Re: M-TH: "wouldabeen nice to talk about, eh?"
A Philadelphia Medical School discovered the chain of damaged genes complicit in breast cancer a little while ago, and set to developing a breast cancer screening system. Some mob called Myriad from Salt Lake City then sent 'em a letter saying you can't do that coz we hold a twenty-year patent on two of the involved genes. And the WTO's brief is to spread TRIPS (trade-related intellectual property something) around the world (at the moment you can only cop a patent in one country at a time). Sounds like another arrow for the anti-WTO quiver (if anyone's still having to field queries of the "waddya got against free trade and better conditions for third world workers, you looney left pillock" variety. Cheers, Rob. --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
Re: M-TH: "wouldabeen nice to talk about, eh?"
Hi again, Sent this to an Oz Labor Party chat list - wonder if anyone here can help add some substance and detail - or just take issue ... G'day all, By way of intro: Oz has always been very hesitant about nuclear plant so far - and, as far as I know, Lucas Heights is the only such plant we have as a consequence (please correct me if I'm wrong). As a good source of uranium, a land of unpopulated spaces, and a source of educated workers and pretty good infrastructure, it's likely 'market forces' might have seen fit to do what Oz politics wouldn't let happen: construct plutonium or strontium (or whatever) all over the place. Anyway, that's the introductory thought. As of today, we're talking the very real possibilty that humanity is in the business of creating new species from scratch. Now, let's do what civil society is here to do: put this new technology in its contemporary historical context, and discuss it. A world of untrammelled producers and consumers constitutes a context whose social organisation and productive engine is predicated on the pursuit of profit. Now, should democratic negotiation determine whether new forms of life are created, what new forms of life are created, and what forms should not be created? Or should the market determine the whether and what, in a world where (eg) Australians may not actively disagree with whatever the apparently ineluctable laws of global supply and demand dictate? As it happens, I suspect we're getting wy ahead of ourselves here - we must not fail to contextualise recent developments in genetic research within the untrammelled capitalism that potentially cometh, a context with a predilection for eugenics (the sort of ideas for which we thought we were fighting Hitler's mob) - after all, we haven't progressed so far since 1945 that most of the rich kids of the future wouldn't be very like the tall, blond/e, heterosexual, addiction-resistant, obesity-resistant, intellectual athletes with three-digit life expectancies of whom Hitler dreamed. At least, 'class' might make a comeback in political discourse then, I s'pose ... Add to that these new life forms, shaped exclusively by the anticipation of annual shareholder meetings, and you have a rather fine example of why the economic must globally be made subservient to the democratic, doncha reckon? That's a topic to place under 'WTO Issues' innit? Or am I reading too much into a WTO-shaped world? Cheers, Rob. --- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
Re: M-TH: "wouldabeen nice to talk about, eh?"
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] ---
Re: M-TH: "wouldabeen nice to talk about, eh?"
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
Re: M-TH: "wouldabeen nice to talk about, eh?"
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] ---
