taxation without representation...
[NYTIMES] August 9, 2004 Immigrants Raise Call for Right to Be Voters By RACHEL L. SWARNS WASHINGTON, Aug. 8 - For months, the would-be revolutionaries plotted strategy and lobbied local politicians here with the age-old plea, No taxation without representation! Last month, some of the unlikely insurgents - Ethiopian-born restaurateurs, travel agents and real estate developers in sober business suits - declared that victory finally seemed within reach. Five City Council members announced their support for a bill that would allow thousands of immigrants to vote in local elections here, placing the nation's capital among a handful of cities across the country in the forefront of efforts to offer voting rights to noncitizens. It will happen,'' said Tamrat Medhin, a civic activist from Ethiopia who lives here. Don't you believe that if people are working in the community and paying taxes, don't you agree that they deserve the opportunity to vote?'' Calling for democracy for all, immigrants are increasingly pressing for the right to vote in municipal elections. In Washington, the proposed bill, introduced in July, would allow permanent residents to vote for the mayor and members of the school board and City Council. In San Francisco, voters will decide in November whether to allow noncitizens - including illegal immigrants - to vote in school board elections. Efforts to expand the franchise to noncitizens are also bubbling up in New York, Connecticut and elsewhere. Several cities, including Chicago, and towns like Takoma Park, Md., already allow noncitizens to vote in municipal or school elections. But in most cities, voting remains a right reserved for citizens, and the prospects for the initiatives in Washington and San Francisco remain uncertain. The proposals have inspired fierce opposition from critics who say the laws would undermine the value of American citizenship and raise security concerns in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Washington's mayor, Anthony Williams, has expressed his support for extending voting rights to permanent residents, but has yet to garner a majority of supporters on the 13-member City Council. In San Francisco, critics have questioned whether the law would violate the state's Constitution. In this city, where Ethiopian restaurants and El Salvadoran travel agents dot many urban streets, advocates argue that permanent residents are paying taxes and fighting and dying for the United States as soldiers in Iraq while lacking a voice in local government. They describe the ban on immigrant voting as akin to the kind of taxation without representation that was a major cause of the American Revolution. They also note that the United States has a long history of allowing noncitizens to vote. Twenty-two states and federal territories at various times allowed noncitizens to vote - even as blacks and women were barred from the ballot box - in the 1800's and 1900's. Concerns about the radicalism of immigrants arriving from southern and Eastern Europe in the late 19th and early 20th centuries led states to restrict such voting rights. By 1928, voting at every level had been restricted to United States citizens. Today, some argue, those rights should be restored to noncitizens. They're paying taxes, they're working, they're contributing to our prosperity,'' said Jim Graham, the councilman who introduced the bill here. And yet they're not able to exercise the franchise. This is part of our history. A lot of people don't know what the history of this nation is in terms of immigrant voting; they don't understand even that localities can determine this issue. It's a very healthy discussion.'' Critics counter that the proposed laws would make citizenship irrelevant and pledges of allegiance to the United States meaningless. It is a touchy political issue, particularly in an election year when many politicians across party lines are lobbying for support from Hispanic voters, and many politicians have tried to sidestep it altogether. Democrats have most often sponsored the initiatives, but some also oppose them. In Washington, where Congress has the right to override city laws, some Republicans said they would try to overturn the immigrant voting bill if it passed. Is it really too much to ask that American citizenship be a prerequisite for voting in American elections?'' Representative Tom Tancredo, Republican of Colorado, asked in a letter to members of Congress last month. One of the things that differentiates American citizenship from simple residency is the right to vote,'' said Mr. Tancredo, who rallied opposition to the bill. The passage of this measure would not only blur that distinction, it would erase it - allowing as many as 40,000 aliens in the District of Columbia to vote.'' In San Francisco, some critics have also argued that the proposals raise security concerns. Louise Renne, a former city attorney in San Francisco and a longtime critic of the
Re: No Bounce for Kerry
Doug Henwood wrote: If there's a great untapped reservoir of leftish populism in the American masses, why did Kucinich do so badly in the primaries... it may not be populism, but leftist sentiment might be present. its a media affair involving millions of dollars of course: kucinich was relatively unknown to most, let alone his stand. in a democratic nominees focus group session that was broadcast on c-span, some of the participants referred to him not by name, but as the guy who was not serious because he was looking for a bride on the internet. --ravi
Re: A Question for the Moderator
Ulhas Joglekar wrote: Some posters on this list have expressed their support for the breakup of Russia, India, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Turkey. this is a bit of an unfair characterization, especially if it refers to my contributions on these threads. i should probably check the archives first, but from memory, i do not recall anyone (and definitely not me) calling for breakup of these nations as the only satisfactory option. --ravi
Re: Israel pushing for Kurdish state? -
Ulhas Joglekar wrote: Chris Doss wrote: Reactionary is an understatement. This is equally true of terrorists in Kashmir. About 70% of terrorists killed in Kashmir in the recent years have been non-Kashmiris. They are usually Punjabis trained by the ISI and smuggled into Kashmir. what are the sources for these numbers? it would be worthwhile to study how and by whom a person is judged a terrorist, after which 70% of those classified are considered foreign. imho, the more important debate is regarding cause and effect: did local popular unrest and uprising lead to the influx of foreign terrorists? or did foreign terrorists bring about the image of local unrest? if the former is true, the discussion regarding the current composition and nature of activists/terrorists may prove to be a distraction. the widespread anti-muslim sentiments in india (dating back to the independence) and the record of abuse by the govt and armed forces in kashmir and other areas (punjab, for example) and by the hindu majority (in gujarat for example), should cast suspicion to any official positions or claims regarding the issue. --ravi
Re: Israel pushing for Kurdish state? -
Ulhas Joglekar wrote: ravi wrote: This is equally true of terrorists in Kashmir. About 70% of terrorists killed in Kashmir in the recent years have been non-Kashmiris. They are usually Punjabis trained by the ISI and smuggled into Kashmir. what are the sources for these numbers? I suggest you visit cemetaries in Kashmir where freedom fighters have been buried. Their names may give you some clues. are you being serious? assuming you are, questions remain: who buried these people? kashmiri locals? do the names suggest they are of punjabi origin? are there such data available? if you are not being serious, but sarcastic: that is unfortunate. i am not suggesting you are making up numbers. i am only pointing out that we need to examine the sources. if the indian govt claims that 70% of all terrorists killed are of foreign origin, it is not much different from the bush govt auditing its own excesses. The terrorist upsurge in Kashmir must be seen in the context of US led Jihad against the Soviets in Afghanistan with Saudi funding and Pakistani support. i find that quite plausible. nonetheless, it continues to leave open the issue of the original desire of the kashmiri people (though it does provide some evidence in favour of the thesis that unrest was introduced), which we discuss below: if the former is true, the discussion regarding the current composition and nature of activists/terrorists may prove to be a distraction. The former, even if it is true, irrelevant today. The so-called self determination for Kashmiris will create a US protectorate in reality. how can you say that the original expression of the local population is irrelevant today? if it is true that the kashmiri people wish to be rid of indian oppression, and we are afraid that the result will be a US protectorate, then our duty is not to deny the former, but to fight the latter, isn't it? --ravi
Re: Israel pushing for Kurdish state? -
Ulhas Joglekar wrote: ravi wrote: Kashmir: a US protectorate in reality. then our duty is not to deny the former, but to fight the latter, isn't it? How do you fight the latter? isn't the answer to that question what the broader context of this list is? or at least the humanist left is? i am hardly qualified to answer the question in any sufficient sense, but i think there are answers available... in the writings, recommendations and actions of various people (thoreau, gandhi, mlk, chomsky, feyerabend, ...). Btw, do CPI and CPM share your positions? i do not have a position, at least on kashmir, other than this: the wishes of the population need to be ascertained and honored in some manner that is satisfactory to them. i am not sure what the positions of the CPI and CPM are, since i am not a communist. the following provides some information: http://www.indianexpress.com/ie/daily/2809/ian09065.html Wary of a communal division of Jammu and Kashmir gaining acceptance among political circles and an increasing role for the US in the Valley, the Left parties stress on more autonomy for the state. AMRITH LAL analyses the position The position of the Indian mainstream Left on the Kashmir issue has been consistent right from the 1940s. The Left has always espoused the peculiar position of the state within the Indian union and the need to give it maximum autonomy. which seems like a good start to me. --ravi
Re: Israel pushing for Kurdish state? -
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Affirmative action programs do not and cannot solve the fundamental problem of a historically forced and institutionalized social position of the African American people as a people. When one even mentions the shattering and break up of the US multinational state many so-called progressives, revolutionaries and even Marxists become eerily quiet. The self determination program up to and including the formation of an independent state is evidently reserved for genuine movements of the oppressed outside the boundary of our own bourgeoisie. the point i raise is that the status of genuine movement of the oppressed may be denied to the kashmiris in exactly the same way, in india, as you suggest it is denied to african americans in the US! --ravi
kashmir and india (was Re: India's HDI Improves, Ranking Doesn't)
Chris Doss wrote: --- ravi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: nothing unites like hate. and for that there is pakistan and/or muslims. the common language i share with my indian spouse is english. but not to worry with respect to commonality... advice from some relatives/acquaintances on both sides struck a common chord: marry someone soon, but just don't marry a muslim! even one of the those american boys/girls is ok... /facetious -- There must be more of a unifying Indian identity than just shared hatred of Muslims and Pakistan. Wasn't there a kind of pan-Indian nationalism that manifested itself during the struggle for independence? i am not anywhere close to an authority, but i would answer in the affirmative. national identity is cultivated using similar means as in the US: reciting pledges at schools, sporting national teams and propogating the legend of patriotism, while leaving plenty of room for existing sectarian differences (religion, caste, region, language, etc) to express themselves. How do non-Kashmiri Indian Muslims view the Kashmir issue? Is it seen in religious terms? they probably do, now, given the sharp hindu-muslim divide (witnessed by the successful rise of the BJP, the user-friendly front of hindu extremism). purely based on anecdotal data, i would also add that it would be difficult to ascertain the true views of muslims in india, who are cowed into a pro-india position through false logic (such as comparisons between india and pakistan) and challenges (it was perfectly within bounds for my anglophile uncles to support the australian cricket team against india, but rumours of muslim support for the pakistani cricket team were/are maintained and brought out to question the 'loyalty' of indian muslims). --ravi
Re: India's HDI Improves, Ranking Doesn't
Anthony D'Costa wrote: There are two main national languages: Hindi and English. A good number of people don't speak either. But they tend to be from rural areas from the non-Hindi belt. my experience differs somewhat from this assessment. i am from madras which is definitely from the non-hindi belt, but is hardly rural. the number of people who speak hindi in madras (or at least used to, when i lived there 15 years ago) is/was restricted to the north indian population and children from the privileged class, enrolled in central board schools, who are forced to learn the language as part of the curriculum. and even that is a stretch... i studied in such a school myself and graduated without even a passing knowledge of the language. not one person in my vast array of relatives (in the region) can speak hindi and these are people from the middle or upper classes. with the advent of popular hindi television, some of this may have changed, though that process of subtle imposition of the language (starting with the national programming in the 80s) had itself been subverted in the 90s through the dubbing of such programmes in regional languages. we may not see a repeat of the fiery demonstrations that madras witnessed a few decades ago, against the imposition of hindi by the centre, but it may be a safe bet to suggest that the majority of the people from the region may prefer english over hindi, if a common language is to be enforced. the other regions of southern india (karnataka and andhra pradesh in particular) may not have a history of such militant opposition to hindi. --ravi
Re: India's HDI Improves, Ranking Doesn't
Chris Doss wrote: Given that knowledge of English is so low and the absence of a national language (I guess), what is the lingua franca in India? I mean, is there any language that people anywhere in India would be able to communicate in (like Russian in the fSU)? Without that, I imagine it would be very difficult to have a united country. facetious nothing unites like hate. and for that there is pakistan and/or muslims. the common language i share with my indian spouse is english. but not to worry with respect to commonality... advice from some relatives/acquaintances on both sides struck a common chord: marry someone soon, but just don't marry a muslim! even one of the those american boys/girls is ok... /facetious --ravi
Re: Israel pushing for Kurdish state?
Ulhas Joglekar wrote: ravi wrote: Let there be self-determination everywhere, from Bejing toHavana. in a general sense, why not? Surely, Cuban leadership (and this is only an example)should offer self-determination to Cubans before it demands demands self-determination for Kashmiris? i think if i understand you correctly, you are commenting on the hypocrisy of cuban support for kashmiris. that may be valid. can i infer further that you do not disagree with the content of their call: i.e., the kashmiri people deserve the right of self-determination? --ravi
Re: Israel pushing for Kurdish state?
Chris Doss wrote: It's counterinsurgency war -- the main victims in counterinsurgency war are always civilian. It's probably the most brutal form of warfare there is. I don't know about the state of the Indian Army, but most of the horrors against civilians in Chechnya (leavinf aside the tricky question of how to define the term civilian) are the result of terrified and trigger-happy drafted soldiers who want to get home alive and therefore shoot first and ask questions later. BBC What started as essentially an indigenous popular uprising in BBC Indian-administered Kashmir has in the last 12 years undergone BBC major changes. Sounds like Chechnya to me. I would go as far as to say that anytime the international mujaheedin start to figure prominantly in a conflict, it has almost certainly been hijacked. that may be true, but would you then agree with BBC's assessment that it started as an essentially indigenous and popular uprising? if so, that is all the more reason to ask the people. counterinsurgency warfare might be a dirty business (and i doubt you condone it), but it is all the more dirty when the actions are partially aimed at silencing the people or denying them a voice. --ravi
Re: Israel pushing for Kurdish state?
Chris Doss wrote: I'm not surprised. They probably knee-jerk support every little group that screeches national sovereignity! Even if India goes down in flames. --- Ulhas Joglekar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chris Doss wrote: Ha. Do you know Cuba supports self-determination by Kashmiris? so, are you two saying that kashmiris are a little group that screeches sovereignity? aren't their demands of self-determination legitimate? why would india go down in flames if the people of kashmir were to gain self-determination? --ravi
Re: Israel pushing for Kurdish state?
Michael Perelman wrote: Where does this ocme from, Chris. Again, Cuba is weak -- yet amazingly has survived every imaginable sort of pressure -- so it may find it beneficial to side with Pakistan. But to make your generalization about knee-jerk support seems overblown. On Mon, Jul 26, 2004 at 10:07:10AM -0700, Chris Doss wrote: I'm not surprised. They probably knee-jerk support every little group that screeches national sovereignity! Even if India goes down in flames. --- Ulhas Joglekar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chris Doss wrote: Ha. Do you know Cuba supports self-determination by Kashmiris? [all the top posting is making this difficult to follow, but i hope the reader can still make sense of who said what when] why pakistan? isn't it wrong to reduce the human rights violations of kashmiris (by both countries) to a tiff between the perpetrators? or to put it another way why is supporting self-determination for kashmir = siding with pakistan? --ravi
Re: Israel pushing for Kurdish state?
ravi wrote: why pakistan? isn't it wrong to reduce the human rights violations of kashmiris (by both countries) to a tiff between the perpetrators? or to put it another way why is supporting self-determination for kashmir = siding with pakistan? apologies for the flood. correction to the first sentence above: human rights violations of kashmiris should read violation of kashmiri human rights. --ravi
Re: Israel pushing for Kurdish state?
Chris Doss wrote: You're assuming a majority of the people of Kashmir want self-determination. I don't know if they do. Since most fighters killed in Kashmir (as far as I know) are non-Kashmiris, I doubt that they do. i do not know about fighters, but definitely quite a few kashmiris have been killed in kashmir by indian forces. a simple search on amnesty.org for 'kashmir' yields multiple pages and reports of abuse and murder perpetrated by the indian govt and armed forces. leaving aside the jammu, the region with a larger indian population, what i have heard and read suggests that the people of kashmir would perhaps prefer to be independent of both india and pakistan. afaik, that, not just pakistan sponsored terrorism, is also one of the reasons for the indian govt's refusal to conduct a plebiscite. so, how are we to know what the majority of the people of kashmir want? tariq ali writes: http://www.counterpunch.org/tariqkurds.html TA The real question is what to do about Kashmir, and the simple answer TA is to ask the Kashmiris. Neither Islamabad nor Delhi wants to know, TA because they already know: Kashmir would like to be independent. w.r.t the question of kashmiri militants, BBC writes: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1719612.stm BBC What started as essentially an indigenous popular uprising in BBC Indian-administered Kashmir has in the last 12 years undergone BBC major changes. BBC ... BBC some of the groups that were in the forefront of the BBC armed insurgency in 1989 - particularly the pro-independence BBC Jammu-Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) - have receded into the BBC background. a contrary view and report can be found at: http://members.tripod.com/~INDIA_RESOURCE/kashmir.html --ravi
Re: Israel pushing for Kurdish state?
Ulhas Joglekar wrote: ravi wrote: tariq ali writes: TA The real question is what to do about Kashmir, and the simple answer is to ask the Kashmiris. Let us then ask Tibetan and Uighurs what they want. Let us ask Sindhis and Baluchis in Pakistan, Tamils in Sri Lanka, Arakan people in Mynamar, muslims in South Thailand and Philippines what they want. Let Cuban freely decide what kind of rule they want. Let there be self-determination everywhere, from Bejing to Havana. in a general sense, why not? i am not able to tell if you are being sarcastic or making some other point... --ravi
Re: Thomas Frank op-ed piece
i am going to try to do a bunch of responses in one message, so i do not flood the list. this sub-thread (initiated by me) seems to be going in the direction of a few previous ones which resulted in a flamewar (some of it off-list). for that reason: (1) i want to point out that i am only asking questions here -- i do not have a preferred position. if any of my messages imply otherwise, please disregard. (2) if this does turn into a flamewar, i will hold off on further posts, to avoid list traffic. Michael Perelman wrote: On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 09:37:03PM -0400, ravi wrote: what then of US responsibility to clean up the mess we created? it seems to me that many (not necessarily on pen-l) who call for the return of the troops are primarily motivated by their concern for the safety of american soldiers. many of these same people i am sure supported the invasion that put these soldiers in iraq! why not first the call: US corporations out of iraq? The US establishment could do a lot more good by leaving Iraq, admitting that they were wrong, that the press screwed up, and warning that the people should be more attentive to the truth next time. yes, lot more good at home. but does anything but the first point (leaving iraq) make a difference for iraqis? and it is the first point that is under question. Ravi, with all due respect, Iif the US really wanted to make things better the money that they spend now could buy many more Islamic soldiers, without the stigma of US control. probably true, but we probably cannot convince the powers to follow the above plan. or should we be pressing for it? If the US left Iraqis decide the fate of their gov't, it would probably be anti-American and theocratic. and is that a good thing for the iraqis? actually, if the US left iraq, would there be a govt? the current one is itself a bit of a sham. but the military is too blunt an object to acomplish anything good. that may be the real reason to pull out i.e., if we (on the left) are to advocate pulling out the troops, we need to make explicit our reasons, lest we be lumped with the jingoists calling for withdrawal, but concerned only with american lives. s.artesian wrote: THEIR thugs are OUR thugs, just as they were in Afghanistan. It is the decimation of the social structure under US attack that creates the opportunity for and the thugs themselves. We can control our thugs? That must be comforting to all those in US run prisons. I can't wait until somebody in the US military tells them how much better off they are. i agree with your first point. it is the US attack that created the environment for thugs to arise and gain power. but now that that is the situation on the ground, what is the best thing for iraqi people? how would their condition improve or degrade if the US left? w.r.t controlling our thugs: i believe we can indeed do that. i tend to think of the points raised by chomsky in his piece on the responsibility of intellectuals (substitute for intellectuals: the relatively freer financially safe/stable US resident members of pen-l; well most i would guess). like me... sitting here typing this message. instead i could be out on the street organizing a civil disobedience effort to correct the actions of the thugs that control my govt. if an iraqi tried to control his thugs in a similar manner, allawi would probably put a bullet in his head. no? The facts are that the economy is worse off now than before; living standards continue to decline; oil revenues are misappropriated. i agree. these conditions are a direct result of the US invasion. are they made worse by the presence of US troops? lets pull the US govt out of iraq. let us prevent contracts from being handed out to any international corporations. let us call for a UN force to bring about a real elections, based on a real constitution designed by the people. let US troops be under such UN command and perhaps even used only in a non-combat role. wouldn't all that help the iraqi people? or would the removal of all foreign presence in iraq lead to peace and justice in iraq? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This thread is needed and heart breaking. Being compelled to ask if the people of Iraq are better off today than they were yesterday . . . is mindboggling. Our government bombed this country for ten years after Desert Storm . . . inflcited horrible destruction upon the people of Iraq . . . murdering their babies . . . then destroyed their infrastructure to a large degree and one is asked if the new rulers are going to be better than those who created the situation in the first place. What kind of question is that? when you say being compelled to ask, do you end up answering your question above: it is the kind of question that is both heart breaking and compelling. would you say that nothing that can happen in iraq after a sudden US pullout would be worse than what we have and are continuing to do/done
Re: Thomas Frank op-ed piece
s.artesian wrote: The US GAO, now known as the Government Accountability Office (recent name change) has issued a report detailing the increased instability and economic decay wrought by the occupation. i read the news about the GAO report also, and i have been listening to arguments (on pen-l and elsewhere) on both sides of the issue of pulling out US troops. by both sides, i mean both sides of rational argument (as opposed to: lets pull the troops out since we may not get re-elected otherwise). i am not sure i am convinced by either side. take the point above, for example. is the increased instability and decay caused by the occupation or the invasion? both were/are perpetrated by the same party but they are a bit different, aren't they? is it possible that the US army/govt is the only group with the money and power to cleanup the mess they created? for instance, if the US govt dumped a shitload of nuclear waste in my backyard, i would want it to clean it up (with oversight by me and a neutral informed party). what would happen if we pull out the troops? would iraqis, rid of an illegal occupying force, unite and form a peaceful and just govt, or at least one that is more just than either saddam's or bremmer/allawi's? or would the country descend into even further chaos? what would happen if we keep the troops? would we, as american taxpayers, be able to influence our govt to use them to undo the massive harm we have caused the people of iraq? or would the troops contribute to further degradation of life in iraq? --ravi
Re: Thomas Frank op-ed piece
Michael Perelman wrote: How can anyone believe that keeping troops in the US could possibly help bring social justice? i assume, you meant keeping troops in iraq? --ravi
Re: Thomas Frank op-ed piece
Michael Perelman wrote: sorry. you are correct. but I would be happy to remove the troops from the US. On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 03:18:05PM -0400, ravi wrote: Michael Perelman wrote: How can anyone believe that keeping troops in the US could possibly help bring social justice? what then of US responsibility to clean up the mess we created? it seems to me that many (not necessarily on pen-l) who call for the return of the troops are primarily motivated by their concern for the safety of american soldiers. many of these same people i am sure supported the invasion that put these soldiers in iraq! why not first the call: US corporations out of iraq? --ravi
Re: Thomas Frank op-ed piece
Devine, James wrote: ravi writes: what then of US responsibility to clean up the mess we created? shouldn't it be what then of the US power elite's responsibility to clean up the mess they created? for an iraqi is there a difference? or even for us? 30-50% of the taxes i pay go towards funding american adventures in other countries and the further excesses of client states like israel. am i not complicit in the suffering of iraqis and palestinians and east timorese? Do you think that US troops are the best tool for cleaning the mess they were hired to create? i don't know. that's why i am trying to follow this debate. but often all i hear is dismissal without justification of the opposing position. perhaps the reasons are obvious? It seems that they are serving the US corporations, so if you're calling for US corporations out of Iraq, you're also calling for their servants to leave. i dont know about the last part. perhaps US troops as part of a multinational force could help ensure peace. that might be a naive hope. the corporations (hallibortun, bechtel, etc) are by their very nature a corrupting and degenerate influence. BTW, did you see that the Sydney Morning Herald reported that Iyad Allawi, the new Prime Minister of Iraq, pulled a pistol and executed as many as six suspected insurgents at a Baghdad police station, just days before Washington handed control of the country to his interim government... indeed i read about this, and it only adds to my doubt. i am not very knowledgeable about iraq but is it not possible that the thugs who will rush in to fill the void left by a suddenly departed US army, would be worse? i remember reading pieces about east timor, rwanda, and elsewhere, of the horrors that ensued when any provisional authority pulled out (in those cases these authorities were a bit more legitimate, such as the UN). isnt it important not to forget that their thugs are as bad as ours? only, we can try to control our thugs but they cannot control theirs or ours. --ravi
Re: absolute general law of capitalist accumulation
Charles Brown wrote: by Devine, James Charles writes: The funny thing is dialectics is logic. So, it is a way of talking about things. Formal logic is a linguistic project. i am not sure who wrote what, but addressing the above: i would submit that formal logic is a mathematical project, not a linguistic one (even wittgenstein might agree). fwiw, i agree with most of the rest of charles' summation of logic. --ravi
Re: OOOPS! Re: Off List Re: Thomas Frank op-ed piece
Carrol Cox wrote: Sorry, that last post was intended to be off-list to Michael. when i saw off-list in the subject and pen-l in the recipient list, i realized the mistake, and looked with great eagerness into the message, expecting to find some embarassing snafu or revelation ... the contents failed to satisfy. methinks you owe us an embarassing fact! ;-) --ravi apologies for lack of progressive economics content, in my message.
[Fwd: TNR Online | July Surprise?]
Original Message http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040719s=aaj071904 PAKISTAN FOR BUSH. July Surprise? by John B. Judis, Spencer Ackerman Massoud Ansari [...] This spring, the administration significantly increased its pressure on Pakistan to kill or capture Osama bin Laden, his deputy, Ayman Al Zawahiri, or the Taliban's Mullah Mohammed Omar, all of whom are believed to be hiding in the lawless tribal areas of Pakistan. [...] This public pressure would be appropriate, even laudable, had it not been accompanied by an unseemly private insistence that the Pakistanis deliver these high-value targets (HVTs) before Americans go to the polls in November. [...] [A]ccording to this ISI official, a White House aide told ul-Haq last spring that it would be best if the arrest or killing of [any] HVT were announced on twenty-six, twenty-seven, or twenty-eight July--the first three days of the Democratic National Convention in Boston.
Top Ten George W. Bush Complaints About Fahrenheit 9/11
you have seen the movie, i hope!! from michaelmoore.com: - Letterman's Top Ten List: Top Ten George W. Bush Complaints About Fahrenheit 9/11: 10. That actor who played the President was totally unconvincing 9. It oversimplified the way I stole the election 8. Too many of them fancy college-boy words 7. If Michael Moore had waited a few months, he could have included the part where I get him deported 6. Didn't have one of them hilarious monkeys who smoke cigarettes and gives people the finger 5. Of all Michael Moore's accusations, only 97% are true 4. Not sure - - I passed out after a piece of popcorn lodged in my windpipe 3. Where the hell was Spider-man? 2. Couldn't hear most of the movie over Cheney's foul mouth 1. I thought this was supposed to be about dodgeball - --ravi
Re: Sowell and the big lie.
David B. Shemano wrote: Melvin P. writes: On affirmative action he would be run out of the podium and forced to understand the real meaning of traditional American justice. The poor would most certainly string him up and I would not object. As Godwin's Law approaches, I am done with the thread. a long time ago on usenet, someone proposed a sort of self-referential corollary to goodwin's law: any attempt to avoid a response, through the invocation of godwin's law, in itself satisfies the antecedent of the law, and the consequent applies. ;-) --ravi
Re: Enron
David B. Shemano wrote: The argument that capitalism is legalized fraud and theft is a very interesting thesis which I would love to explore. (For instance, doesn't that statement, as a normative statement, assume the justness of private property, because if not, what is wrong with theft?). can we define such a thing as public property? i.e., something that belongs (i would prefer 'open' or 'available' to 'belong') to everyone (all species)? if so, anyone appropriating such property for personal use, excluding access to othres, could be said to be committing 'theft', no? --ravi
Re: Enron
k hanly wrote: What is assumed as just is that a person should be able to appropriate the value of what they produce through their labor... naive question: does this not assume that the person produces (through his labour) in a vacuum? aren't a whole slew of living and non-living things whose existence and assistance are prerequisite even for the act of the person's labour? if so, do they not have a claim to the end result of this labour? --ravi
Re: Nike me
Michael Perelman wrote: Nike just sent me a large packet c/o my publisher describing all the wonderful corporate responsibility activities that they support. Very slick indeed. hmmm... air perelman... doesn't sound bad... ;-) --ravi
[Fwd: The myth of the self-made millionaire]
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/yhoo/story.asp?guid=%7BB4FBCBBD-1278-4421-889C-1D4B7982B9C3%7Dsiteid=myyahoodist=myyahoo The self-made myth Societal support key to much wealth creation, report says By Thomas Kostigen, CBS.MarketWatch.com Last Update: 8:55 PM ET June 28, 2004 SANTA MONICA, Calif. (CBS.MW) -- Some of the wealthiest entrepreneurs in this country say there is no such thing as the self-made man. With more millionaires making rather than inheriting their wealth, there is a false conceit that they haven't received outside support, a new report says. But society's role in wealth creation is significant, therefore society has an obligation to maintain a level playing field for opportunities to create wealth, contends the report, I Didn't Do It Alone: Society's Contribution to Individual Wealth and Success. The idea that if government would get out of the way, then every entrepreneur would automatically succeed is wrong, the report says. The report is published by Boston-based United for a Fair Economy, a nonprofit group that researches and raises awareness on issues related to wealth and power. It has signed more than 2,200 multimillionaires and billionaires to a petition to reform and keep the inheritance tax; the I Didn't Do It Alone report was gleaned from small sample of those petitioners. Pro-business economic policies and tax policies are often centered on the myth of the self-made man, the report says. But the myth of self-made wealth is potentially destructive to the very infrastructure that enables wealth creation. Individuals profiled believe that they prospered in large part thanks to things beyond their individual control, such as social investments in education, research, technology and infrastructure, the report says. Or as Jim Sherblom, former CFO of Genzyme, says, We are all standing on the shoulders of those who came before us. He and others profiled believe it's vital to give back to society so that others in the next generation can have the same opportunities they had. This giving goes beyond taxes to charity and mentoring programs. This is not so much a call for increased taxes as it is a highlight of society's role and claim upon us as individuals. We each have a responsibility to the common wealth upon which individual wealth is possible, says Chuck Collins, the report's co-author. In prepared remarks, Collins was more emphatic: How we think about wealth creation is important since policies such as large tax cuts for the wealthy often draw on the myth of the self-made man... Taxes are portrayed as onerous, unfair redistribution of privately created wealth -- not as reinvestment or giving back to society. Yet, where would many wealthy entrepreneurs be today without taxpayer investment in the Internet, transportation, public education, legal system, the human genome and so on? Those Collins profiled in the report say their success is attributable to many factors, among them public schools and colleges, government investment in research and small business assistance, contributions of employees, and strong legal and financial systems. The idea behind the report is to point out what often gets lost in translation in the definition of success and to lobby for continued investment in public programs. Just four weeks ago, the Washington Post reported the Bush administration alerted government agencies that if President Bush is reelected, there will be domestic spending cuts, including programs in homeland security, education, nutrition, Head Start, homeownership, job-training, medical research, environmental protection and science. In Arthur Miller's play about the downfall of the American Dream, Death of a Salesman, Willy Loman says to his son on whom he had placed much hope: If only you had passed your math, things would have turned out different. Without the chance to study math, Willy wouldn't have a complaint. The myth of the self-made man is that he has made it alone. Warren Buffett, founder of Berkshire Hathaway and the second-richest man in the world, says: I personally think that society is responsible for a very significant percentage of what I've earned. And Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, says, Lots of people who are smart and work hard and play by the rules don't have a fraction of what I have. I realize I don't have my wealth because I'm so brilliant. What shines through the report is that those profiled and interviewed have an awareness of what made them successful, and they want to pass that along to future generations in the form of public support. Some of us call that government -- more or less.
Re: Thomas Frank's new book
Devine, James wrote: such as whom? me, perhaps? ;-O --ravi
india unbound
(didn't see any mention of this book in the pen-l archives). has anyone read this thing: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/037541164X/104-8496214-3025527?v=glance From Library Journal In 1991, four decades of Nehruvian socialism fell before the economic reforms of Indian Prime Minister Narasimha Rao. In the subsequent decade of India's deregulation, the national debt has decreased, the middle class has doubled in size, inflation has declined, and the restraints of industrial licensing have been abolished. Das, a former CEO of Proctor Gamble and presently a business consultant and journalist, exudes an evangelical zeal for India's entry into the world economy. Arguing that India never experienced an industrial revolution, he asserts that because of its conceptual nature, the information age his country is now embracing is a superior fit with its caste system. Das also envisions India's economic growth as paralleling that of China, Japan, Korea, and Indonesia. Told with verve and excitement, Das's tale is loosely organized around a chronology of his life. He eschews mention of worker exploitation, environmental pollution, and new forms of corruption, but his story is an exciting, hopeful account that can be read by all with profit, as long as discretion is exercised.DJohn F. Riddick, Central Michigan Univ. Lib., Mt. Pleasant Copyright 2001 Reed Business Information, Inc. thoughts? --ravi
Re: Thomas Frank's new book
Carl Remick wrote: Hmm, modesty abounds. From WWWK's Acknowledgments: Gene Coyle, Doug Henwood, Jim McNeill, Nomi Prins, and Daryll Ray each helped me understand the particulars of the industrial fields discussed in the book. jimD: bummer! looks we didn't make the list ;-). --ravi
Re: india unbound
Anthony D'Costa wrote: I have not read the book. I have read many reviews of the book. It appears to be a view of India that is only part correct, leaving out many other important things. I heard him speak in March in Baltimore, I walked out along with a colleague to the bar! He is far too bullish and uses statistics in the most selective way. The recent elections indicates to me how far off he was with his analysis of Indian development. He is also a BJP supporter (reform/globalization wise and sans the religious part) and presumably was asked to represent it but declined. thank you for the response! if you do get to read the book i would love to hear further thoughts, especially a rebuttal of his notions and a defense of some form of socialism (not necessarily nehruvian). the recent spate of pro-capitalist (for lack of a better word) books and articles in india seem to be introducing people there (and indians here) to the regular stories about 'rising tides lifting all boats', etc (when the recent election is inferred as a protest by the vast rural population expressing its lack of gain in the boom). as a response, i often recommend: http://www.bookfinder.us/review4/1843310279.html http://www.btinternet.com/~pae_news/texts/Chang1.htm kicking away the ladder: development strategy in historical perspective -- ha-joon chang --ravi
Re: Further confirmation of Mark Jones
Michael Hoover wrote: erlich vs simon in texas death match, loser leave town... simon's argument that, by definition, there can be no finite resources because it is impossible to know what quantity of a given resource exists squares with historical belief in infinite supply, which was logical throughout much of human history as peoples migrated to uninhabited lands... aren't there enough examples of resource exhaustion for other species (often brought about by man) that has in fact led to their extinction? or is it that man will wipe out other species with his technological progress, but use the same (technological progress) to generate infinite resources for himself? --ravi
remembering reagan
http://www.kirktoons.com/june_2004/images/06_01_04_Remembering_Reagan.jpg
Re: sudden loss of spam
Chris Burford wrote: The amount of spam I get has fallen drastically in the last few weeks. Is this a sign of further globalisation - the US government finally moving in coalition with major monopoly capitalist bodies like Microsoft, to hunt down the spammers? And the spammers have suddenly got scared? I am afraid I am grateful. It is a step towards the global enforcement of global standards, and the capitalists are unfortunately in control. no need to look for conspiracies... my spam stays at usual healthy levels of growth. i can forward you some of mine, if you wish: do you prefer penis or breast enlargement? or both? ;-). --ravi
Yahoo! News - Israeli Leader's WWII Analogy Draws Fire
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=storycid=514e=5u=/ap/20040523/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians_17 Israeli Leader's WWII Analogy Draws Fire Sun May 23,12:44 PM ET By RAMIT PLUSHNICK-MASTI, Associated Press Writer JERUSALEM - Causing an uproar, an Israeli Cabinet minister said Sunday he was reminded of the suffering of his family under Nazi rule when he saw TV images of an Israeli offensive in a Palestinian refugee camp. Justice Minister Yosef Lapid, a Holocaust survivor, insisted he was not likening army actions to Nazi policies. However, he said the picture of an elderly woman searching for medication in the rubble of a home razed by Israel in the Rafah camp reminded him of his grandmother. Infuriated Cabinet colleagues said that even if unspoken, the analogy was clear, and demanded he retract his comments. Lapid's remarks added fire to a debate in Israel over its offensive in the Gaza Strip (news - web sites) camp, which is near the border with Egypt. Some critics said the campaign makes little sense from a military point of view, while others questioned why Prime Minister Ariel Sharon (news - web sites) approved it even though he is pushing for an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. Israel has damaged or demolished dozens of homes in Rafah in its six-day offensive, an attempt to root out militants and uncover arms-smuggling tunnels. The practice has been widely criticized around the world and questioned by Israel's attorney general. Early Sunday, four military bulldozers and three tanks moved back into Rafah's Brazil neighborhood, scene of fighting last week. Hundreds of residents fled the area, with some women loading belongings and young children onto donkey carts. Gunfire crackled in the air, and Israeli helicopters flew overhead. Separately, three members of the Hamas militant group were killed Sunday while handling explosives in the West Bank town of Nablus, Palestinian security sources said on condition of anonymity. The men had pulled their car up alongside an abandoned vehicle used to store their explosives, and the storage vehicle blew up while one of the militants was handling materials inside, the sources said, adding it was unclear whether the explosion had been accidental or carried out by Israel. Lapid, of the centrist Shinui Party, called for a halt in the demolitions during a Cabinet discussion Sunday, evoking images of his family's suffering during World War II. I am talking about an old woman on all fours looking for her medicine in the rubble of her home and I thought about my grandmother, he later told Israel Army Radio. Lapid, a native of what is now Yugoslavia, spent part of the war in the Budapest ghetto and lost many relatives, including one grandmother and his father, in the Holocaust. He immigrated to Israel in 1948 when he was 17. Many Israelis have relatives who perished in the Nazi genocide, and using the issue in political debate, however heated, is considered taboo. Any comparisons between the Holocaust and other acts are seen as cheapening the memory of the 6 million Jews killed by the Nazis. Can he make such an analogy just because he is a Holocaust survivor? Health Minister Danny Naveh told Army Radio. The comparison, maybe hinted or even unintentional, between the systematic murder of the Jews by the Germans and the army's operations in Gaza ... is not a legitimate analogy. In the radio interview, Lapid also revealed that the army is considering demolishing some 2,000 homes in Rafah to expand a patrol road between the camp and the border with Egypt. Military officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed for the first time that they are exploring plans involving the demolition of 700 to 2,000 homes. We look like monsters in the eyes of the world, Lapid told Israel Radio. This makes me sick. Israeli military officials want to widen the patrol road to make it more difficult for weapons smugglers to dig tunnels. The plan has been criticized by the United Nations (news - web sites), the European Union (news - web sites) and the United States. Israeli officials said Attorney General Meni Mazuz believed the road-widening plan would not hold up in local and international courts, and that he told the army to come up with alternatives that would cause less destruction. In a meeting with Mazuz, military chief Lt. Gen. Moshe Yaalon and Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz proposed offering compensation to Palestinians who lose their homes, officials said. No decision was made on the he proposal. Forty-one Palestinians have been killed since Operation Rainbow began last Tuesday. Israel says its offensive has resulted in the arrest of dozens of militants and the killing of a local leader of the armed group Hamas. The army also said it had discovered one arms-smuggling tunnel. The ongoing violence has put new pressure on Sharon, who wants to withdraw from Gaza. Sharon is exploring the possibility of bringing the moderate Labor Party into his government as he tries to push
Re: Saving India's economy
Louis Proyect wrote: NY Times, May 20, 2004 Sikh Who Saved India's Economy Is Named Premier By AMY WALDMAN NEW DELHI, May 19 - Manmohan Singh, the gentlemanly Oxford-educated economist who saved India from economic collapse in 1991 and began the liberalization of its economy, has been appointed the country's next prime minister, ending a week of high political drama. while singh deserves the credit for the economic liberalization, was it not p.chidambaram who began the process? --ravi
Re: question for the list
Michael Perelman wrote: Writing about the transfer of wealth to the rich in the US, would it be fair to say, United States has witnessed in recent decades what is probably largest transfer of wealth and income in the history of the world -- larger than what occurred during the Russian or Chinese revolutions. would you include imperialist looting in this category? would that come out higher or lower? --ravi
Re: Sam Smith SIGNS ON THE ROAD TO ABU GHRAIB
Louis Proyect wrote: full: http://prorev.com/abu.htm Giovanna Borradori has called post-modernism a definitive farewell to modern reason. Pauline Marie Rosenau wrote: Post-modernists recognize an infinite number of interpretations (meanings) of any text are possible because, for the skeptical post-modernists, one can never say what one intends with language, [thus] ultimately all textual meaning, all interpretation is undecipherable. . . Many diverse meanings are possible for any symbol, gesture, word.. The semiotician Marshall Blonsky observed, Character and consistency were once the most highly regarded virtue to ascribe to either friend or foe. We all strove to be perceived as consistent and in character, no matter how many shattering experiences had changed our lives or how many persons inhabited our bodies. Today, for the first time in modern times, a split or multiple personality has ceased to be an eccentric malady and becomes indispensable. Together, brutal capitalism and post-modernism firebombed principles of cooperation, decency, individual ethical responsibility, community, and social democracy. In their place came simple brute power manifesting itself in whatever guise seemed most useful at the time. With hubris rather than horror, America celebrated the collapse of its own consensus of conscience. i find it strange that everyone, whether on the left or the right, unerringly traces the world's problems to 'post-modernism'. does an obscure field of philosophy/literary-theory really have this much influence? and irrespective of the answer to that question, are all of its notions entirely wrong? what do terms like 'character' and 'consistency' mean? perhaps post-modernism teaches us to get past such simplistic and naive notions and learn to deal with the truth of multiple personalities? modern reason is indeed a very appropriate term, since it betrays the narrow, scientific, reductionist approach of the contemporary style of reasoning. perhaps a case can be made that this sort of reductionism, and the single-dimensional growth of technology, have been a lot more brutal and detrimental to cooperation, etc, than the different theories of post-modernism, some of which criticize these very notions (narrow scientific reasoning). --ravi
a victory of sorts in india...
from the anyone but bush again dept, a victory of sorts: the right-wing fundamentalist (and dare i say, murderous) BJP suffers an election defeat: India's ruling party concedes defeat http://www.guardian.co.uk/india/story/0,12559,1215700,00.html India's ruling Bharatiya Janata party (BJP) today conceded defeat in parliamentary elections, according to the party's president, Venkaiah Naidu, in one of the biggest upsets in Indian politics since independence. Tired of Tech, Hungry Farmers Vote for Change http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=storycid=655e=1u=/oneworld/20040513/wl_oneworld/4591859741084447887 Agriculture experts stress that the defeat of India's techno-czar at the hustings is a warning to politicians to heed the interests of rural India, where several thousand debt riddled farmers committed suicide in the last few years. LDF makes clean sweep of kerala: http://in.rediff.com/election/2004/may/13ker1.htm The CPI-M led opposition Left Democratic Front in Kerala made a clean sweep of 18 of the 20 Lok Sabha seats in the state. guardian india election special report: http://www.guardian.co.uk/india/0,12559,821007,00.html rediff.com election 04 links and data: http://specials.rediff.com/election/poll04.htm --ravi
Re: a victory of sorts in india...
Doug Henwood wrote: Isn't there someone here who can tell us how the BJP is really the lesser of two evils? i am a bit confused by the above. i think the BJP is the worse of the many evils. are you asking for a contrary opinion to mine? or did you misunderstand mine? i would have a tough time explaining why the BJP is the worst alternative in india, without transporting you in both time (to a day when india's secular pretensions were less distant from reality) and space: a visit to india will illustrate how the hindu fundamentalists energize the committed bigots and win over the neutral middle class by providing them a legitimate medium to express their biases. michael asks: At this point in our history, we should savor any victory, however hollow. Maybe the Right has finally overreached. Is Congress still as neo-liberal as it was under the last Gandhi? i am not well qualified to answer this one, but my guess would be that their economic policies will not deviate much from the BJPs, apart from minor allowances that acknowledge the rural anti-technological revolt that (among other causes) led to this result. --ravi
Re: a victory of sorts in india...
Louis Proyect wrote: First, there were forces in the north connected to caste politics. Second, the emergence of the right-wing and reactionary elements like the RSS [Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh]. a few points: 1) w.r.t the above, the RSS is not a recent emergence. the hindu/upper-caste fundamentalism, afaik, has been around for a while, including such illustrous members as nathuram ghotse (the man who killed gandhi). the RSS itself has been active as a sort of recruiting and indoctrination vehicle for quite some time. i remember being approached in school by classmates who were RSS members. 2) one significant event that derailed the congress was probably indira gandhi's imposition of emergency in the 70s[?], leading to various prominent leaders from the independence movement leaving the party or coming out in opposition (jayaprakash narayan, morarji desai, et al). the more leftist janata party (people's party) toppled the congress in the ensuing elections (the BJP grew out of the janata party, afaik, a few years later). 3) as michael hinted in his message, the programme of neo-liberalization was begun under rajiv gandhi (son of indira gandhi), when the congress regained power in the 80s. there was a techno bent to the reform even in those days: eg: star indian technologist sam pitroda was lured back from the USA to india with promises of large funding and unlimited freedom. --ravi
Re: a victory of sorts in india...
Louis Proyect wrote: Not really. India, like most civilized countries, has a parliamentary system. This means that all parties can get some representation no matter how small. The USA has a winner take all system that was if not designed to marginalize smaller parties certainly has that effect. That being said, it is fascinating to see the similarities between John Kerry, the Congress Party and Putin. They all represent something not quite as bad as the party to the right. With the deepening crisis of world capitalism, you can be sure that lesser-evil scenarios for stopping fascism will be played out until either the world blows itself up or we finally expropriate the expropriators. hence my prefix: from the anybody but bush again department! ;-) --ravi
Re: Bush apology?
k hanly wrote: Bush actually said that he apologised to the King of Jordan for the torture of Iraqis by US personnel. Why didn't he directly apologise to the Iraqi people and the victims and their families? Why this strange and roundabout way of going about the act of apology. Why should be he be apologising to the King of Jordan rather than to the Iraqis concerned! First, he refuses to apologise at all and now he apologises second hand through an apology to the King of Jordan. Weird. Is there a third instalment? yeah, the third installment will be his apology the american people, on behalf of the iraqis who might have misunderstood american compassion and intentions, after these series of events. --ravi
Media Matters for America
http://mediamatters.org/ Plurality of Voters Say Conservatives Have More Influence in the Media Than Liberals http://mediamatters.org/items/200405020001 Findings of a National Survey Conducted for Media Matters for America Media Matters for America recently commissioned a poll by the Garin-Hart-Yang Research Group to assess how Americans get their news about national government and politics. The poll also explores attitudes toward various media outlets and the relationship between news source choices and political and public policy awareness. The poll of 1,010 voters, conducted from March 30 - April 3, 2004, provides a snapshot of how the news media and the American public interact -- including Americans' media preferences; the reasons for those preferences; concerns about the spread of conservative misinformation throughout the media; opinions of specific media outlets and personalities; and views on media responsibility. The poll will also serve as a Media Matters for America baseline for examining changes over time in the public's media choices and attitudes. It will help media monitoring entities, including Media Matters for America, track gains and losses in the popularity and credibility of various media sources, as well as the public's views regarding the ideological composition of the media. Perhaps most important, the poll will provide the baseline for gauging public awareness of the pervasiveness of conservative misinformation. We intend to revisit these issues in the future; for now, the Garin-Hart-Yang poll provides a wealth of insight into the state of the media today.
Re: The new Iraqi Flag
Devine, James wrote: given that the US does even worse, how can I boycott US goods? you cannot. US goods are all made elsewhere. ;-) --ravi
Re: The new Iraqi Flag
Michael Perelman wrote: On Doug's list, people have been discussing that O'Reilly says that we should boycott Canada and treat it as an enemy. here's a reason to boycott canada: http://www.animalsvoice.com/PAGES/features/seal1.html Seal Song: The Canadian Seal Slaughter --ravi
is this an old one?
found this in unix 'fortune': Laissez Faire Economics is the theory that if each acts like a vulture, all will end as doves. --ravi
a few more good ones before i get flamed ;-) ...
with apologies for the flippant content: A conservative is a man who believes that nothing should be done for the first time. -- Alfred E. Wiggam Q: How many right-to-lifers does it take to change a light bulb? A: Two. One to screw it in and one to say that light started when the screwing began. She hates testicles, thus limiting the men she can admire to Democratic candidates for president. -- John Greenway, The American Tradition, on feminist Elizabeth Gould Davis --ravi p.s: yeah, i have problems with the last one, but it seems extremely well-suited for the candidate of the moment.
Re: Mark Jones Was Right
dmschanoes wrote: 3.Social solutions? How about disbanding the US military, currently the consumer of 22% of US petroleum supplies? How about revolution, so we don't provide a material incentive for burning rain forests to produce pasture? Technological solutions? How about emissions controls? How about elimination of biomass as a fuel, and the use of natural gas. How about a combination of the emission controls and natural gas (which current reserves are at 63 years)? Plus, the revolution. If you are skeptical about the feasibility of such solutions, then I'm afraid you are going to find yourself, despite your protests, right back in the corner of those Malthusian solutions you reject-- i.e. culling the herd, and imposing sterilizaton on women, since it's always imposed on women by men. 4. Finally, there is a real problem with what I have referred to as short-attention span radicalism, in that it never thinks through the consequences of its positions-- so someone can talk about a carrying capacity of 2 billion and ignore what that entails for at least 4 billion others on the planet. So that some might argue for the notion of closing down Phoenix, without explaining what that means, or how that would be accomplished. It makes little sense to argue for a humane sharing society when the program includes closing down a city of several hundred thousand and doing exactly what with the population? Forcibly dispersing them towhere? Retirement villages of the damned? Are we going to ship them, lox, stocks, and cracker barrels to other cities which we think are more sustainable? Sounds a little bit too much to me like strategic hamlets, or pseudo Stalinist organized deportation based on orders of a central committee. And when those gray panthers of Phoenix, and some indigenous peoples say to the central committee, we like it here...it's warm and dry... what will the central committee say-- Up Against the Green Wall, motherfucker. This is the ecology police.? so, any attempt to control population growth is portrayed as a sort of police state. how exactly is the alternative (of this so-called revolution that reduces this and disbands that) imposed on the people? the last section of #3 is an attempt at demonizing the position you disagree with. --ravi
Re: Mark Jones Was Right
i want to thank in public, louis proyect for the spirited, logical and convincing defense of his position on the [un]sustainability of current population levels and rates of consumption. i am glad to see that the ghost of the ehrlich/simon wager has not raised its head for convenient misuse. --ravi
Re: Mark Jones Was Right
Julio Huato wrote: Louis Proyect: I am simply opposed to the notion that the Earth can sustain the life-style of a New Jersey suburbanite. Just project 10 billion people with Jeep V8s, central air conditioning, lawns, a TV in every room, beef 5 times a week, etc. Simply can't be accomplished under any social system. What do you mean by being opposed? That (1) you will choose not to live in NJ and live that lifestyle? (2) you will liquidate NJ suburbia, destroy SUVs, AC equipment, TV sets, computers, devolve the cows to their natural habitat (?), etc.? (3) you'll do your part to make sure the economy is re-organized in such a way that the direct producers set the production and consumption priorities of society (subject to natural laws, etc.)? being opposed to a notion means that you think the notion is incorrect. that statement has meaning (in discourse) irrespective of how one expresses one's opposition. of course, i could continue in your style and list the positions or responses i wish to restrict you to, by starting out with the question on whether you accept the stated proposition or not. and until you, and others, answer that question, i could refuse to proceed, with reason, with further analysis. --ravi
Re: unsubscribing...
paul phillips wrote: Perhaps you could post all the standard commands for unsubbing, or postponing mail, and for resubbing etc. since many of us will be wanting to postpone or unsub due to summer and conference travel, etc. and given our state of academic dementia, our memories of how to do that are somewhat diminished :-[ even if mp posts these instructions, its doubtful all of you will remember it two months from now or look for it in the archives. then he will have to post the instructions once a month. that will cause members to start ignoring those messages altogether. and on and on it goes. there is a simple alternative: send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the line (in the body of the message): HELP you will be sent a response with all sorts of useful info, including info on how you can unsub temporarily, etc, or pointers to such info. or in more impolite terms: RTFM!!! ;-) --ravi (for non-geeks: RTFM = read the fucking manual. to joanna: i know you posted the original request; not flaming you here!).
Re: unsubscribing...
ravi wrote: there is a simple alternative: send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the line (in the body of the message): HELP here's what i found from the above. you can temporarily suspend your membership by sending email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the line (in the message body): set pen-l nomail and then when you are ready to resume getting mail, send another message with the line: set pen-l mail (you can do this later step on a *nix box, assuming you want to restart mail on the the 25th of april, with the simple command: echo 'echo set pen-l mail | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]' | at 1:00am 4/25/2004 simple, eh?) YMMV: a password may be required for both commands. check it out. the *nix command assumes correct mail setup on your host. --ravi
Re: unsubscribing...
Devine, James wrote: ravi writes: RTFM = read the fucking manual. so what do we do when Microsoft and similar companies don't provide a manual? your critique of HW/SW is quite correct. but in the limited sense of interacting with the list management software, the manual is fairly decent and useful. i guess manuals either tend to be too trivial (cute graphics and solutions to trivial problems) or go the other extreme and become reference manuals i.e., if i already know about motherboard jumpers then they will tell me what jumpers to set to bring up my second ATAPI interface drive, or some such. --ravi
Re: From Your Friends at Dissent
Michael Perelman wrote: Doug Henwood has been able to write about economics at a popular level. I have not. Nor have most of us. (the below has nothing to do with enhancing sales of books, for which, i am sure your agent's advice is probably way more relevant) i found steal this idea quite readable, as a layperson. the one unasked for piece of advice that i would give all of you technical authors is to not assume that the general audience understands and subscribes to the axioms or assumptions or models (of thought, analysis) of your field. also, IMHO, your reader's understanding of your book boils down to her/his ability to reduce your reasoning down to some basic convictions she/he holds. often these are political and moral convictions and admittedly are extremely difficult to contest/displace. but ignoring them altogether, results in limiting your readership to the converted (those that share your moral/political positions). i was recently reading peter singer's analysis of george w bush's positions on various moral issues, in his (singer's) new book. though some might disagree with his reasoning, (again IMHO) his style is comprehensive yet readable. --ravi
Re: leftist encyclopedia
Devine, James wrote:
1. someone could set a WikiLeft Encyclopedia that we could all
contribute to, promising to be good and trying to avoid sectarianism
and personal attacks.
if you decide to go this route, i volunteer to host it. i have done some
work with wikis in the past, and with some memory refresh, should be
able to administer and run the thing. all domains wikileft.{net,com,org}
are available, currently.
--ravi
Re: air america radio
Louis Proyect wrote: It was far more sanctimonious and boring than WBAI at its worst. surely that is impossible! --ravi
air america radio
http://www.airamericaradio.com/ on today. --ravi
Yahoo! News - Iraq War Was about Israel, Bush Insider Suggests
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=storycid=655e=1u=/oneworld/20040330/wl_oneworld/4536827661080666584 Iraq War Was about Israel, Bush Insider Suggests Tue Mar 30, 1:05 PM ET Emad Mekay, Inter Press Service WASHINGTON, Mar 29 (IPS) - Iraq (news - web sites) under Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) did not pose a threat to the United States but it did to Israel, which is one reason why Washington invaded the Arab country, according to a speech made by a member of a top-level White House intelligence group. IPS uncovered the remarks by Philip Zelikow, who is now the executive director of the body set up to investigate the terrorist attacks on the United States in September 2001--the 9/11 commission--in which he suggests a prime motive for the invasion just over one year ago was to eliminate a threat to Israel, a staunch U.S. ally in the Middle East. Zelikow's casting of the attack on Iraq as one launched to protect Israel appears at odds with the public position of President Bush (news - web sites) and his administration, which has never overtly drawn the link between its war on the regime of former president Hussein and its concern for Israel's security. The administration has instead insisted it launched the war to liberate the Iraqi people, destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and to protect the United States. Zelikow made his statements about the unstated threat during his tenure on a highly knowledgeable and well-connected body known as the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB), which reports directly to the president. He served on the board between 2001 and 2003. Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I'll tell you what I think the real threat (is) and actually has been since 1990--it's the threat against Israel, Zelikow told a crowd at the University of Virginia on Sep. 10, 2002, speaking on a panel of foreign policy experts assessing the impact of 9/11 and the future of the war on the al-Qaeda terrorist organisation. And this is the threat that dare not speak its name, because the Europeans don't care deeply about that threat, I will tell you frankly. And the American government doesn't want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell, said Zelikow. The statements are the first to surface from a source closely linked to the Bush administration acknowledging that the war, which has so far cost the lives of nearly 600 U.S. troops and thousands of Iraqis, was motivated by Washington's desire to defend the Jewish state. The administration, which is surrounded by staunch pro-Israel, neo-conservative hawks, is currently fighting an extensive campaign to ward off accusations that it derailed the war on terrorism it launched after 9/11 by taking a detour to Iraq, which appears to have posed no direct threat to the United States. Israel is Washington's biggest ally in the Middle East, receiving annual direct aid of $3-to-4 billion. Even though members of the 16-person PFIAB come from outside government, they enjoy the confidence of the president and have access to all information related to foreign intelligence that they need to play their vital advisory role. Known in intelligence circles as Piffy-ab, the board is supposed to evaluate the nation's intelligence agencies and probe any mistakes they make. The unpaid appointees on the board require a security clearance known as code word that is higher than top secret. The national security adviser to former President George H.W. Bush (1989-93) Brent Scowcroft, currently chairs the board in its work overseeing a number of intelligence bodies, including the Central Intelligence Agency (news - web sites) (CIA (news - web sites)), the various military intelligence groups and the Pentagon (news - web sites)'s National Reconnaissance Office. Neither Scowcroft nor Zelikow returned phone calls or email messages from IPS for this story. Zelikow has long-established ties to the Bush administration. Before his appointment to PFIAB in October 2001, he was part of the current president's transition team in January 2001. In that capacity, Zelikow drafted a memo for National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) on reorganising and restructuring the National Security Council (NSC) and prioritising its work. Richard A. Clarke, who was counter-terrorism coordinator for Bush's predecessor President Bill Clinton (news - web sites) (1993-2001) also worked for Bush senior, and has recently accused the current administration of not heeding his terrorism warnings, said Zelikow was among those he briefed about the urgent threat from al-Qaeda in December 2000. Rice herself had served in the NSC during the first Bush administration, and subsequently teamed up with Zelikow on a 1995 book about the unification of Germany. Zelikow had ties with another senior Bush administration official--Robert Zoellick, the current trade representative. The two wrote three books
Re: Job flight
Doug Henwood wrote: joanna bujes wrote: More interesting is the thesis that outsourcing is profitable for hi-tech companies. I wonder how they figure out that profit. The very large hi tech company I work for has outsourced a number of projects to India and China. I know first hand that the results of this off-shoring were nothing short of disastrous. Because of communication problems and inept management, the work done offshore had to be done over, about three times so far. This not only cost more time-wise and money-wise, but in the meantime, my company shipped products that looked like they were done in somebody's garage (while charging enterprise prices) and, I suspect, considerably tarnished their reputation and credibility. This line is now emerging in the biz press. I saw something from one of the brand-name consultants the other day saying that 2004 will be the year of reality-check or some such for the whole trend. The savings turn out to be far smaller than the raw wage gap makes them appear. i am not an expert on the matter, so this is just my opinion: i believe the above effect is temporary. programming is not difficult and it is well suited for outsourcing. those going through outsourcing disaster will learn from their mistakes... already, i know of many fellow indians in the US who are getting into the very lucrative career path of acting as a sort of outsourcing liaison, leveraging their knowledge of both worlds. joanna, i actually greatly admire your company. they were internet pioneers and the geek in me looks up to their innovative work. but they were charging enterprice prices for badly put together products long before there was any outsourcing. my guess is that when you add up the numbers, outsourcing will still be cheaper. i just read an article (i believe in business week) in which a programmer, who was earning $200,000 (!!!) a year, was complaining about the loss of her job and questioning what was wrong with america, etc. $200,000/year??? i could probably count on my fingers the number of programmers who deserve that kind of pay! --ravi
Re: Job flight
joanna bujes wrote: You're saying that writing a program or creating a software product in three different countries is no different than creating a pre-fabricated house in three different countries: the roof in the US, the window frames in China, and the walls in India. I think though that fitting a pre-fabricated house together is not the same as getting a dozen application components to work together. You can say that the whole point of API's is to allow just that to happen, but from what I notice, it's just not that easy. i did somewhat miss the distinction you draw. nonetheless, i am not sure i am wrong. do you feel that software interfaces are inherently more difficult to engineer and manage? in some cases, this complexity is willful... take the current obsession with XML and building layers and layers on top of it. to some extent all of this is because some of this application layer work still suffers from the hubris of the late-90s tech boom. they still have a bunch of underqualified people running around selling pie-in-the-sky end-to-end CRM, ERP, what-have-you systems. ultimately though, i think it will indeed break down to well-defined APIs and implementations that a few people here can put together. a lot of that has happened for hardware, hasn't it? complex processors, PCBs, peripherals are built in different regions and integrated for a multitude of higher-order systems. But, I am happy for you that if push comes to shove, you will be able to go back and be able to work and live. come on now. its not about your job against my job, and i am not trying to defend indian programmers or some such identity group. if i do go back, i hope i will be more empowered to participate in the real world, rather than have to sit in a cube and write uninspiring software. --ravi
Re: 2008, or After Bush
Yoshie Furuhashi wrote: Who will be the Republican presidential candidate in 2008? rudy giuliani? --ravi
Re: Yassin assassination
Marvin Gandall wrote: Though widely decried as stupid... why is this assassination considered stupid? isn't it obvious israeli strategy to incite hamas into becoming the primary opposition, thus sidelining more moderate elements with whom they (israel) may be forced to negotiate with by their patrons (the US)? --ravi
Re: Yassin assassination
Marvin Gandall wrote: Perhaps you misunderstood. I said exactly what you have said below. I don't consider the action was stupid -- that's how it's been criticized in the West and by Arab conservatives -- but cold-blooded calculation in accordance with a long-held Likud strategy. - Original Message - From: ravi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Marvin Gandall wrote: Though widely decried as stupid... why is this assassination considered stupid? isn't it obvious israeli strategy to incite hamas into becoming the primary opposition, thus sidelining more moderate elements with whom they (israel) may be forced to negotiate with by their patrons (the US)? ah, ok. apologies, --ravi
the future of social security/medicare
andie nachgeborenen wrote: I do not expect to have Social Security or Medicare, for example. what did you folks think of kuttner's piece in business week (march 2004): if you have a BW online id (i do not): http://www.businessweek.com/premium/content/04_11/b3874042_mz007.htm?se=1 essentially, if i understand him correctly, he quotes a few reports, based on which he suggests that the funds will not run out by ~ 2025 (as feared), unless bush continues his tax cut strategy including making cuts permanent. --ravi
Re: corporations/More Side Issue
Sabri Oncu wrote: Of course, it is unsual for you westerners who forgot the closeness touching one another brings out but I don't blame you. It is just sad that you don't know how to touch and kiss each other except when you have sex. the westerners don't come close to us indians when it comes to being conservative about this stuff. we literally wrote the book on sex, but now we don't even touch or kiss each other during sex ;-) ;-). --ravi
Re: What is this thing called love?
Mike Ballard wrote: --- Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: jks wrote: joanna wrote: snip happens pish tosh! bah humbug! you sentimentalists! all you need to remember is the words of the sister: what's love but a second hand emotion? It's physical Only logical You must try to ignore That it means more than that ;-) --ravi p.s: kindness and caring. that's what counts. ;-)
Re: Corporations
David B. Shemano wrote: I have been accused of being reductionist. According to dictionary.com, reductionsist means: ... Based upon that definition, I accept the label. It is better than being wrong. What really are we fighting about? i called your definition (of corporations) reductionist. i am not fighting with you. i used the term in a neutral sense. that said, there are multiple arguments against reductionism. the foundational ones are too detailed to hash out here. there is also the argument against reductionism that in its use, in complex fields, there is a tendency to oversimplify a problem, in order to solve it. reductionism can lead to wrong and dangerous conclusions. of course the onus to refute your argument (either on eco-theoretical ground, or methodological ground as a critique of reductionism) lies, to a large extent, on your detractors. An attempt or tendency to explain a complex set of facts, entities, phenomena, or structures by another, simpler set: 'for the last 400 years science has advanced by reductionism... The idea is that you could understand the world, all of nature, by examining smaller and smaller pieces of it. When assembled, the small pieces would explain the whole' (John Holland). this is an extremely (and wilfully/intentionally) naive definition. science rarely proceeded along this clean reductionist process. at best, the context of justification has at times tended to honour reductionism. may i suggest kline's works on the history of mathematics (math being the language of science) and of course feyerabend's expose and defense of methodoligcal anarchism? --ravi
Re: Mysteries of cricket
Chris Burford wrote: Now today behind this important ritualised trial lies the context that the national bourgeoisies of India and Pakistan have decided it is in their economic interests to promote a free trade area and some sublimation of the extraordinarily dangerous potential for war. Other sections of national capital have won out over the sections associated with the arms economy. you may be right, but having lived through 20 years of this political posturing in india, and given what i perceive as the alarming rise in anti-muslim feelings among the middle-class in now fundamentalist-ruled india, i cannot be sure about your conclusion. i do think that the emerging entrepreneural class, the nouveau riche, will aggressively pursue their agenda and shape the government to reach their ends. to some level, that is no different from the patronage of mahatma gandhi by the birlas and other moneybags. what i find disheartening is that the hate can quite easily co-exist with economic development (unless you are telling me that india stands to gain enormously from trade with pakistan; to a larger extent than the current boom caused by IT, in paricular IT outsourcing). But don't ask me actually how to play the game. I always went paralytic. i have always assumed that a paralytic condition is a pre-requisite for the lethargic sport ;-). don't tell my cricketing family, but personally, i prefer basketball! --ravi p.s: no offense intended to those who are physically paralyzed.
Re: Corporations
Eugene Coyle wrote: This stuff is much worse than people have been asked to leave the list over i caution against this reaction, if at all this list is to be of use to non-technical (in this case non-eco) users of the list and the web. as one such person, i have non-technical reasons for believing that corporations (as implemented, not as theoretical entities) are a bad thing for various causes i consider important. however, it would be difficult for me to find the technical flaw in david shemano's reductive definition. i discovered this list through a web search which led me to the archives. the archives (if they are still public) are an internet resource that people will consult. the information content of the messages will affect the ranking of the archives in the search results. keeping these discussions productive will give us, on the left, a way to gain the attention of those looking for answers on the net, and present to them a different viewpoint or logic than is drummed into their head by popular media and mainstream literature. of course rehashing econ 101 may be a waste of time for the bulk of list members. in that case, i suggest that we compile a FAQ (as was the norm for both newsgroups and mailing lists) with such questions. the FAQ would serve not only as a repository that david and others can be pointed to, but also as a document on the web that would serve the purpose i outline above. my 2 cents, --ravi
Re: Chai
joanna bujes wrote: Hey Ravi, Do you or Dyvia know how to make masala chai? The blends they sell are really expensive and my guess would be that it's basically black tea + spices. But which spices? and how much? replying on-list since trade in spices and tea where probably the beginning of economic theory ;-). 'masala' is a bit of a generic term and the word 'chai' has been abducted and misused so badly that its meaning is unknown to me. so, i'll stick to what indians refer to as masala chai, and here's a note from divya: every masala chai is diff. but in general the spices that can be used are cinammon, cardamom (small green elaichi), ginger and cloves. just boil a little of these spices with the regular desi chai of tea leaves, milk and sugar. desi = indian. if you wish, instead of tea leaves, you can buy indian tea powder (and all of the listed spices) at your local indian store. you may even find a pre-mixed chai masala there. 'taj mahal' is a decent brand for the tea powder. typically the milk is boiled with the tea, not added to boiled water. --ravi
a public plea to pen-l list members
i delete a large volume of pen-l email, which i would like to read since i respect the opinions of the authors, simply because of the impossible formatting of the text (yes, i do realize i write entirely in lowercase, and if required i will present my case against 'gratuitous capitalization'). some of this strange formatting cannot even be explained as limitations of non-technical users, since the particular format seems to have been explicitly chosen by the sender, over the default (IMHO more readable) format of the mailreader. in particular, i plead that we return to the tried and tested USENET conventions of: 1) not attaching the entire message, that you are responding to, at the end of your one line response. 2) identifying the poster you are responding to. most mailreaders will automatically attach a single line that does so, when you click on the 'reply' button (or equivalent). 3) quoting text you are responding to using some prefix: the preferred one being . almost all the popular mailreaders will do so by default, and can be configured to do so if required. 4) replying in-line: quote sections of text you are responding to *before* your response (see example below). keep the quoted text minimal to what is relevant, if possible, without losing context. 5) using more blank lines rather than less, especially to separate original text you are responding to, from your own response. there are various other suggestions, but i think the above 5 points would make a big difference. below is my example of what i recommend as a readable post: ---start example--- On Feb 24, 2004, George Bush wrote: On Dec 30, 2000, Bill Clinton wrote: Alan Greenspan is God. He is the invisible hand. I agree. He is da man! You guys are so wrong. I dated the guy back when we took Homoskedactics 101 and the man just didn't get it. I think he is a closet Heteroskedactist. Granted, I tried kidding around with him but the dude has no sense of humour. And I mean, irrational exhuberance, is that even a word? Or three words? You know what I mean. But my daddy and Dick say he's the smartest dude around when it comes to this stuff. Well I could tell you a thing or two, but Michael has strictly forbidden posts with any sort of explicit content. Let me just say that Ayn ruined him for the rest of us. Plus the guy constantly contradicts himself with his theories. It is preposterous to even consider him a serious economist. Take for instance, his frequent reference to the Laffer curve. Bet old Arthur was Laffing all the way to the bank when you guys swallowed that one. Warm Regards, Disgruntled Leftie Joe ---end example--- i must emphasize that i am not trying to lecture here. this post is a plea from a non-eco list member who wants to be able to read your messages! --ravi
Re: Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
Jurriaan Bendien wrote: I do not take badly to disagreement, I take badly to disagreement from which nothing is learnt, and that is quite a different story. this is sort of circular isn't it? or is it that only the rest of us are to learn? --ravi
Re: Wasting bandwidth. Was Greenspan and the use of time to commit fiscal crime
Michael Perelman wrote: David asked me to make the call. Here it is: just about everybody on the list knows about Alan Greenspan and the savings-and-loan scandal. Just about everybody on the list knows about Alan Greenspan and Ayn Rand. ... There are people here with valuable information that could benefit others on the list. I would like to hear from them rather than rehash well-known topics. apologies for (a) my response to jurriaan [sp?] and (b) the use of the greenspan debate in the example in my post pleading for better formatting. --ravi
Re: demo fervor
Carrol Cox wrote: Sabri Oncu wrote: heteroskedastic. WHAT??? yeah, sounds like one of those words bush invents, perhaps this time to explain his homophobic opposition to gay marriage. but google leads us to this page: http://economics.about.com/cs/economicsglossary/g/heteroskedastic.htm which tells us that such a beast does exist. and i thought i earned my math degree with higher grades than sonofabush! --ravi
Re: song lyrics and poetry
Michael Perelman wrote: Do people find such contributions useful? well, since you asked: not if its the beatles. ;-) we (and by 'we' i mean me and at least 5 friends of mine) relatively younger people tend to dismiss them (the beatles) as a bit of wishful thinking on the part of the previous generation, dressing up the pop of their generation as some sort of deep art. seriously though, i am the least qualified to comment, since my own posts, including this one, are of equally dubious merit with respect to the intent of this list! --ravi
Re: CA
Lee, Frederic wrote: Perhaps some people find humor in how children are conceived. Perhaps it is fun to tease those who cannot conceive because they are of the same sex or if heterosexual one of them cannot contribute to conception. From experience, us males who are sterile and have to seek out sperm donors to have children, the issue is not humorous--rather it is a very personal and a very hard decision to make. You see, a child that is conceived in a situation in which one parent is non-biological is considered abnormal, perhaps un-American by many and it seems by some on this e-mail list. Tease about politics--but when it comes to conceiving children that is not a teasing issue for a great many of us. why does the child have to be conceived? why not adoption? what's the difference? surely, on a progressive list, we cannot avail of the traditional reasons for this bias? --ravi
Seminar issue 531, Footloose Labour
found this on the web, and thought it might be of interest: http://www.india-seminar.com/2003/531.htm FOOTLOOSE LABOUR a symposium on livelihood struggles of the informal workforce --ravi
Re: All Internet voting is insecure: report
Grant Lee wrote: Online voting is fundamentally insecure due to the architecture of the Internet, according to leading cyber-security experts. without even having to read the entire article, i feel i am justified in responding that the above assertion is wrong, except in a very trivial sense (such as saying all voting is fundamentally insecure due to the architecture of reality). BTW online does not necessarily have to mean the Internet (upper-case 'I'). --ravi
Re: sending large articles to pen-l
Michael Perelman wrote: Please try not to send large articles to the list -- like I did yesterday. It is better just to send the url. and as previously offered, if you want to post a document of some sort to the list, you are welcome to email it to me, and i will put it up on a web server and give you a URL to it. --ravi
Re: sending large articles to pen-l
paul phillips wrote: But on the other hand, if you or others just send a url, many of us just delete the message and never follow it up. I for one never follow up a url -- it is too time consuming and sometimes proves fruitless. If this list were to become just a list of urls, I would probably log off. It is much easier to just delete any article that I am not interested in. i think michael has clarified that news articles etc are fine to post. i agree with him that people should not send word or powerpoint documents (or other such non-text files) to the list. not only for the stated reasons, but also because there are some of us (and this is a progressive list isn't it, that i hope will tolerate the minority), not yet assimilated into the microsoft empire, who cannot even read them. additionally word and other documents provide means to spread viruses and worms around. i wish michael would go one step further and ban HTML formatted email! ;-) --ravi
Re: All Internet voting is insecure: report
joanna bujes wrote: So, do you think they're rejecting it out of fear it may encourage democracy and third-party candidates? ravi wrote: without even having to read the entire article, i feel i am justified in responding that the above assertion is wrong, except in a very trivial sense (such as saying all voting is fundamentally insecure due to the architecture of reality). BTW online does not necessarily have to mean the Internet (upper-case 'I'). i don't know... perhaps that's the case. or perhaps they are saying the safest thing. it's sort of the problem of 'verification of a positive claim', isn't it? logically speaking, one can never prove that the 'internet is safe for voting'. otoh saying 'the internet is unsafe for voting' is always safe, since the first break proves one is right, while the lack of one only suggests that it hasn't happened yet. i am psychoanalyzing here: i think it could also be the pleasure in one's own cleverness. can i (not ravi, but the members on that committee), a world-renowned computer security expert, plausibly invent a scenario where online voting could be broken. well, if i had access to the support port on some intermediate router, or perhaps if i could generate a buffer overrun in the bind code on a relevant DNS server (what? they are running 1.7.4? that's been broken already!). and so on and so forth... boy, how clever i am! ;-) finally, in their defense (the larger context of their critique, not just the strong claim in the line i quoted), i think they are looking at the particular system that the DoD came up with and found it extremely flawed in its design and assumptions. i do think online voting WILL encourage democracy AND third-party candidates. i think it might also have negative effects: wasn't there a recent finding that more right-wing conservative types are wired than poor or left-leaning folks? online voting would thus make it even easier to mobilize and bring out the right-wing vote. but the solution (imho, in this case) is not to avoid the technology, but to find out ways to leverage it to our advantage. --ravi
Re: why is spam worse
Michael Perelman wrote: I have never received so much spam. Does the new law just encourage them? are you extrapolating from today's email volume? if so, it could be that you are being hit by a virus, not spam: http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/[EMAIL PROTECTED] if the above is not the case, i still encourage list members to read the above warning and take necessary precautions and steps to avoid the above virus, which is spreading at a somewhat disturbing pace. --ravi
Re: Dean and the Iowa primary
Louis Proyect wrote: A Lexis-Nexis search for articles that contain the words Howard Dean and angry within the past 3 months returned 494 articles. Going into the Iowa primary, the label angry had reached a critical mass. It probably was one of the factors that made the largely white, religious and rural Democratic voters shy away from him. They would seem to prefer somebody bland like John Kerry. i hear this a lot -- that the average white american family is turned off by angry or aggressive rhetoric or acts. but when i look at reality, it seems quite different: the black guy who just got released from jail, after spending 20 years for a crime he did not commit, seems coinciliatory. he talks about not holding on to his anger, about moving on, etc. in the meantime, the same white people who angrily demanded for his imprisonment continue to angrily call for him to be sent back (see for instance the case of the 4 young black men who were wrongly convicted in the central park jogger case). it was american anger, driven by 9/11, that led to the mindless invasion of afghanistan and iraq. but it seems the iraqi people are not that angry at americans who (indirectly) caused the deaths of thousands of iraqis. on a progessive list, i do not expect that there will be much disagreement with my view above. what i want to know is, if you agree with the above, how do you think this notion (of average white people being turned off by anger) is sustained even in their own minds? --ravi
young george...
http://www.smh.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1074360692258_2004/01/19/20cartoon.jpg
Re: Michael Moore and General Clark
k hanly wrote: PS sorry about the tabula rasa... no problem, we know your *nature* and given the position of each atom, its a trivial matter to compute what you intended to say! ;-) --ravi
Yahoo! News - Former Treasury Sec. Paints Bush as 'Blind Man'
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=storycid=584e=1u=/nm/20040109/pl_nm/people_oneill_dc Former Treasury Sec. Paints Bush as 'Blind Man' WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill likened President Bush (news - web sites) at Cabinet meetings to a blind man in a room full of deaf people, according to excerpts on Friday from a CBS interview. O'Neill, who was fired by Bush in December 2002, also said the president did not ask him a single question during their first one-on-one meeting, which lasted an hour. As I recall it was just a monologue, he told CBS' 60 Minutes, which will broadcast the entire interview on Sunday. In making the blind man analogy, O'Neill told CBS his ex-boss did not encourage a free flow of ideas or open debate. There is no discernible connection, CBS quoted O'Neill as saying. The president's lack of engagement left his advisers with little more than hunches about what the president might think, O'Neill said, according to the program. CBS said much of O'Neill's criticisms of Bush are included in The Price of Loyalty, an upcoming book by former Wall Street Journal reporter Ron Suskind.
Re: FT op-ed: Pakistan's moderate islamicists vs. its extremists
i hope this doesn't put a damper on the extremist wings (VHP, RSS) of mr.vajpayee's right-wing fundamentalist party's (BJP) freedom to continue to kill, rape and terrorize the muslim minority in india. that would be real progress and we wouldn't want that. --ravi
Re: dissatisfied
Michael Perelman wrote: What can we do to boost the signal to noise ratio. i suggest a 'studs of pen-l' holiday calendar featuring luminaries such as jimD and ianM is provocative swimwear. and a total ban on future beatles lyrics posts by jurrian [sp?]. that should do the trick. ;-) --ravi (apologies, best wishes, and peace to all)
Re: Fidel Castro on unequal exchange
joanna bujes wrote: What's the continuum concept? something to do with there being no transfinite numbers between aleph-0 and aleph-1? (where 2**c = aleph-1???). whether that is correct (as recalled from my sketchy knowledge of math) is doubtful. what it has to do with fidel castro is of course beyond me. ;-) perhaps i am confusing the hypothesis with the concept? --ravi
Re: Fidel Castro on unequal exchange
ravi wrote: joanna bujes wrote: What's the continuum concept? something to do with there being no transfinite numbers between aleph-0 and aleph-1? (where 2**c = aleph-1???). whether that is correct (as recalled from my sketchy knowledge of math) is doubtful. what it has to do with fidel castro is of course beyond me. ;-) perhaps i am confusing the hypothesis with the concept? ack! was intended offlist. forgive the foray into dubious math. --ravi
Re: Unsubscribing---thanks...
joanna bujes wrote: You accuse me of being an FBI agent and then you say that you don't forget whose side I'm on??? what's up with all these FBI agent accusations anyway? LNP just posted the same in response to someone else. whatever happened to old-fashioned insults like m*rf*a, you despicable scoundrel, etc? ;-) But, basically, PEN-L is economics list. It doesn't seem that people are comfortable with subjects that veer away from economics. It doesn't even seem that people are comfortable with anyone questioning the basic terms and assumptions of the trade, so I feel that I am more of an annoyance than a good member of this list. why, did you get flamed for a non-eco post? i make quite a few of them (though trying to keep the count down) and haven't been rebuked thus far. i enjoy reading your posts on the list and i hope you stay on. if not, will continue to bother you over personal email ;-). non-eco content: WMD Hunt: Find The Real Weapons of Mass Destruction http://www.findthoseweapons.com/ --ravi
Re: Covering ones ass twice over
k hanly wrote: Seems that not only is the US justified in excluding those not part of the coalition of the willing for security reasons and thus consistent with WTO rules but also CPA is not subject to rules in first place.. The sheer idiocy of US policy is hard to fathom. Just as Baker is out begging Germany, France and Russia to forgive Iraq debt it is announced that they are excluded from these contracts. could this be another karl rove strategy? it seems that a majority among the voting population here at home (USA) might be liberal on some fronts (affirmative action or pro-choice perhaps?) but united in being suspicious if not hateful of/towards the rest of the world. by presenting the issue as US taxpayer money should come back to US companies, not to those foreigners who snubbed us in the first place. its american soldies who are dying. etc, bush can once again rally the masses behind him, once again diverting attention from the real issues. --ravi
Re: Covering ones ass twice over
Devine, James wrote: yes, it's a Karl Rove-type strategy (and it meshes well with neo-con we are the world arrogance) but it undermines other efforts by the Bushmasters to get France, Germany, Russia, and Canada to help the US. well, it didn't look these nations (rightly) were not going to help out with money or troops anyway, probably not unless bush was willing to share the spoils a lot more evenly than his core constituency (defense contractors, etc) would ever let him do. --ravi
CNN.com - Nobel winner slams war on terror - Dec. 10, 2003
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/12/10/nobel.peace/index.html Nobel winner slams war on terror OSLO, Norway --This year's Nobel Peace Prize winner says the September 11 attacks have been used as an excuse to violate international law and human rights. Iran's Shirin Ebadi, the first Muslim woman to win the prize, did not mention the U.S. by name but was clearly referring to Washington and its allies in a speech prepared for delivery at the official award ceremony in Oslo, Norway. Ebadi, recognized for her fight for children's and women's rights in Iran, collected a gold medal and the $1.4 million award from the head of the Norwegian Nobel Committee at Oslo City Hall. The 56-year-old lawyer said Wednesday: In the past two years, some states have violated the universal principles and laws of human rights by using the events of September 11 and the war on international terrorism as a pretext. Regulations restricting human rights and basic freedoms ... have been justified and given legitimacy under the cloak of the war on terrorism, she said. Ebadi also slammed Washington for ignoring U.N. resolutions in the Middle East while using them as a pretext for launching a war in Iraq. Why is it that in the past 35 years, dozens of U.N. resolutions concerning the occupation of the Palestinian territories by the state of Israel have not been implemented properly? she asked. Yet, in the past 12 years, the state and people of Iraq, once on the recommendation of the Security Council, and the second time in spite of U.N. Security Council opposition, were subjected to attack, military assault, economic sanctions, and ultimately, military occupation? U.S. President George W. Bush's administration launched the Iraq war in March saying President Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. But the war did not have explicit backing from the Security Council. The Nobel laureate also criticized what she called breaches of the Geneva conventions at the United States' Guantanamo military prison in Cuba. Nobel experts said the five members of the Nobel committee, who included three women, probably chose Ebadi as a way of promoting change in Iran. The Middle Eastern nation was once branded part of an axis of evil by U.S. President George W. Bush with pre-war Iraq and North Korea. Ebadi received Norway's Rafto Prize in 2001 for her sustained fight for human rights and democracy in the Islamic country. She received her law degree from the University of Tehran and, as a lawyer, has been involved in several controversial political cases. As a result, she has been imprisoned by Iranian authorities on numerous occasions. From 1975 to 1979, she served as president of the city court of Tehran and became the country's first woman judge judge. But after the revolution in 1979 she was forced to resign and now works as a lawyer and also teaches at the University of Tehran. She successfully campaiged to reveal those responsible for the 1999 attack on Tehran University students. Several students died in the violence. Ebadi is the founder and leader of the Association for Support of Children's Rights in Iran. She is also the author of a number of books on human rights.
CNN.com - Teacher tells kids Santa is 'make-believe' - Dec. 4, 2003
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/South/12/04/offbeat.teacher.santa.ap/index.html Teacher tells kids Santa is 'make-believe' MIRAMAR, Florida (AP) --Mrs. Jolly thinks her son's teacher is a Grinch. Sandra Jolly said her 6-year-old son's Christmas was spoiled when his teacher told the first-grade class Monday that Santa Claus is make-believe. He had this sad, lost puppy dog look on his face. This unhappy, empty look, Jolly said. He said his teacher informed the entire class that Santa is make-believe. D.J.'s teacher, Geneta Codner, was reading a story about the Tooth Fairy when the class started discussing what was real and what was not, said district spokesman Joe Donzelli. When the subject of Santa came up, the teacher started questioning parts of his story -- How could a fat jolly man fit down a chimney? How could reindeer fly around the world in one night? -- and told the children that wasn't possible. It's all been blown out of proportion, Codner said. I'm sorry (parents) think I meant it that way. We were just having a discussion. I don't know where all this hurt came from. The teacher said none of the children acted upset or sad during class. But Jolly and others disagree. How do you destroy a 6-year-old like that? said Pam Sturt, whose son Bradley is in D.J.'s class. Donzelli said the school's principal had a real stern conversation with the teacher. But there will be no written reprimand because she did not violate any school district policy. We have no Santa clause, Donzelli said. We would think that teachers would use better judgment.
