If Clinton had a failed war -- actually two --, a prison torture scandal, a weak
economy can you imagine how the Right would have feasted on him.
I am reading Nina Easton's Gang of five, telling the story of how 5 of the leading
young Repugs., Norquist, Reed, Kristol, Bolich, and McIntosh
The Washington Post says it obtained 1,000 more digital pictures of
Iraqis under torture and other images:
http://montages.blogspot.com/2004_05_01_montages_archive.html#108382259529189787.
The US is becoming exposed as no so much an evil empire as an
embarrassing empire. :-0
--
Yoshie
* Critical
Michael said:
I don't disagree with you, but I cannot see why we should take this
group more seriously than Chalabi or other collaborators.
We should take them more seriously because --- unlike Chalabi --- they are
people who have lived in Iraq under Saddam, (something which no doubt has
how do the communist live under the baathist? consider fir ins this syrian joke: when the syrian communist party was allowed an office, the sign on the door said 'the syrian CP, owned by the baath party"
but on a more serious note the biggest impedement to any arab cp truly becoming a mass party
I took the liberty of forwarding this to an email list trying to
promote psychological approaches to schizophrenia and other psychoses.
It is relatively strong in New York and I am sure the film would be of
interest to some of the members
web addresses
http://www.isps-us.org/and
Grant:
not to mention a much greater ability to
generate popular support
Greater than that of Chalabi maybe but a negligibly
small (or infinitesimal) ability nevertheless.
Anyone who knows anything about the left in my part of
the world knows this.
The left back there is not to be taken
Soula:
In answer to your question, no, I don't read Arabic. I wish I had the
aptitude for languages of someone like Marx (a belated happy 186th to him)
who -- not content with German, Greek, Latin, French, English and
Italian --- was learning Turkish when he died.
I do not think the occupation
Chris Doss wrote:
He wrote a hilarious book review in the eXile recently saying that the
left should just admit that the anarchists in the Spanish Civil War were
a bunch of loons and that the only one who was looking at the big
picture was Stalin.
Yes, hilarious is just the right word.
Grant Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Soula:In answer to your question, no, I don't read Arabic. I wish I had theaptitude for languages of someone like Marx (a belated happy 186th to him)who -- not content with German, Greek, Latin, French, English andItalian --- was learning Turkish when he
Chris Doss wrote:
He wrote a hilarious book review in the eXile recently saying that the
left should just admit that the anarchists in the Spanish Civil War were
a bunch of loons and that the only one who was looking at the big
picture was Stalin.
Yes, hilarious is just the right
Sabri Oncu:
It is neither up to the U.S. nor to the rest of the
west to bring peace to our region
My response: I wholeheartedly agree.
and I don't give a
shit to that so-called reconstruction, either.
I disagree. The left anywhere can't afford to express such a deep lack of
concern for a people
In response to James Devine:
The irony of careerism is not that some people on this list have careers,
are sacrificing their principles, or are trying to rise etc., but that the
term careerist was applied to Communists (by this term, I mean people who
are known to be or publicly associate with the
Joel:
But I don't agree that it is ever a good idea,
or maybe anything other than cynical, to say
we don't care about what the outcome of the
situation will be, no matter how far out of
our control or from our ideal it ends up being.
This is not what I said, or at least not what I had in
James Devine wrote:
I wish people would stop using this rhetorical trick of dismissing others'
views as fashionable or in fashion. Sometimes fashions are right, as
with the late-1960s fashion of opposing the US war against Vietnam. BTW, a
relative of mine uses the same trick, dismissing those who
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/05/04 12:32 AM
A friend has a question:
I have a question for you: what is the welfare-warfare state thesis?
I thought it had been advocated by some left faction in the 70s, but
also know that Austrian and ultra-rightists talk about this. What do
you know about this term? I
It's typical eXile mockery of everything existing.
I can't see the humour.
Dolan doesn't actually manage to pin anything on the anti-Stalinist left at
all, not that they _were_ angels; wars against fascists/absolutists are
always a thin time for angels.
He could have mentioned the
Chris Doss forwarded Dolan's review, which is an attempt to discredit
the revolutionary left and anti-Communist hacks like Stanley Payne, the
author of the book being reviewed. The only person Dolan ends up
discrediting is himself. Some comments:
Dolan:
Payne deserves credit for the first part of
Chris Doss wrote:
It's typical eXile mockery of everything existing.
How daring.
--
The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
Sabri Oncu wrote:
Joel:
I just refuse to accept the the worse a situation
is, the better it is argument that too many people
on the left hold.
I find it notable that those who spin this ridiculous canard _never_
quote particular leftists -- it is an urban legend, and passing it on
In other news, the finale of Friends is expected to be a huge ratings winner in
Iraq, where millions of Iraqis are longing for the chance to say goodbye to some
Americans. -- from the BOROWITZ REPORT.
Jim D.
Chronicle of Higher Education, May 7, 2004
FILM
Documentaries Cast a Cold Eye on Corporate America
By JULIA M. KLEIN
Philadelphia
The inspiration came to him on Thanksgiving. Spurred by lawsuits
involving the hazards of fast food, Morgan Spurlock, a wiry athletic man
in his early 30s, decided to
I wasn't endorsing it.
-Original Message-
From: Louis Proyect [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 6 May 2004 09:25:14 -0400
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Samuel Huntington's Hispanic panic
Chris Doss wrote:
It's typical eXile mockery of everything existing.
How daring.
--
Ken:
Thanks for your reasoned remarks, which illustrate a willingness to engage
with the present situation.
As I've already said, my recent usage of imperialism was not supposed to
be definitive, and I agree with your comments on this.
THe issue is the status
of those who side with
Actually, he'll probably be remembered as the translator of Eduard Limonov. But
shock-jock is about right. The same goes for Taibbi and Ames, largely.
Comment:
Shock-jock journalism, I guess. 50 years from now people will be reading
Hemingway while the only recognition Dolan will receive is from
Grant Lee wrote:
If anti-imperialists had an inkling of the horror that would follow hard on
the heels of the decolonisation of India in 1947, they may well have begged
British forces to stay there a little longer. (And maybe some did, I haven't
checked this out.)
I guess you aren't aware that the
Correspondence between Robert Kagan and Niall Ferguson:
http://slate.msn.com/id/2099751/entry/2099900/
--
The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
Louis said:
I guess you aren't aware that the British were responsible originally
for dividing people by religion in the colonies. You might as well ask
the tobacco industry to spearhead an anti-smoking campaign.
Of course I'm aware of that. And what use would it have been to point that
out
Grant Lee wrote:
The tobacco thing suggests that you don't seem to have taken on board the
dialectics _within_ the capital class as a whole. In this neck of the woods,
tobacco companies _do_ spearhead the anti-smoking campaign --- for some
years now they have been required by law to carry
Don't forget Russian or Engels's even greater knowledge of language. Linguistic
expertise seems more relevant to the list than the stand of a minor party with a
rather strange political perspective.
Could we kill this thread?
On Thu, May 06, 2004 at 03:31:23PM +0800, Grant Lee wrote:
In
(This was referred to in Maureen Dowd's NY Times op-ed column today.)
The Toronto Star
May 6, 2004 Thursday
Yesterday, British Prime Minister Tony Blair's human rights envoy to
Iraq said U.S. soldiers detained an elderly Iraqi woman last year,
placed a harness on her, made her crawl on all fours
The US right and multinational middle strata, who _would have liked_
to join the management of empire, may find it harder to justify an
embarrassing empire than an evil empire -- plus a nod to Gramsci
and an appropriation of T.S. Eliot:
catty. catty.
On Thu, May 06, 2004 at 09:25:14AM -0400, Louis Proyect wrote:
How daring.
--
The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
NY Times, May 6, 2004
Low-Tech or High, Jobs Are Scarce in India's Boom
By AMY WALDMAN
HYDERABAD, India - Two years ago, with the employment market in his
drought-stricken rural district as dry as the earth, Bhaliya made his
way to this high-tech capital in southern India and found salvation in
Carrol said:
The situation is in fact going to get
worse the longer the u.s. invaders stay there.
Have I disagreed with this statement? Somewhere along the way, Carrol has
come to think that I support the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq. You'll
have to check the archives and find a quote.
As to
It is probably silly plotting the future of Iraq from a keyboard, but I think that
talk of supporting a democratic force at this time is pretty far-fetched. The US has
created such turmoil that democracy at this time is probably impossible. From what I
understand -- and my understanding is
Joel Wendland wrote:
Carrol said:
The situation is in fact going to get
worse the longer the u.s. invaders stay there.
Have I disagreed with this statement? Somewhere along the way, Carrol has
come to think that I support the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq. You'll
have to check the archives and
Joel W writesIn response to James Devine:
The irony of careerism is not that some people on this list have careers,
are sacrificing their principles, or are trying to rise etc., but that the
term careerist was applied to Communists (by this term, I mean people who
are known to be or publicly
I wrote:
I wish people would stop using this rhetorical trick of dismissing others'
views as fashionable or in fashion. Sometimes fashions are right, as
with the late-1960s fashion of opposing the US war against Vietnam. BTW, a
relative of mine uses the same trick, dismissing those who favor
Michael Perelman wrote: It is probably silly plotting the future of Iraq from a
keyboard, but I think that
talk of supporting a democratic force at this time is pretty far-fetched.
it's more than far-fetched. Any democratic force supported by the US -- or by
westerners -- would be discredited
From: Doug Henwood
Charles Brown wrote:
CB: Ok , how about just profits ? Why would U.S. imperialism and U.S.
based transnationals go through so much, invest so much in creating and
protecting capitalist relations of production outside of U.S. territory if
profits were not made there ?
For
From: Carrol Cox
Profits are the _ultimate_ goal but never necessarily the immediate goal
of capitalist action (particularly of the capitalist state, which among
other things is the domain of intra-capitalist struggle).
^
CB: Yes, I agree with this ( though it is often said that the
Charles Brown wrote:
CB: My thought on that is that the 30%-40% is the icing on the cake, and the
icing is the extra profit ( so super means extra rather than
gigantic; above and beyond the regular profit). I don't know if the
concept of margin applies to this. The idea is that super means extra
On Thursday, May 6, 2004 at 16:11:31 (-0400) Doug Henwood writes:
...
My pleasure. I keep wanting to see some rigorous proof that the First
World is rich primarily at the expense of the Third, which is
something I hear people assert pretty often. I'm open to the
argument, if someone wants to make
Bill Lear:
How does one measure the opportunity cost of, say, 10 million
slaughtered peasants over the last 40 years?
You really need to expand your time-frame in order to make sense of this
question. Like 400 years rather than 40. If it were not for the colonial
exports of silver, gold, fur,
michael perelman wrote:
It is probably silly plotting the future of Iraq from a keyboard, but I think that
talk of supporting a democratic force at this time is pretty far-fetched. The US has
created such turmoil that democracy at this time is probably impossible. From what I
understand --
[was: RE: [PEN-L] The new Iraqi Flag ( imperialist booty)]
Doug writes:I keep wanting to see some rigorous proof that the First
World is rich primarily at the expense of the Third, which is
something I hear people assert pretty often.
The assertion seems to be based on the implicit assumption
Doug Henwood:
Total profits from MNC investment in poor countries - all except the
rich industrial countries of Asia, Europe, and North America, plus
the Asian NICs - was about $25 billion in 2002, or about 0.25% of
U.S. GDP. That's a pretty thin layer of icing.
CB: Yes, it is a thin layer
Jim, this list is not x-rated. You should not discuss your sex life here.
On Thu, May 06, 2004 at 02:15:25PM -0700, Devine, James wrote:
(gonna shake some imperialist booty!)
Jim D.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
No, I think it's based on a confusion between the
moral and explanatory dimensions of value theory. I
think that advocates of this position think that we
cannot attack imperialism against the third world
unless we say that what is wrong with it is theft, on
the analogy that what is wrong with
With its remit to control inflation the Bank of England Monetary
Policy Committee has raised interest rates 1/4% despite infation at
1.1% being much below the 2% inflation target.
The balanced interpretation seems to be that they are influenced
indirectly by the renewed rise in house prices, on
Justin Schwartz wrote:
advocates of this position think that we
cannot attack imperialism against the third world
unless we say that what is wrong with it is theft, on
the analogy that what is wrong with capitalist
exploitation of workers is supposed to be theft --
unearned expropriation of what
My guess is that the present value of historic resource
rents (mineral, timber, land use) from colonial
areas is huge.
From a little essay I wrote:
For starters, Abdel-Fadil (1987) claims that colonial powers had seized 85
percent of the planet's surface area by 1914.
-Original
Max B. Sawicky wrote:
My guess is that the present value of historic resource
rents (mineral, timber, land use) from colonial
areas is huge.
I don't doubt that about the past; my query is about the present. Of
course, Brenner disagrees, but I don't want to go near that one on
this list.
Doug
I wrote: The assertion [that the First World is rich primarily at the expense of
the Third] seems to be based on the implicit assumption that first-world workers
don't produce surplus-value. Nor do other workers, so that the whole story is one of
redistribution between regions (unequal
Doug Henwood wrote:
Joel Wendland wrote:
Carrol said:
The situation is in fact going to get
worse the longer the u.s. invaders stay there.
Have I disagreed with this statement? Somewhere along the way, Carrol has
come to think that I support the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq. You'll
I mention this as a possibility, that would explain a good deal of the
clashes between me and some others over the last several years.
I have never _once_ written about what I think the u.s. should do. I
don't think what I think about that is going to butter any parsnips.
My focus has _always_
If 'rich' means stock of wealth, then the present value of stolen
resources (and labor, incl slaves, forgot about that
till Louis noted it) is wealth that would not be held
by the descendants of colonists, hence they would
be a lot less rich.
This is germane to the reparations question.
mbs
Doug Henwood wrote,
I keep wanting to see some rigorous proof that the First
World is rich primarily at the expense of the Third, which is
something I hear people assert pretty often. I'm open to the
argument, if someone wants to make it.
Depends first on what you mean by rich and poor.
Doug Henwood,
I don't doubt that about the past; my query is about the present. Of
course, Brenner disagrees, but I don't want to go near that one on
this list.
But capital is all about the past: dead labour. Those who appropriated the
most dead labour in the past are entitled to appropriate
Tom Walker writes: A rich country's monopolization of resources, markets etc. can
effectively
deny access to those resources or markets even with no money changing hands.
So how do we measure the absence of what might have been?
dead weight loss! the gain to the imperialists the loss by the
(I changed the subject line because I think the question of imperialist
booty interferes with the analysis of imperialism. It creates the
illusion that the leopard could change its spots.)
Devine, James wrote:
I think Lennon (or what it Lenin?) had something to say here. You're talking about
Tom Walker wrote:
But capital is all about the past: dead labour.
Or so the Germans would have us believe.
Those who appropriated the most dead labour in the past are entitled to
appropriate more dead labour, compounded, in the future. Doesn't matter if
you appropriated it there then and here now.
62 matches
Mail list logo
