M-TH: What is going on in Seattle?

[Bob Malecki]

See a fray has broken out on this 
stuff.
 
From here lots of pictures about demos and martial 
law. But what is the politics of all this stuff. I see glimpses of protectionism 
as being the bottom line in all of this. And a bit of green hysteria. So I tend 
to think that Hugh is over emphasizing the movement again. 
 
My position from a distance is that the demos 
hardly go against the WTO but compliment it in the sense of protectionism and 
imperialist rivalry. We are just seeing both ends at the same time and both will 
be used in the future to prepare for a new war.
However this does not mean we abstain from all this 
stuff. Probably defend the demonstrators against the police state methods being 
used while ideologically attacking the protectionist and utopian green crap that 
the demonstrations represent.
 
No time very busy.
 
The nazis stuff has been all over the TV and 
newspapers up here and now today the radio with the Nazi stuff. The school 
leadership and commune leadership (Social Democracy) now want to do somewthing 
to combat nazism and foremost get the good name of "Robertsfors Commune" out of 
the mud it has been dragged into of late.
 
The stuff here co-inciding with a campaign by four 
big bourgeois dailies "expose" of the nazi threat against 
democracy.
 
Today I will be debating the leadership of children 
and education on radio on whether they have been caught sleeping on this matter. 
At school things are crazy ..TV, newspaper reporters, cops and radio invading 
the place.
 
The kids in both ground schools and highschool are 
now mobilizing for a big anti Nazi demo on the 13th of December. I have 
contacted all of the unions here in Robertsfors to moboilize and have speakers 
at the demo. The school principle is contacting political parties.
 
So what started out as a small incident here in 
school has now gotten very big and everybody is trying to jump onto the anti 
Nazi bandwagon naturally hardly to combat nazism but to confuse people. The 
commune bureaucrats want to white wash the commune from the nazi stample the 
press and tv have put on it. The kids want to help bob and stop the Nazi´s .. 
The trade unions probably will jump in to help the Social Democrats in power try 
and clean up the image of their commune.
 
Mean while the cops are running all over the place 
trying to get involved with all kinds of information which contradicts 
itself.
 
Even the church wants in and has asked that the 
demo end there. I refused saying that this had nothing to do with the church but 
school and society as a whole and the demonstration will end at the big 
gymnastic hall with speakers from school (the kids) , myself, the trade unions 
and commune politicians (probably the leading Social Democrat.)
 
However it should be pointed out that the last 
thing many of these people (except the kids) want to do is fight fascism. In 
fact are incapable of fighting fascism. The commune and school leadership are 
trying to regain control and iniative which they lost when this all got out into 
the public and the death threat against me became public knowledge. 

 
Mean while on the personal level I have taken some 
extra security precautions. When I'm home I got both a baseball tree and a 
borrowed moose gun nearby.
 
The Nazi's are also active. At the highschool lots 
of Nazi graphitti has been going up on the walls. They hacked the homepage of 
the school and put in a lot of garbage there. Including killing all those who 
oppose them. 
 
Bob

Re: M-TH: China and LOV

[Dave Bedggood]

You shoudnt be so sensitive Rob.
My post was directed to Simon and his World Socialism.
If you identify with this current that's your problem.
By the way pb covers those like you and me who own their own tools of 
intellectual trade.
Parasitism? Depends what you do with the state pay check.
Blueprint.  Definitely. Russia failed to live up to it.
exploiting defeat?  Well the menshies took a back seat until the 
end of the SU, not wanting to own up to any affinity with Stalin.
Then they popped up all fresh with their Eurocentric patented 
democratic socialism. That's what is patronising, including the 
belief that we are not onto you.
Dave.

> Date:  Thu, 2 Dec 1999 22:30:49 +1100
> To:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From:  Rob Schaap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject:   Re: M-TH: China and LOV
> Reply-to:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]

> Whilst I obviously tend to Simon's general point of view (although I'm
> closer to Hugh on the finance/'productive capital' question) - and I do
> find it strange to be considered 'pb' when we own nothing, 'parasites' when
> we ask nothing, 'offering blueprints' when that is precisely what we know
> we can not do, 'exploiting defeat' when it is all we hold dear that is
> being defeated, and 'patronising' for believing in the potency of
> democratic activism - I'd've thought we had better things to talk about.
> 
> Like the democratic activism going on in and regarding Seattle.
> 
> That consumate poll-watching politician par excellence, Clinton, is
> actually opting to walk the thin high wire on this one - and the attempts
> to ridicule the protesters are waning because this is too big, right across
> the spectrum - and that little distinction between what is human and what
> is market is pressing itself on people's attention around the world - and
> third-worlders are feeling sufficiently cocky to talk about power gaps in
> globalist paradise - and people are asking loudly how does the
> socio-economic system we have address the gaps it immanently produces - and
> our suits are coming to learn no-one is swallowing their tripe any more -
> and unionists, students, anarchists, greenies and Marxists are getting used
> to the feel of each others' shoulders again - and they're learning that the
> great democracy's answer to popular expression comes from the barrels of
> guns - but they're also tasting popular potency for the first time in a
> generation.  All this in the belly of the beast, too!
> 
> Geez, that wouldabeen nice to talk about, eh?
> 
> Obviously not.
> 
> Cheers,
> Rob.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
> 




 --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

Re: M-TH: "wouldabeen nice to talk about, eh?"

[Dave Bedggood]

I steer a course between Hugh and Russell but closer to Hugh.
I think the protestors are attacking capitalism's symptoms, which is 
where spontaneous upsurges begin anyway. But to translate this into a 
real upsurge, we would have to see the labour movement get off the 
polite streets and start building in the workplaces. We would 
have to have communist shop stewards and victories. The MUA fight 
prevented an outright defeat, but it was a tactical defeat, and we 
have yet to see any communist challenge to the MUA bureaucracy.
There is a long way to go, and every reason for starting now. 

As for Russell's references to the last fart of hippydom, it seems 
that even he has run out of farts. A fart is a start I say. 
Dave.

> Wouldn't it be nice if Hugh were right?
> 
> >It's called an upsurge
> 
> In your dreams.
> 
> No cauldron about to explode- this is just a tempest in a teapot- the last 
> fart of hippydom whinging about selected contradictions of capital and 
> hoping that street theatre and letters to Clinton are going to change the 
> world.
> 
> The full measure of their real impotence is evinced by a spokesman of 
> voxcap.com , viz:
> 
> "After the curfew went into effect, we found 20 new links added to our 
> site," Miles says. "I think people got off the streets and got online to set 
> things up for the rest of the week."
> 
> http://www.voxcap.com (click on their sponsor's link to apply for a credit 
> card)
> 
> 
> 
> Wouldn't it be nice if we were older
> Then we wouldn't have to wait so long
> And wouldn't it be nice to live together
> In the kind of world where we belong
> I know it's going to make it that much better
> When we can say goodnight and stay together
> 
> Wouldn't it be nice if we could wake up
> In the morning when the day is new
> And after having spent the day together
> Hold each other close the whole night through
> The happy times together we've been spending
> I wish that every kiss was never ending
> 
> Oh, wouldn't it be nice..
> 
> Maybe if we think and wish and hope and pray
> It might come true
> Maybe then there wouldn't be a single thing we couldn't do
> 
> We could be married
> And then we'd be happy
> Oh wouldn't it be nice..
> 
> You know it seems the more we talk about it
> It only makes it worse to live without it
> So let's talk about it...
> 
> Oh, wouldn't it be nice
> Good night, sleep tight...
> 
> 
> 
> __
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
> 
> 
>  --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
> 




 --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

M-TH: Reject Australia's racist laws on refugees

[Bullimore / Kim Maree (COM)]

Comrades,
The Howard government in Australia, with the support of the Labor Party
have just past the most draconian and harshest refugee laws anywhere in
the world in the form of the Border Protection Bill.

In Australia, mandatory detention extends to children (including those
born in detention) and since 1992 Australia has the longest detention
period in the world - 363 days, with the "day count" suspended during
legal proceedings and appeals etc, thus making the time limit in effect
indefinite.  The new legislation now prevents all those seeking political
asylm for gaining permanent residence by now only granting temporary visas
of 3 years (Pauline Hanson proposed this same policy two years ago, with a
time limit of 5 years).

Below is a public statement initiated by the DSP.  If you would like to
add your name phone  02-9690 1230, fax 02-9690 1381, email
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

comradely,
Kim B
___
Public statement

Reject Australia's racist laws on refugees

In 1997 Australia became infamous around the world because of the rapid
rise of the overtly racist Pauline Hanson's One Nation party. Following a
wave of anti-racist protests, One Nation went into decline but Hansonism
is far from dead in Australia...

We, the undersigned, strongly oppose the new laws and regulations recently
introduced by the Howard Liberal-National government. They are racist and
an affront to basic human solidarity, and it is utterly despicable of the
Labor opposition to support such measures.
In particular we condemn:

1.  Regulations recently made by Minister of Immigration Philip Ruddock
that will only offer approved refugees three year temporary visas, instead
of permanent residence. This racist proposal was first advocated by
Pauline Hanson's One Nation party.

2.  The Border Protection Bill which toughens the already inhumane rules
on the treatment of "boat people", removes refugee decisions from rule of
law, criminalises refugees and gives  the government the powers to evade
its international responsibilities to refugees under international
conventions by intercepting suspected "boat people" in international
waters.

We also demand the end of mandatory detention of "boat people" introduced
by the former Labor federal government in 1992. This law, which has been
condemned by the Uniting Church as racist, has kept hundreds of  families
seeking asylum locked up in remote detention camps, sometimes for several
years while their applications for asylum are being processed. These
detained asylum seekers are overwhelmingly from countries in the Third
World and have fled severe political persecution, war and economic crisis.
There is no mandatory detention of  other "illegal migrants", most of whom
come from Britain, the USA and other wealthy countries.

We urge all anti-racists to fight this latest wave of racism.

Lisa Macdonald, Editor, Green Left Weekly
Max Lane, Asia Pacific Institute for Democracy and Development
Wendy Robertson, National Coordinator, Resistance
John Percy, National Secretary, Democratic Socialist Party
Pip Hinman, National Secretary, Action in Solidarity with Indonesia and
East
Timor
Klaas Woldring
Debbie Brennan, for Radical Women
Alison Thorne, for Freedom Socialist Party
Cameron Parker
Lucy de Petro
Jodie Goodman
Marilyn Capper (Melbourne, Australia)
Marilyn CAPPER, Administrator, School of Drama, Victorian College of the
Arts
Tracey Claire, School of Drama, Victorian College of the Arts
Dr. Denise Varney, School of Studies in Creative Arts, Victorian College
of
the Arts
Trish Hayes
Dr Kevin Brophy, Co-Ordinator Creative Writing Program,
School of Studies in Creative Arts
Victorian College of the Arts
Shiffi Blustein and Toby Ovadia
Don Walters, Apollo Bay
Yvonne Francis, Nuclear Disarmament Party
Pamela Curr
Bree K. Taylor, Boronia
Kate Emery, WA student
Paul Hayes, Chester Hill
Mary-Jo O'Rourke
Bimal Man Shrestha
Bellana Shrestha
Claire O'Connor, Barrister and Solicitor, Adelaide
Laurie Forde
Desley Forde
Brendan O'Reilly
Leon Parissi
Joan Silk
Colin Long, Secretary, People's Committee for Melbourne
Felicity Lang, Ringwood
Joan Pollock, Lecturer Victorian College of the Arts
Shelley Marshall
Jacqui Basheer
Kim Bullimore

To add your name phone  02-9690 1230, fax 02-9690 1381, email
[EMAIL PROTECTED]





 --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

M-TH: Australia's racist new laws.

[Bullimore / Kim Maree (COM)]

World's Harshest Refugees Law
  By Iggy Kim 

With last week's passing of the Border Protection Bill by the federal
Coalition and Labor parties, Hansonism became law.

 Australia now ranks as the most anti-refugee among the wealthy,
 predatory countries of the First World. This is an amazing paradox
just two years after the strong grassroots movement against the rise of
 Pauline Hanson's racist One Nation party.

 This state of affairs is the result of some major attacks introduced
over the last
 decade by Labor and Liberal governments. 

 Mandatory detention
 The first was the mandatory detention of all unauthorised arrivals,
implemented
 by the Labor federal government in 1994. This formalised the de facto
situation
 since the Migration Act of 1958. The 1994 codification of mandatory
detention
 was preceded by another Labor bill in 1992 which singled out "boat
people" for
 such treatment. 

 While all imperialist governments have provisions for detaining
people who arrive
 at their borders without permission, pending deportation or legal
entry, only
 Australia imposes mandatory detention with no right to obtain bail or
other
 temporary release. 

 More importantly, even unauthorised arrivals who formally request
asylum are
 locked up while awaiting the outcome of their application. In the
event of a
 negative ruling, they remain locked up during their (often lengthy)
appeal. There
 is no judicial review of this criminal treatment. 

 Other wealthy countries that detain unauthorised arrivals seeking
asylum do so
 only in particular circumstances, and the detainees have rights to
judicial review
 and temporary release. In Portugal, those who request asylum within
48 hours of
 arriving cannot be detained at all. 

 In several countries, there are provisions for a weekly review of
detention cases,
 as well as accountability and appeal procedures when detention is
continued
 beyond a certain time. In 1994, Luxembourg reduced the maximum
allowable
 detention period from six months to one month. There are also strict
restrictions
 against imprisoning minors: Sweden recently raised the minimum age of
detainees
 from 16 to 18. 

 In Australia, mandatory detention extends to children, including
those born while
 their parents are detained. Since 1992, the time limit on detention
has been set at
 363 days. This is already too long, but counting is suspended during
any legal
 proceedings, thereby condemning an asylum seeker to indefinite
imprisonment. 

 According to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, in
the early
 to mid-1990s, many were detained for more than three years before
being
 deported or admitted. 

 The length of detention and the number of long-term detainees have
now been
 greatly reduced, but only because restrictions were introduced by the
 Immigration Department in 1994 to prevent boat arrivals applying for
asylum in
 the first place. 

 The proportion of "boat people" entering the refugee determination
process is
 now less than 10%, compared to between 40% and 100% before 1994.
 Moreover, out of the minority who entered the process in 1994-97, the
annual
 rate of granting refuge averaged about 7%, compared to a 1989-93
average of
 just over 55%. 

 If they are denied refuge at the primary stage of the application,
asylum seekers
 can appeal to the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT), where, historically,
there has
 been more success. 

 According to a 1998 National Audit Office report, the refugee
determination
 process is the only administrative decision-making system in which
the review
 stage has a higher approval rate than the primary stage,
demonstrating the
 barriers refugees face in the first instance. The catch is that an
appeal to the RRT
 costs $1000 if unsuccessful. 

 Temporary protection
 The second major attack, incorporated in the Border Protection Bill,
is the
 automatic denial of the right to permanent refuge for all asylum
seekers who
 arrive without prior authorisation. Again, this is unique in the
world. 

 Other governments have used temporary visas to deal with sudden
influxes
 resulting from particular crises of mass displacement, such as the
war in the
 Balkans. But Australia is the first to generalise this to all
unauthorised arrivals
 who apply for asylum. 

 The particular target is "boat people", who are currently prey to a
racist media
 frenzy in which every boat, whether it carries 10 or 100 people, is
blasted by
 panic headlines. This is especially appalling in light of the tiny
number of boat
 arrivals to Australia compared to the 20-25 million refugees
worldwide, and
 compared to the multitudes of desperate migrants w

M-TH: Marx at Seattle

[Chris Burford]

Despite the openly declared attacks on world capitalism, I have heard no
reports yet of pictures of Marx among the demonstrators at Seattle. 

Perhaps his followers have not done enough to link the law of value with
global economic conditions. 

Marx himself suggested a more insidious and unconscious process of
revolutionary development in the 18th Brumaire of Louis Napoleon. 

Today the mole is digging away vigorously within 10 years of the fall of
the Berlin Wall.


"But the revolution is thoroughgoing. It is still traveling through
purgatory. It does its work methodically. By December 2, 1851, it had
completed half of its preparatory work; now it is completing the other
half. It first completed the parliamentary power in order to be able to
overthrow it. Now that it has achieved this, it completes the executive
power, reduces it to its purest expression, isolates it, sets it up
against itself as the sole target, in order to concentrate all its
forces of destruction against it. And when it has accomplished this
second half of its preliminary work, Europe will leap from its seat and
exult: Well burrowed, old mole!"



Chris Burford

London



 --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

M-TH: Seattle

[Doug Henwood]

I've been posting reports from Seattle to the LBO website 
. Fresh material has 
just arrived.

Doug Henwood
Left Business Observer
250 W 85 St
New York NY 10024-3217 USA
+1-212-874-4020 voice  +1-212-874-3137 fax
email: 
web: 


 --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

M-TH: Re: "wouldabeen nice to talk about, eh?"

[Hugh Rodwell]

RIP from the tomb intones:

>Wouldn't it be nice if Hugh were right?

(It *is*, Russ...)

>>It's called an upsurge
>
>In your dreams.
>
>No cauldron about to explode- this is just a tempest in a teapot- the last
>fart of hippydom whinging about selected contradictions of capital and
>hoping that street theatre and letters to Clinton are going to change the
>world.
>
>The full measure of their real impotence...


Thousands of do-gooders and bleeding hearts, along with hundreds of left
militants, stopped some of the world's most influential ruling class
representatives from meeting for a whole day and made them wish they were
somewhere else.

Impotence is when you can't get it up. RIP seems to think impotence is not
being able to conceive, gestate, give birth, raise and marry off progeny
all in one blink of an eye. Make no mistake about it, the folks in  Seattle
were raring to go, even if there were more Gapons than Bolsheviks around.

This ranks with the Daley Chicago Democratic convention of 1968 with police
"Gestapo tactics in the street". Only there's no hot war going on at the
moment, just slow torture of uncooperative states like Iraq, Cuba, North
Korea and Serbia and the incessant frenzied flogging of dead and almost
dead horses (Africa and Latin America).

Just for a second, imagine what would happen if some protestors were shot
and killed. Or if solidarity demos in other places were shot on and people
were killed (Kent State).

This isn't isolated, either. Remember the Columbia "town hall meeting" in
Ohio where Albright and her henchmen were driven to put off the bombing of
Iraq for months. And the protests now against the WTO are much broader.

And remember it was good old bleeding heart Father Gapon leading the
innocent but enraged masses on a peaceful protest march to implore the
Little Father to see reason (constitutional rights and better working
conditions) that triggered off the 1905 revolution in Russia. The dear
priest was, as it happens, also a Tsarist spy, for which he was fittingly
rewarded by some of the workers he'd been spying on. So the best-laid plans
of Tsarist rats for moderate reforms within the Law can lead to the most
unimaginable (to some at least) consequences.

When RIP van Winkle wakes up from his connubial slumbers, we'll let him
know what's been happening. However, if he can keep his eyes open during
"events", he may find himself able to half-inch a 4WD from some factory
that temporarily finds itself out of the iron grip of bourgeois legality.
After all, it's an ill wind blows nobody good...

Cheers,

Hugh

PS I can just hear him whistling Johnson's Motor Car to himself as he flies
over the Midlands lanes in his trophy...


--

Will ya still need me, will ya still feed me,
When I'm sixty-eight...




 --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

Re: M-TH: Historical vs Dialectical materialism.

[r.i.p]

>Towards this, I suggest a debate on the real issue behind all of this -
>historical materialism vs dialectical materialism.

Only the former can be found in Marx's writings.

Russ

__
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


 --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

Re: M-TH: "wouldabeen nice to talk about, eh?"

[Rob Schaap]

G'day Hugh,

>What Rob is describing in Seattle is what Bob M and me have been describing
>in Sweden, and what me and Bob and Dave have been going on about for years
>now.

You go on about it during the recess breaks between retreads of the ol'
'I'm a good bolshie, you're a bad pb menshie, and all we need is
leadership' refrain.  Or so it seems to me.

>It's called an upsurge, and we have been very explicit about it as
>being an expression of a worldwide tendency (mind you Dave thought it was
>all a bit exceptional in a "reactionary" period, but that was then, maybe),
>perhaps clearest in relation to Albania, the Congo and the Oz wharfies'
>struggle.

Er, we got creamed in the Wharfies' strike, Hugh!  And after that it was as
if nothing had ever happened.  Seems our elected betters are preparing to
pull the same stunt on our one remaining strong politically-aware union as
we speak (the CFMEU, check 'em out at:
http://www.ifbww.org/~fitbb/INFO_PUBS_SOLIDAR/Information.html ).

>I'll be putting up Marx's views on Free Trade and Protectionism from 1847
>soon, again, for the umpteenth time, too, so we can all see that Free Trade
>and Protectionism are not at all where it's at for the working class --
>they're purely bourgeois concerns and always have been. We have other fish
>to fry.

Fry fish when you have fish, I reckon.  I'm going with the 'whither
democracy' line on WTO just now.  Sorta furnishing the tacklebox, if you
like.

>And I think it's weird that Rob "generally" agrees with Simon on
>unspecified issues,

I made it pretty clear just on which specific - and important - points
Simon and I seemed to agree, did I not?

>while he agrees (tends to agree) with me on the
>fundamental scientific issue of the character of the bourgeoisie and its
>relation to the productive forces of society at the present time, surely
>one of the most important matters in the class struggle -- like, know your
>enemy...  I mean, it does sound as if Rob regards the imperialist
>bourgeoisie as his enemy too, doesn't it?

Doesn't Simon?  You're disagreeing on other things, I reckon.  I tend to
your view on finance as decisive structure/engine of our day - and the role
of this development in highlighting to the suddenly resurgent populace its
role as functional object of exploitation.  But Simon is getting at
something important, though.  The attitude of a world in which the
financier's view of capitalism is replacing that of the
factory-owner-manager's view, IS an attitude of blissful consumption,
insofar as decisive price signals are ignoring the C that separates M1 from
M2.  That'd distort production in the short term and separate stock values
from assetts/price-earnings ratios/sustainable productivity projections to
such a degree as to make the system vulnerable to a credit crunch of
possibly unprecedented intensity and durability.  We can only guess at the
decisive kick-starter of such a crisis.  But it'll come.  Big finance has
proven itself very good at managing crises geographically (destroying
foreign brown capital/people), but a popped bubble on Wall St would demand
bailouts in the first instance - bailouts contingent on having lots of
precisely what a popped bubble would make scarce - public funds and lines
of credit.

>Perhaps we should ask Rob to give us his definition of an enemy, him being
>a sociologist and all, after a cold one on the porch of an evening has
>subdued the fevered heat of yet another Oz summer's day...

It WAS bloody hot today (34 degrees and a cloudless sky, but I was sweating
in the shed with cups of tea, alas).  Another warm one tomorrow, but mebbe
something for the water tanks come evening.  No coldies until next week,
I'm afraid.

And I guess the socialist's enemy is the capitalist relation.  Right now,
the fight is about minimising creeping (charging?) commodification of
what's left of our human lives.  So that'd be the enemy du juour.  If all
goes well, capitalism shall have produced for itself an enemy worthy of it.
One which has proven to itself its ability to defend (Bill Woodfull-style),
thus coming to entertain the thought of some aggressive strokeplay - at
first pursuing the first-innings deficit with a few cuts and hooks (Stan
McCabe-style), and then ruining the enemy's line and length altogether, and
taking the lead with some flourishing drives (Don Bradman-style).  Jardine
(finance) would have Larwood (the state) charging in from the fence by
then, and it'd be on for young and old.  Sorry to go so far into the
archives for my summery metaphor, but I needed to invoke an English cricket
team worthy of the might of capital.

One place you and Simon do disagree is to do with how'd you handle
capitalism's bodyline tactics?  Do you emulate Jardine (as McCabe advised),
and emulate your enemy (grab the state and deploy its mechanisms) or do you
do a Woodfull (see the state as inimical to your raison d'etre and deploy
an unprecedented global integration in the context of unprecedented forces

M-TH: China and AFL-CIO

[Charles Brown]

A forward.

CB

((



Subject: WTO - Sweeney - China
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 23:52:50 +0100
Encoding: 38 TEXT

With Europe in the bag after its involvement in the Yugoslavia attack, the 
front of advancing empire has switched to the West.

Tomorrow, in the U.S. city of Seattle on the shores of the Pacific and with 
China as the next intended victim, world capital, organized in the World 
Trade Organization, under the guidance of its U.S. majority stockholders, 
will begin its Summit to determine how best to advance its control over the 
nations of the world and their governments, all of whom may be subject to 
popular pressure.  Capital, which votes by dollars and not heads, wants to 
get rid of such possibility of restraint.

Alarm at this development has arisen among the world's peoples and many are 
expected at the city to protest.

Therefore a diversion has been prepared.

Led by President John Sweeney of the AFL-CIO, massed U.S. labor and its 
representatives are to point to China as the source of the worlds troubles 
and demand that, whatever the WTO does, China must be excluded from the   
family of nations.

-  And that it should so remain, unless and until it is put under control 
and meets standards presumably to be set by unions of the U.S. which, with 
5 percent of the world's population takes for itself a full fourth of the 
worlds energy supply.  The difficulty for China to meet this demand, since 
it has ten times U.S. population, may be considerable..

It is expected that this demand will be sufficient to prevent any uniting 
of the 3/4 of world labor outside the OECD and to sidetrack any demands 
that the WTO be abolished.

In this, the AFL-CIO is only carrying out its traditional role as defender 
of U.S. business.  It remains to be  seen what percentage and what sectors 
of U.S. labor willl follow President Sweeney's call.

John Manning
U.S. staff member, WFTU, Prague, Retired





 --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

Re: M-TH: Re: Meszaros article: "Communism Is No Utopia"

[Charles Brown]

>>> "The World Socialist movement (via The Socialist Party of Great 

 Marx disavowed this 1848 solution a couple of decades later:
already he considered the barricade/ dictatorship of the proletariat route
to be past its sell by date in europe.

(((

Charles: What is your evidence of this ?

CB



 --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

Re: M-TH: "wouldabeen nice to talk about, eh?"

[r.i.p]

Wouldn't it be nice if Hugh were right?

>It's called an upsurge

In your dreams.

No cauldron about to explode- this is just a tempest in a teapot- the last 
fart of hippydom whinging about selected contradictions of capital and 
hoping that street theatre and letters to Clinton are going to change the 
world.

The full measure of their real impotence is evinced by a spokesman of 
voxcap.com , viz:

“After the curfew went into effect, we found 20 new links added to our 
site,” Miles says. “I think people got off the streets and got online to set 
things up for the rest of the week.”

http://www.voxcap.com (click on their sponsor's link to apply for a credit 
card)



Wouldn't it be nice if we were older
Then we wouldn't have to wait so long
And wouldn't it be nice to live together
In the kind of world where we belong
I know it's going to make it that much better
When we can say goodnight and stay together

Wouldn't it be nice if we could wake up
In the morning when the day is new
And after having spent the day together
Hold each other close the whole night through
The happy times together we've been spending
I wish that every kiss was never ending

Oh, wouldn't it be nice..

Maybe if we think and wish and hope and pray
It might come true
Maybe then there wouldn't be a single thing we couldn't do

We could be married
And then we'd be happy
Oh wouldn't it be nice..

You know it seems the more we talk about it
It only makes it worse to live without it
So let's talk about it...

Oh, wouldn't it be nice
Good night, sleep tight...



__
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com


 --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

Re: M-TH: Every word?

[J.WALKER]

Hugh,

This is a bit unfair as I was trying to be generally complementary. 
Though I am not exactly sure how you can presume on what basis I 
would disagree. I must be SO obvious!  :)

> Including this too?
> >> But the reality is that in this whole century capitalism has been
> >> objectively ripe for  revolution
 
If by 'whole century' Dave means that throughout the century 
there have been opportunities for revolution then I agree. If he 
meant that at all point in all places revolution was constantly 
busting out then I am not so sure.

Of course, in my view it has been a century of fruiting (to keep the 
metaphor) socialist revolutions. The only problem is that in western 
European countries (especially the failure in Germany following the 
1st Imperialialist War) the ripe fruits have not been harvested and 
has been left to go rotten. But I would blame that of the strenth of 
Eurocentric Menchevism and people (perhaps like you Hugh) who have 
sought to make alliance with reactionary reformist 'socialist' 
parties (such as you outspoken call for a vote for the Labour Party 
because of its supposed 'left-wing' candidate). Or the diversion into 
Labour movement internal battles which - while sometimes being 
progressive - are rarely revolutionary. Reforms should be the 
by-product of the striving for revolution not an end in themselves.

> >> it was the Bolsheviks, particularly Lenin and Trotsky
> >> who developed marxism beyond  Eurocentric menshevism 

> Trotsky too??

Trotsky as the post-Menchevich leader of the Red Army, Minister for 
Foreign Affairs and Politburo member was o.k. as far as I am 
concened, just many others were. But I think that ice-picks can have 
more uses than just breaking ice :) 

Regards,
John


 --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

M-TH: "wouldabeen nice to talk about, eh?"

[Hugh Rodwell]

Rob whinges:

>Whilst I obviously tend to Simon's general point of view (although I'm
>closer to Hugh on the finance/'productive capital' question) - and I do
>find it strange to be considered 'pb' when we own nothing, 'parasites' when
>we ask nothing, 'offering blueprints' when that is precisely what we know
>we can not do, 'exploiting defeat' when it is all we hold dear that is
>being defeated, and 'patronising' for believing in the potency of
>democratic activism - I'd've thought we had better things to talk about.
>
>Like the democratic activism going on in and regarding Seattle.
>
>That consumate poll-watching politician par excellence, Clinton, is
>actually opting to walk the thin high wire on this one - and the attempts
>to ridicule the protesters are waning because this is too big, right across
>the spectrum - and that little distinction between what is human and what
>is market is pressing itself on people's attention around the world - and
>third-worlders are feeling sufficiently cocky to talk about power gaps in
>globalist paradise - and people are asking loudly how does the
>socio-economic system we have address the gaps it immanently produces - and
>our suits are coming to learn no-one is swallowing their tripe any more -
>and unionists, students, anarchists, greenies and Marxists are getting used
>to the feel of each others' shoulders again - and they're learning that the
>great democracy's answer to popular expression comes from the barrels of
>guns - but they're also tasting popular potency for the first time in a
>generation.  All this in the belly of the beast, too!
>
>Geez, that wouldabeen nice to talk about, eh?
>
>Obviously not.


What Rob is describing in Seattle is what Bob M and me have been describing
in Sweden, and what me and Bob and Dave have been going on about for years
now. It's called an upsurge, and we have been very explicit about it as
being an expression of a worldwide tendency (mind you Dave thought it was
all a bit exceptional in a "reactionary" period, but that was then, maybe),
perhaps clearest in relation to Albania, the Congo and the Oz wharfies'
struggle.

So who's not talking about what?

I'll be putting up Marx's views on Free Trade and Protectionism from 1847
soon, again, for the umpteenth time, too, so we can all see that Free Trade
and Protectionism are not at all where it's at for the working class --
they're purely bourgeois concerns and always have been. We have other fish
to fry.

And I think it's weird that Rob "generally" agrees with Simon on
unspecified issues, while he agrees (tends to agree) with me on the
fundamental scientific issue of the character of the bourgeoisie and its
relation to the productive forces of society at the present time, surely
one of the most important matters in the class struggle -- like, know your
enemy...  I mean, it does sound as if Rob regards the imperialist
bourgeoisie as his enemy too, doesn't it?

Perhaps we should ask Rob to give us his definition of an enemy, him being
a sociologist and all, after a cold one on the porch of an evening has
subdued the fevered heat of yet another Oz summer's day...

As for the belly of the beast, consider this: imperialism as a beast has
contained vast and increasingly agitated amounts of gases (popular
frustration, resentment, protest and not infrequently rebellion) over the
past twenty-five years or more (let's say Nixon and Kissinger gave the
starting signal, and Reagan and Thatcher carried the ball for them). Its
repressive policies and austerity policies and
strangulation-of-the-poor-and-working-masses-at-home-and-abroad policies
have so compressed these internal gases that it is more like a
pressure-cooker or a power-station boiler now than any common-or-garden
dragon. When I mentioned the other day that Sweden is seething, this was in
the actual pressure cooker. Little bubbles under great pressure. Now most
of us know what happens if you suddenly release the pressure under such
conditions -- you get a bloody great explosion and learn just what
insupportable pressure there was in the containing vessel. And given that
this is the belly of the Great Satan, just imagine the stink...

Looks like some strong indications of an imminent release of pressure are
happening in Seattle. And, against the Jeremiahs who have been preaching
tranquillity and total imperialist control for ever and ever (Henwood shall
be nameless, as he is by no means alone in this, he's had the whole bloody
chorus of ex-Marxists and ex-revolutionaries and petty-bourgeois Doubting
Thomas's doo-wah-ing along behind him), it's obvious that there's a whole
broad spectrum of angry masses involved. Imperialism is being deserted by
its one remaining mass popular political base, the intermediate strata of
bureaucrats, educated jobsworths and petty-bourgeois at home in the
once-privileged heartlands.

Watch for superstructural contortions as the likes of Clinton and Blur try
to create the appearance of offering concessio

M-TH: Every word?

[Hugh Rodwell]

>Thanks Dave,
>
>I haven't really been reading much of this thread I'm afraid but
>reading your reply here I counldn't help but agree with every word.
>
>I thought I would just say (for the record!)
>
>John


Excellent!

Including this too?


>> But the reality is that in
>> this whole century capitalism has been objectively ripe for
>> revolution, and it was the Bolsheviks, particularly Lenin and Trotsky
>> who developed marxism beyond  Eurocentric menshevism to take
>> advantage of that reality.


Trotsky too??

Cheers,

Hugh




 --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

Re: M-TH: China and LOV

[Rob Schaap]

Whilst I obviously tend to Simon's general point of view (although I'm
closer to Hugh on the finance/'productive capital' question) - and I do
find it strange to be considered 'pb' when we own nothing, 'parasites' when
we ask nothing, 'offering blueprints' when that is precisely what we know
we can not do, 'exploiting defeat' when it is all we hold dear that is
being defeated, and 'patronising' for believing in the potency of
democratic activism - I'd've thought we had better things to talk about.

Like the democratic activism going on in and regarding Seattle.

That consumate poll-watching politician par excellence, Clinton, is
actually opting to walk the thin high wire on this one - and the attempts
to ridicule the protesters are waning because this is too big, right across
the spectrum - and that little distinction between what is human and what
is market is pressing itself on people's attention around the world - and
third-worlders are feeling sufficiently cocky to talk about power gaps in
globalist paradise - and people are asking loudly how does the
socio-economic system we have address the gaps it immanently produces - and
our suits are coming to learn no-one is swallowing their tripe any more -
and unionists, students, anarchists, greenies and Marxists are getting used
to the feel of each others' shoulders again - and they're learning that the
great democracy's answer to popular expression comes from the barrels of
guns - but they're also tasting popular potency for the first time in a
generation.  All this in the belly of the beast, too!

Geez, that wouldabeen nice to talk about, eh?

Obviously not.

Cheers,
Rob.







 --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

Re: M-TH: China and LOV

[J.WALKER]

Thanks Dave,

I haven't really been reading much of this thread I'm afraid but 
reading your reply here I counldn't help but agree with every word.

I thought I would just say (for the record!)

John

> Simon shows all the signs of evolutionary menshevik thinking.
> Because for him the LOV is universal to class society, he can't see 
> that the revolution in Russia was a qualitative change. Nor that the 
> deformed revolution that followed in China was also. He cannot see 
> that the reason that the imperialist powers campaigned for 70 years 
> to defeat the revolution was that it posed a genuine alternative to, 
> not just a slightly less efficient model of,  capitalism.  He 
> counter-poses to that actual history, where Lenin used the term 
> 'state capitalism' in a very different way to mean the survival of 
> the market in a workers state, a blueprint of 'real socialism'. This 
> is the quiescent, academic "world party of socialism" intellectuals 
> offering their blue print to the masses, covered by the patronising 
> bullshit about 'self-activity'.  
> 
> Frankly, this is a petty bourgeois rendition of marxism. It has its 
> material roots in the non-historic but nonetheless reactionary role 
> of  petty bourgeois intellectuals who must attach  themselves as 
> parasites to one or other of the main classes to survive. Those who 
> attach themselves to the working class attempt to suck it dry. 
> Today the western pb intelligentsia is reviving classic menshevism 
> by exploiting the current period of historic defeats of workers 
> with the disintegration of the SU and other DWS's. Its theme is 
> that the revolution has not happened yet (October was premature, the 
> Bolsheviks were substitionist blah blah) and will not until 
> capitalism has exhausted its developmental potential for creating 
> privileged jobs for the petty bourgeois.  But the reality is that in 
> this whole century capitalism has been objectively ripe for 
> revolution, and it was the Bolsheviks, particularly Lenin and Trotsky 
> who developed marxism beyond  Eurocentric menshevism to take 
> advantage of that reality. 
 


 --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---