Title: good question
Subject: News from sister Lynne
REPUBLICANISM SHOWN TO BE GENETIC IN ORIGIN
The discovery that affiliation with the Republican Party is
genetically determined was announced by scientists in the current
issue of the journal NURTURE, causing uproar among traditionalists
who
WORLD BANK: BELARUS HAS FEWEST POOR PEOPLE IN CIS
MOSCOW, March 4, 2004. (RIA Novosti correspondent) - Belarus has the lowest
number of poor people among the CIS countries, the Belarussian Embassy in
Moscow informed RIA Novosti on Thursday quoting the data of the World Bank.
Belarus holds 85th
On second thought, this data looks kind of screwy. No way are there fewer people
living in poverty in Ukraine and Georgia as a percentage of the population than in
Russia. Russian wages are about three times as high as Ukrainian ones, and last time I
checked the only fSU country with a higher
I think it is important to separate the issues of petroleum scarcity and
economic determinants.
We can argue about both, but the real issue the connection between the two.
I think it is painfully clear that the bourgeoisie are not driven forward or
backward by an anticipated shortage of
I'd love to find someone who could talk about the history
political economy of Haiti on my radio show next week - e.g., how
did it get to be so poor? Any ideas?
Doug
* About the history and political economy of Haiti in particular:
Alex Dupuy:
LA Times, March 5, 2004
In Aristide's Wake, a Land Long Divided by Class, Color Explodes
Looting and attacks on businesses and the rich could lead to deepening
of the nation's poverty.
By Carol J. Williams, Times Staff Writer
PETIONVILLE, Haiti From the palm-shaded swimming pools and marble
BIGGEST JUMP IN 2 1/2 YEARS
Manufacturers' capital spending up 15%
The Japan Times: March 5, 2004
Capital spending by manufacturers jumped 15 percent in the
October-December quarter from a year earlier for the biggest rise in 2 1/2
years, underscoring the strong capital investment fueling the
dmschanoes wrote:
I think it is painfully clear that the bourgeoisie are not driven forward or
backward by an anticipated shortage of petroleum.
PEARL HARBOR THE FIRST ENERGY WAR
History Today, Dec, 2000, by Charles Maechling
Charles Maechling sees the US oil embargo against Japan as the
The article is very interesting. I think a lot can be gained from posing and
investigating a simple question re Japanese capital spending, Why Now?
China's demand input to the Japanese economy is not now qualitatively higher
than it was 3 years ago, and if, as the article notes, manufacturer's
This appeared on Daniel Ellsberg's list and I thought it might be of
interest.
Peter Hollings
-Original Message-
From: Ellsberg.Net Email List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 4:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Ellsberg defends Kerry against Republican
Alex Dupuy, Who Is Afraid of Democracy in Haiti? June 2003:
http://www.trinitydc.edu/academics/depts/Interdisc/International/PDF%20files/Haiti-7.final.pdf.
--
Yoshie
* Bring Them Home Now! http://www.bringthemhomenow.org/
* Calendars of Events in Columbus:
Louis Proyect has submitted a portion of a text designed to prove that the
bourgeoisie are in fact driven by shortages of energy and that WWII was
the first energy war. Careful reading of the full text makes it very clear,
however, that neither the actions of the Japanese, nor the US were driven
DMS wrote:
Louis Proyect has submitted a portion of a text designed to prove that the
bourgeoisie are in fact driven by shortages of energy and that WWII was
the first energy war. Careful reading of the full text makes it very clear,
however, that neither the actions of the Japanese, nor the US
David challenged Lou and Lou responded regarding oil. First of all, please do not
challenge people directly on the list. That way, we can avoid flaming [flaring] and
people don't find the need to go on and on with interminable challenge and response
threads.
Also, David made his case already.
Marvin Gandall wrote:
Teixeira first propounded the thesis with co-author John Judis in The
Emerging Democratic Majority, which appeared shortly before the US
mid-term elections in 2002 unfortunate timing, because these saw a
sharp swing to the Republicans. But Teixeira says the election was an
As D.C. goes TCF is pretty liberal on tax, budget, health,
and Social Security stuff. Worth reading, I would say.
I don't follow Texeira or their other material, which included
a big project on homeland security.
Of course the center moves all the time. In DC I'm a crazy
left-winger. In a
I was pointing out the critical rupture the scarcity theory makes with
Marx's analysis regarding historical necessity and the agent of revoution--
the essential conflict between the means and relations of production.
I, and I'm sure not only I, am well aware of your tendency to make every
Just to set the record straight: Excuse me, Louis challenged ME directly.
Remember? I posted first the piece about oil prices as an index to the
direction of capital. Lou took exception to my dismissal of scarcity.
I responded.
Lou responded.
I re-responded.
Lou re-re-responded
etc.
If the
the politically correct definition of the working class is either (1) all those with
paid jobs (including CEOs) or (2) those with relatively low incomes. Or course, many
want to define it as vaguely as possible, because it plays well politically.
Jim Devine [EMAIL
dmschanoes wrote:
Just to set the record straight: Excuse me, Louis challenged ME directly.
Speaking from personal experience, I can say it's better for your own
mental health and that of onlookers if you just ignore him.
Doug
This is the second provocation from Henwood in a week. Henwood, you make
it sound like I made you crazy or something. I didn't make you crazy.
And I never abused you. I challenged your Nation Magazine/Living
Marxism/postmodernist politics and you didn't like it. Too bad. If you
aspire to be
Lou, Doug was wrong and so are you here. Find a neutral corner and duke
it out. Not on pen-l.
On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 12:54:25PM -0500, Louis Proyect wrote:
This is the second provocation from Henwood in a week. Henwood, you make
it sound like I made you crazy or something. I didn't make you
I will answer offlist. Others may contact me if they are interested in my
reply.
- Original Message -
From: Carrol Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 1:13 PM
Subject: [PEN-L] Alleged conflict of forces/relations of production
dmschanoes wrote:
Acceptable to whom?
-Original Message-
Max B. Sawicky wrote:
In a meeting at EPI I said you could define
the working class as those who must work to finance a standard
of living, and somebody said that was a marxist definition.
What's the acceptable definition of the working
Title: White House Subp
Air Force One
phone records subpoenaed
Grand jury to review call logs from Bush's jet in probe of how a
CIA agent's cover was blown
BY TOM BRUNE
STAFF WRITER, Newsday
March 5, 2004
WASHINGTON -- The federal grand jury probing the leak of a covert CIA
officer's identity
Max B. Sawicky wrote:
Oh. They like to define things with numbers.
So do I, but you've got to have some conceptual scheme if you're
classifying workers into working class and not working-class.
My nephew asks: Do you know of any good articles or web sites that
comprehensively discuss the Romanian transition and expelling of
Ceaucescu?
I answer, No, but I know lots of smarties on PEN-L who surely will.
If I remember, Ceaucescu was shot, not expelled, for starters...
Bill
My nephew asks: Do you know of any good articles or web sites that
comprehensively discuss the Romanian transition and expelling of
Ceaucescu?
I answer, No, but I know lots of smarties on PEN-L who surely will.
If I remember, Ceaucescu was shot, not expelled, for starters...
[sorry for post
Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
Why classify workers into working class and not working class?
You meant to say classify people into 'working class' and 'not
working class'?
Even Michael Eisner is a worker, at least for a little while longer.
So are bond traders.
Doug
ravi wrote:
bad news for doug ;-).
Good news for the reputation of the stock market, though! Wall Street
will sleep peacefully knowing that Martha's decorating her cell.
Doug
I, for one, am now more willing to invest my nest-egg in Wall Street!
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
-Original Message-
From: Doug Henwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 12:56 PM
To: [EMAIL
Reactionary coup in Romania
http://www.workers.org/marcy/cd/sam90/1990html/s900104.htm
An excerpt from this report written at the time:
What the millions saw on U.S. television, for instance--the burning of
public buildings, the shooting up of libraries--is characteristic of the
period long ago
Michael Hoover wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/05/04 3:14 PM
Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
Why classify workers into working class and not working class?
You meant to say classify people into 'working class' and 'not
working class'?
Even Michael Eisner is a worker, at least for a little while longer.
So
We find that the centering of the management of
industries into fewer and fewer hands makes the trade
unions unable to cope with the ever growing power of
the employing class. The trade unions foster a state
of affairs which allows one set of workers to be
pitted against another set of workers in
D. Henwood wrote:
I'm not saying that worker = working class. A worker is someone who
works; a member of the working class is someone with little or no
property who must earn a paycheck to stay alive.
Doug
So a person who works and does not sell her or his labor-power in the labor
market is
Title: liars at work
Look what the lying motherfuckers
are up to.
Dan Scanlan
-
Date posted:
2004-03-03
Indecency Bill
Fine Raised Higher Than Expected
Members of the
House Commerce Committee made two big changes to the indecency bill
passed to
- Original Message -
From: Doug Henwood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Max B. Sawicky wrote:
Oh. They like to define things with numbers.
So do I, but you've got to have some conceptual scheme if you're
classifying workers into working class and not working-class.
Damn, Quine
Doug Henwood wrote:
Max B. Sawicky wrote:
Oh. They like to define things with numbers.
So do I, but you've got to have some conceptual scheme if you're
classifying workers into working class and not working-class.
This finally sank through to me only a couple days ago while reading
some
- Original Message -
From: Carrol Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This finally sank through to me only a couple days ago while reading
some material on class. I haven't got it clear yet, but this is a start.
Why do we _want_ to classify people into classes? Answer: No reason at
all.
Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
Why classify workers into working class and not working class?
You meant to say classify people into 'working class' and 'not
working class'?
Even Michael Eisner is a worker, at least for a little while longer.
So are bond traders.
Doug
Why can't we say that Eisner is a
Ian,
This bloody The Classless Society book by Paul W.
Kingston costs $21.95. Moreover, this is the papeback
price. The hardcover price is $49.50.
I am not going to buy it, of course.
Too expensive for a working class CEO.
By the way, I also happen to be the President as well
as the only
--- Peter Hollings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This appeared on Daniel Ellsberg's list and I
thought it might be of
interest.
Peter Hollings
That it was. Thank-you, Peter.
Regards,
Mike B)
=
Beers fall into two broad
42 matches
Mail list logo
