Re: Re: [weisbrot-columns] (fwd)

2000-05-11 Thread Michael Perelman

I am not going to rise to your bait.  Your love of stirring up
controversy keeps you from being able to be a positive contributor to
the list.

Ricardo Duchesne wrote:

  This discussion is of no interest to the list.

 How do you know that?

--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]




Re: Re: [weisbrot-columns] (fwd)

2000-05-09 Thread Michael Perelman

Ricardo, you keep skating close to the edge.  You say that you do not intend
to provoke, but you seem to poke and poke -- maybe just to get a reaction.  We
do not need that here.

Ricardo Duchesne wrote:

 Now you are getting high on pity which is another trait of
 third worldists who  think that suffering is the defining
 characteristic of the Third World and who, with  a sense of "survivors
 guilt", draw the inaccurate conclusion that the West is solely (or at
 least primarily) responsible for the poverty of the TW. Yet when
 TW people start building industries, attending university or
 consuming Western movies, third wordists view it as
 a sign that these countries are being corrupted by Western influence
 - which brings us back to that other trait, getting high on paradise;
 yes, Jameson really has the best of  both worlds: the joys of a high
 paying academic salary combined with the innocence and purity
 of the TW!

--

Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chico, CA 95929
530-898-5321
fax 530-898-5901




Re: Re: [weisbrot-columns] (fwd)

2000-05-08 Thread Brad De Long

Besides the problems with the article (which i have not read in details),
the fact that Indians make "commercial movies" should not lead you to
normalize the brutality of western imperialism and epidemic violence done
to third world people. did you ever attempt to think why Indian directors
shift to producing commercial movies?

Actually, you don't need to go to third world.Indians were killed here.
African Americans were used as slave labor, and they are still treated as
non-humans. Criticizing this has nothing to do with "returning to the
innocence and purity" of the third world. On the contrary, white
men wanted to create this "purity" by _actually_ eliminating people. It
was not so long ago-- eugenic laws were practiced here till 1965.


Mine

  Why this extraordinary desire to keep Africa from exporting textiles
   to the U.S.--to keep Africa poor and keep Roger Milliken rich?

If I understand what you are saying, it is that (a) eugenic laws were 
practiced here in the U.S. until 1965, and so (b) African textile 
businesses should be prohibited from exporting more than a 
narrowly-limited quota of goods to the U.S.

I'm missing something here...


Brad DeLong




Re: Re: Re: [weisbrot-columns] (fwd)

2000-05-08 Thread Mine Aysen Doyran

Brad, this sentence does not belong to me. My post was a reply to Ricardo's
post about Indian film producers. please, read Ricardo's entire response, then
you will make the connection.

merci,

Mine


I did not write:

  Why this extraordinary desire to keep Africa from exporting textiles
   to the U.S.--to keep Africa poor and keep Roger Milliken rich?



Brad De Long wrote:

I wrote:


 Besides the problems with the article (which i have not read in details),
 the fact that Indians make "commercial movies" should not lead you to
 normalize the brutality of western imperialism and epidemic violence done
 to third world people. did you ever attempt to think why Indian directors
 shift to producing commercial movies?
 
 Actually, you don't need to go to third world.Indians were killed here.
 African Americans were used as slave labor, and they are still treated as
 non-humans. Criticizing this has nothing to do with "returning to the
 innocence and purity" of the third world. On the contrary, white
 men wanted to create this "purity" by _actually_ eliminating people. It
 was not so long ago-- eugenic laws were practiced here till 1965.
 
 
 Mine


Somebody wrote  (NOT ME)

   Why this extraordinary desire to keep Africa from exporting textiles
to the U.S.--to keep Africa poor and keep Roger Milliken rich?



Brad replied:

 If I understand what you are saying, it is that (a) eugenic laws were
 practiced here in the U.S. until 1965, and so (b) African textile
 businesses should be prohibited from exporting more than a
 narrowly-limited quota of goods to the U.S.

 I'm missing something here...

 Brad DeLong



--

Mine Aysen Doyran
PhD Student
Department of Political Science
SUNY at Albany
Nelson A. Rockefeller College
135 Western Ave.; Milne 102
Albany, NY 1