- Original Message -
From: "Jim Devine" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Nathan wrote: ... when a people democratically support atrocities by their
-government, it is not just the leadership that bears responsibility but
-the people themselves.
this sounds as if you are
En relación a [PEN-L:2914] Re: Re: Yugoslavia to fSU and Chile,
el 10 Oct 00, a las 0:36, Nathan Newman dijo:
Contra many folks, though, I think the US's collective guilt has far
less to do with its particular military actions, some of which like
Kosovo and Haiti I can defend, but in its
It seems to be a constant with Anglo politics that
they will always kill you or rob you on the basis of some
"principle", as the Irishman George Bernard Shaw once pointed out...
And this is worse than robbing or killing you on the basis of no principle? --jks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems to be a constant with Anglo politics that
they will always kill you or rob you on the basis of some
"principle", as the Irishman George Bernard Shaw once pointed out...
And this is worse than robbing or killing you on the basis of no principle? --jks
Néstor wrote:
It seems to be a constant with Anglo politics that
they will always kill you or rob you on the basis of some
"principle", as the Irishman George Bernard Shaw once pointed out...
JKS wrote:
And this is worse than robbing or killing you on the basis of no
principle? --jks
In a message dated 10/8/00 6:01:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Then we shouldn't be sorry to see the nationalist thugs at the CIA, DOD,
NSA etc go too.Once we figure out how to get rid of them of course
Surely we will not. Though they mostly aren't
I was away for a couple of days, so I'm behind and I'm confused. I
thought Yeltsin used state power to bomb the Duma, and Pinochet used
the army to overthrow Allende. I could swear the special bodies of
Serb armed men essentially laid down their arms and gave in to the
throngs in the streets.
Actually, I agree that Milosevic was not so undemocratic compared to many
other regimes. He was a brutal murderer who promoted the use of rape as a
weapon and ethnic clensing as policy.
But the fact that he was able to do
so reflects not just his personal qualities but a rough reflection of
- Original Message -
From: "Louis Proyect" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
But the fact that he was able to do
so reflects not just his personal qualities but a rough reflection of the
Serbian democratic will, an unfortunate reflection on that population. And
that is one reason
icans deal with their collective
guilt?
Cheers, Ken Hanly
- Original Message -
From: Nathan Newman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 4:06 PM
Subject: [PEN-L:2895] Re: Re: Re: Yugoslavia to fSU and Chile
- Original Message -
From: "Louis Proyect&qu
I'm sorry to see Milosevich go.
In God's name, why? Don't *ever* be sorry to see nationalist thugs
go. Were you sorry to see Tudjman go? Were you sorry to see Mobutu
go? Were you sorry to see Galtieri go?
Brad DeLong
==
Then we shouldn't be sorry to see the nationalist thugs at
Michael,
I am sure there are. But what is the relevance in this case?
Paul
Date sent: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 18:22:42 -0700
From: Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:[PEN-L:2747] Re: Yugoslavia
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Send reply
I can't recall the case, but someone will remember. A compliant president
was elected who wanted to go against the parliament, but the US demanded that
the authority be given to the president. I suspect that the same will happen
in Yugoslavia.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael,
I am sure
En relación a [PEN-L:2748] Re: Re: Yugoslavia,
el 6 Oct 00, a las 20:26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] dijo:
Michael:
Paul, aren't there other examples about the US defending figure head
presidents vs. strong legislatures when it suited them?
Paul:
Michael,
I am sure there are. But what
I mistakenly erased Louis response to my post and his summary
of Estrin's position in his 1991article. I essentially agree with a lot
of what Estrin says, in particular about the failure to develop an
effective capital market. But that was the point of my arguement
that the 1975 move to
But whatever, I don't see how this provides any evidence for Louis'
bald statement that this proves the non-viability of market
socialism. It is the same as saying that the collapse of the Soviet
Union is proof in the non-viability of central planning and/or the non-
viability of socialism.
,
University of Manitoba.
Date sent: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 13:37:31 -0400
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Louis Proyect [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:[PEN-L:21957] Re: Re: Re: Re: Yugoslavia
Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
But whatever
Paul, thanks for the very informative post.
At 04:10 PM 7/17/00 -0500, you wrote:
Jim, in the case of Slovenia at least, unemployment did not rise during
the crisis as it remained around 2 per cent though this was in part due to
overemployment by enterprises.
right. Also, wasn't a lot of the
Jim, in the case of Slovenia at least, unemployment did not rise during
the crisis as it remained around 2 per cent though this was in part due to
overemployment by enterprises. Contrary to the prevailing neoclassical
orthodoxy (Ward-Vanek) workers were overly protective of fellow
workers
Debt Trap. Monthly Review Press, I think.
Michael,
What is the reference for that? Thanks, Steve
On Sun, 16 Jul 2000, Michael Perelman wrote:
Paul, what do you think of Cheryl Payer's analysis of Yugo.? She says that the
US encouraged self-management to split Yugo. from the USSR.
I am working by memory, but her work said that the U.S. encouraged Yugoslavia to
follow through with a self-management as a means of further differentiating itself
from the Soviet Union, worried that the two countries might develop a rapprochement.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael,
This is
21 matches
Mail list logo
