smaller than usual
this year." Consequently, the seasonally adjusted figures showed increases
between June and July. ... Labor Secretary Alexis Herman said the overall
strength shown in the July employment report need not set off inflation
alarms "as long as we continue to see productivity increases that are larger
than real wage gains." Recent figures on pay and productivity indicate
"there is still balance in the economy," she said. ... (Pam Ginsbach in
Daily Labor Report, page D-1; statement of Commissioner Abraham
Congressional Joint Economic Committee, page E-1).
__The U.S. economy added 310,000 new jobs in July -- 100,000 more than
analysts had expected -- with workers benefiting from strong increases in
wages. The economic data continued a string of reports pointing to
increasing pressure on wages amid the tightest job market in decades,
further fanning fears in financial markets that inflation is picking up.
The July unemployment rate, however, remained unchanged from June at 4.3
percent, suggesting companies are finding enough workers to fill all the new
jobs being created. ... (Tim Smart in Washington Post, Aug. 7, page E1).
__Employers hired new workers at a surprisingly robust pace last month and
had to pay substantially more to find them. While good news in most
respects, the report underscored the mounting pressures in the labor market
and significantly increased the likelihood that the Federal Reserve will
raise interest rates at its next meeting as a hedge against an upward spiral
in wages and prices. ... Of special note was a jump of 31,000 in
manufacturing employment, the first increase in that sector since General
Motors workers returned from a strike last August, and the first not related
to the strike since March 1998. ... The 310,000 new jobs created in July
"followed a 273,000 gain in June and was well above the average monthly
increase of 208,000 for the first half of 1999," said Katharine G. Abraham,
the commissioner of labor statistics. ... (Richard W. Stevenson in New York
Times, Aug. 7, page A1).
__The July employment report did little to ease concerns that the Federal
Reserve will soon raise interest rates to further reduce inflationary
pressures. While July unemployment remained steady at 4.3 percent, hourly
wages rose faster than at any time since January, and the economy added a
higher-than-expected 310,000 nonfarm jobs. ... With the economy still
creating new jobs and hitting on all cylinders, the administration sought
to alleviate fears of inflation, insisting that productivity gains -- not
tight labor markets -- are fueling wage increases. "I think it's premature
to talk about any inflationary pressure on the economy," Labor Secretary
Alexis Herman said. ... (Glenn Burkins in Wall Street Journal, page A2).
The Producer Price Index for July, to be released by BLS on Friday, is
predicted to be up by 0.3 percent, in contrast to the previous fall in the
index of 0.1 percent. The rise in the Producer Price Index minus food and
energy is predicted to be 0.1 percent, in contrast to the 0.2-percent
decline in the previous month ("Tracking the Economy," Wall Street Journal,
page A6).
application/ms-tnef
[PEN-L:9890] Y2K HOAX
Y2K HOAX About some misinformation An e-mail message being circulated re: Windows software and Y2K about changing the short format date in Windows is a hoax. Read on to see what one of the contributing writers/editors at Windows magazine (Fred Langa) has to say about it and other Y2K issues. Windows' "Short Date Format" Scare I've gotten maybe 50 emails in the last week about a "new" Y2K issue---maybe you got one too. The heart of the letter is something like this: Every copy of Windows in the world has default settings that will make it FAIL on Jan 1, 2000 I'm not kidding Check for yourself PASS THIS LETTER ON! TEST: Click on "START" Click on "SETTING" Click on "CONTROL PANEL" Double click on "REGIONAL SETTINGS" icon Click on the "DATE" tab at the top of the page. Where it says, "Short Date Sample," look and see if it shows a "two digit" year (yy). That is the default setting for Windows 95, Windows 98 and NT This date RIGHT HERE is the date that feeds application software and WILL NOT rollover in the year 2000. It will roll over to 00. Click on the "SHORT DATE STYLE" pull down menu and select the option That shows, mm/dd/. (Be sure your selection has four Y's showing and not two.) Click on "APPLY" and then click on "OK" at the bottom. Alas, this note is mostly wrong--- in fact, Microsoft calls it an outright hoax. The worst part of the email is that it fails to distinguish between the way dates are calculated and the way they're displayed. The "date format picker" above affects only how Windows displays dates and interprets the way you type in dates. It tells you nothing about the underlying software calculations or about your PC's date-keeping hardware. If your PC hardware is Y2K compliant and if you're running a newer version of Windows and/or have applied the Y2K patches available (for free) from the Microsoft site, Windows will calculate Y2K dates correctly regardless whether or not the date is displayed in two- or four-digit format. On the other hand, if you don't have a Y2K-compliant PC, or if you haven't applied the Y2K patches, then changing the date-display format is just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic: Changing the format does nothing except to give you a false sense of security. In fact, using four-digit dates won't do you any good at all if the rest of your version of Windows, or the rest of your software, or your PC itself has any of about five completely separate Y2K issues. This "set a four-digits date format and you'll be fine" approach is way too simplistic. It's totally misleading. It's wrong. Fortunately, the real Y2K tests, and the real fixes, are ridiculously easy: To fully address this issue (which has alarmed many of you; and caused others to have false sense of Y2K security) I've made this the topic of my Dialog Box column on the WinMag site this week. There, in more detail than I could fit in this newsletter, I'll give you the full scoop on the "Date Format" scare, and why it can be perfectly fine to continue using two-digit dates. I'll show you where to get free fixes and patches for any Y2K problems your copy of Windows may have, and I'll show you a simple, free, five-minute do-it-yourself test anyone can do to ensure that your PC is fully Y2K-safe at every level. Y2K scares---and bogus emails--- abound. But don't be taken in: Come get the facts, starting midday (EDT; GMT-4) Monday Aug 9, 1999 via the front page at http://www.winmag.com .
