On Monday, January 19, 2004 at 21:37:43 (-0500) Yoshie Furuhashi writes:
Response Jim C: There is another alternative suggested above: direct
contact with those involved and who are often the objects of left
analysis. They get to read and correct what is being written about
them. They provide
One final observation on this set of threads. If the debate is over how
subscribers to pen-l should vote, it is trivial, since the number of
voters on pen-l is insufficient to swing an election for homecoming
queen at Slippery Rock. I don't see as it makes any difference how
anyone votes.
The
Carrol Cox wrote:
P.S. If political struggle is analogous to war, then left journalists
are analogous to munitions makers, not to 'front line' troops. They have
no direct effect on political activity, but they are essential in
providing information. Practically no one reads a left paper who is
Doug wrote:
P.S. If political struggle is analogous to war, then left
journalists are analogous to munitions makers, not to 'front line'
troops. They have no direct effect on political activity, but they
are essential in providing information. Practically no one reads a
left paper who is not
Doug wrote:
P.S. If political struggle is analogous to war, then left journalists
are analogous to munitions makers, not to 'front line' troops. They
have no direct effect on political activity, but they are essential in
providing information. Practically no one reads a left paper who is
not
Response Jim C: There is another alternative suggested above: direct
contact with those involved and who are often the objects of left
analysis. They get to read and correct what is being written about
them. They provide fresh insights and new information from those
closest to the conditions being
I have enjoyed this thread and the W. Clark thread, but I think that we
are no getting repititous.
By the way, the media seems to have been effective in tearing Dean down.
He seems to have come in third in Iowa.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Eugene Coyle wrote:
If a Nixon can figure out how to reach out effectively, why can't we be
equally creative???
Short answer: because in the last thirty years we've been mired in
identity politics...rather than class politics.
Joanna
Michael,
In the interview Lakoff mentions that he has a thing called The
Rockridge Institute -- presumably in the Rockridge area of
Berkeley/Oakland -- maybe he'll take us on as a project.
Gene
Michael Perelman wrote:
Lakoff's framing is very important. We don't know how to do it -- at
least
Shane Mage wrote:
Michael wrote:
Lakoff's framing is very important. We don't know how to do it -- at
least I have not figured out how.
But it's the simplest thing in the world--always has been. Just
establish virtually monopoly control over all the means of
mass communication. Good
didn't Nixon communicate with labor elites and conservatives (e.g., the Teamsters) or
with the rank file in a demagogic way?
don't we want to talk to the rank file in a non-demogogic way?
Jim
-Original Message-
From: Michael Perelman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
Yes, but his group also understood the alienation or labor and how the Dems were
unable to address it.
Devine, James wrote:
didn't Nixon communicate with labor elites and conservatives (e.g., the Teamsters)
or with the rank file in a demagogic way?
don't we want to talk to the rank file
michael wrote:
Yes, but his group also understood the alienation or labor and how the Dems were
unable to address it.
Michael, on what grounds do you assume that the Dems _want_ to resolve
that alienation? The opposite seems to me the case. The whole existence
of the DP is dependent on
You might be correct, but then they will be gone within a decade.
On Sun, Jan 18, 2004 at 06:39:47PM -0600, Carrol Cox wrote:
Michael, on what grounds do you assume that the Dems _want_ to resolve
that alienation? The opposite seems to me the case. The whole existence
of the DP is dependent
Carrol wrote...
Gore knew how he could win, and he deliberately and on principle did not
choose that route.
Dunno about the on principle part. What principles were at work
when he failed to follow the dictums in his own book when he was
vice-president and what principle kept him counting
Michael wrote...
You might be correct, but then they will be gone within a decade.
Could you clarify this? Is they labor or the Dems?
Dan
--
--
Purge the White House of
mad cowboy disease.
--
END OF
I meant that the Dems. will disintegrate if they do not pay attention to
the alienation of labor. Although the way things are going, without any
protest, labor will also be gone. The Bush admin. has been very effective
in undermining labor, especially public sector labor.
On Sun, Jan 18, 2004
Dan Scanlan wrote:
Carrol wrote...
Gore knew how he could win, and he deliberately and on principle did not
choose that route.
Dunno about the on principle part. What principles were at work
when he failed to follow the dictums in his own book when he was
vice-president and what principle
Michael Perelman wrote:I meant that the Dems. will disintegrate if they do not pay
attention to
the alienation of labor.
I don't think so. Why can't the Dems go the way of New Labour in the UK? wasn't that
what Clinton/Gore/Lieberman/DLC is all about?
Jim D.
Not really. New Labor won. Clinton coopted Rockefeller republican
policies and won. The Repugs have moved so far to the right that it will
be hard to coopt them.
On Sun, Jan 18, 2004 at 06:44:16PM -0800, Devine, James wrote:
Michael Perelman wrote:I meant that the Dems. will disintegrate if
I have been looking over an interesting article
Cowie, Jefferson. 2002. Nixon's Class Struggle: Strategic
Formulations of the New-Right Worker. Labor History (August).
You can read it on line
http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m0348/3_43/91201898/p1/article.jhtml?term=
It suggests that Nixon was
A friend sent me this interview with George Lakoff, which goes towards
answering your question, Michael.
Inside the Frame
http://www.alternet.org/print.html?StoryID=17574
Inside
the Frame
BuzzFlash
January 15, 2004
Viewed
on January 16, 2004
George Lakoff,
Lakoff's framing is very important. We don't know how to do it -- at
least I have not figured out how.
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
- Original Message -
From: Eugene Coyle [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A friend sent me this interview with George Lakoff, which goes towards
answering your question, Michael.
Inside the Frame
http://www.alternet.org/print.html?StoryID=17574
Inside the Frame
BuzzFlash
January 15, 2004
Michael wrote:
Lakoff's framing is very important. We don't know how to do it -- at
least I have not figured out how.
But it's the simplest thing in the world--always has been. Just
establish virtually monopoly control over all the means of
mass communication. Good luck. :-)
25 matches
Mail list logo
