From gimenez@csf.Colorado.EDU Thu Jun 4 10:25:38 1998 Received: from localhost (gimenez@localhost) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with SMTP id KAA24262; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 10:25:31 -0600 (MDT) Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 10:25:31 -0600 (MDT) From: Martha Gimenez To: ppn@csf.Colorado.EDU, PSN@CSF.COLORADO.EDU Subject: Class and Mortality Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Richard Sennett wrote years ago about "the hidden injuries of class" meaning, if I recall correctly, the psychological effects of being working class. Class location produces other hidden injuries which, according to an article published yesterday in the Journal of the American Medical Association, contribute to explain the higher death rate among the poor. The poor have a death rate about three times higher than other groups and about 13 percent of this difference is accounted for by unhealthy habits such as lack of exercise, smoking, excessive drinking and overeating. Most of that difference is accounted for by "lack of medical care, the stress of poverty, dangerous jobs and polluted homes and neighborhoods." The author concludes that even if the poor were to adopt healthier behavior patterns their higher death rates would remain. Sociologically, this is a very interesting albeit distressing instance of structural determination. These days it is the fashion to "privilege" agency over structure, thus mirroring the voluntarism and individualism prevalent in the culture. But some social phenomena are irreducible to microfoundations and, while healthier habits might add years to the lives of some individuals, the fate of the poor as reflected in the death rate will remain unchanged in the absence of structural change. in solidarity, Martha ****************** Martha E. Gimenez Department of Sociology University of Colorado at Boulder http://csf.colorado.edu/gimenez/ From Nan.Hildreth@Mcione.com Thu Jun 4 11:07:50 1998 Received: from pm02sm.pmm.mci.net (pm02sm.pmm.mci.net [208.159.126.151]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with ESMTP id LAA27264 for ; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 11:07:49 -0600 (MDT) Received: from acciinc. (usr41-dialup27.mix2.Atlanta.mci.net) by PM02SM.PMM.MCI.NET (PMDF V5.1-10 #27034) with SMTP id <0EU100K3XE8GYT@PM02SM.PMM.MCI.NET> for ppn@csf.colorado.edu; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 17:07:45 +0000 (GMT) Date: Thu, 04 Jun 1998 11:51:53 -0500 From: Nan Hildreth Subject: Class and Mortality X-Sender: 10ebt9o4ablg@mail65.MCIONE.com To: ppn@csf.colorado.edu Message-id: <3.0.1.32.19980604115153.006a5488@mail65.MCIONE.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I am having a long discussion with some population people on an email list who would focus on US population, specifically US immigration, and deny the impact of growing US consumption on global consumption growth. And the relationship between global instability and population growth. Has anyone got pointers for me? Does economic insecurity affect people's choices about having children? Are human rights equivalent to environmental concerns? Nan Hildreth Nan.Hildreth@MciOne.com Houston Population/Sustainability Contact In 1992, "When ...Ted Turner funded a competition to find a fictional work demonstrating a plan for sustainability, ten thousand manuscripts poured in. And yet, reports Turner, "we did not have one plausible treatise on how we could get to a sustainable, peaceful future."' (Chellis Glendinning's, "My Name is Chellis and I'm in recovery from Western Civilization.", 1994, p 206) Also in 1992, Donella advised us to come up with a positive vision of the sustainability transformation (Beyond the Limits). From gimenez@csf.Colorado.EDU Thu Jun 4 17:33:25 1998 Received: from localhost (gimenez@localhost) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with SMTP id RAA20533; Thu, 4 Jun 1998 17:33:18 -0600 (MDT) Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 17:33:18 -0600 (MDT) From: Martha Gimenez Reply-To: Martha Gimenez To: Nan Hildreth cc: PROGRESSIVE POPULATION NETWORK Subject: Re: Class and Mortality In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19980604115153.006a5488@mail65.MCIONE.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII These are interesting questions but too broad to elicit a solid response. U.S. consumption, as well as the consumption of all advanced capitalist countries undoubtedly affect consumption patterns in other nations. The interesting issue to me is the identification of the specific links between overconsumption in one country and underconsumption in others, but right now I cannot think of any specific recent studies. Now the issue of global instability and population growth is a different matter - it reminds of the alarmist literature of the late 1960s and early 1970s when Ehrlich's Population Bomb book was published and Barclay and Reynolds wrote their fascinating study of the Population Establishment. And Rius, the Mexican cartoonist and humorist author of books such as Marx for Beginners, Cuba for Beginners wrote Uncle Sam and his Population bomb. An article published in a recent issue of The Atlantic makes a good case for rejecting population bomb arguments while calling our attention to qualitative changes in the earth brought about by the normal functioning of the economy and current forms of resource utilization. In his view, it is not so much population growth in itself that will cause perhaps unsurmountable problems, but the unprecedented increase in the consumption of resources that will accompany it with their unavoidable effects upon the earth and its atmosphere. Solving the problem will require more than lowering the birth rate, though that will help. I think you will find it useful and it is, perhaps, an article members of PPN might like to read and discuss. I would be interested in what others think of it: Bill McKibben, A Special Moment in History. The Fate of the planet will be determined in the next few decades, through our technological, lifestyle, and population choices. The Atlantic Monthly, May 1998. And about your question about the relationship between economic insecurity and people's reproductive choices.... well, that depends on the kind of insecurities and the social class of the people we have in mind. People who risk losing their social and economic status are likely to plan the timing and number of births or might opt for remaining childfree, while those at the bottom of the class structure with nothing to lose might not be so worried about family size. But these are, of course, well known generalizations. I am not very clear about your last question with respect to human rights and environmental concerns. I will just say that the U.N. declaration on Human Rights include, besides the usual political and civil rights, the right to work and right to a good life - broady defined so that one could extrapolate (or perhaps the UN is explicit about this) and argue that to live in a pollution free environment and to have clean water to drink and adequate housing are important human rights and that everyone who pollutes violates the human rights of the people affected by the poisoned environment. in solidarity, Martha E. Gimenez Department of Sociology Campus Box 327 University of Colorado at Boulder Boulder, Colorado 80309 Voice: 303-492-7080 Fax: 303-492-5105 ******************************************* On Thu, 4 Jun 1998, Nan Hildreth wrote: > I am having a long discussion with some population people on an email list > who would focus on US population, specifically US immigration, and deny the > impact of growing US consumption on global consumption growth. And the > relationship between global instability and population growth. Has anyone > got pointers for me? Does economic insecurity affect people's choices > about having children? Are human rights equivalent to environmental > concerns? > > > > > > Nan Hildreth Nan.Hildreth@MciOne.com > Houston Population/Sustainability Contact > > In 1992, "When ...Ted Turner funded a competition to find a fictional work > demonstrating a plan for sustainability, ten thousand manuscripts poured > in. And yet, reports Turner, "we did not have one plausible treatise on > how we could get to a sustainable, peaceful future."' (Chellis > Glendinning's, "My Name is Chellis and I'm in recovery from Western > Civilization.", 1994, p 206) Also in 1992, Donella advised us to come up > with a positive vision of the sustainability transformation (Beyond the > Limits). > From Nan.Hildreth@Mcione.com Fri Jun 5 10:54:29 1998 Received: from pm02sm.pmm.mci.net (pm02sm.pmm.mci.net [208.159.126.151]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with ESMTP id KAA04297 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 10:54:26 -0600 (MDT) Received: from acciinc. (usr22-dialup40.mix2.Atlanta.mci.net) by PM02SM.PMM.MCI.NET (PMDF V5.1-10 #27034) with SMTP id <0EU3008VS89UVC@PM02SM.PMM.MCI.NET> for ppn@csf.colorado.edu; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 16:54:06 +0000 (GMT) Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 11:48:09 -0500 From: Nan Hildreth Subject: P: help me learn about about imperialism X-Sender: 10ebt9o4ablg@mail65.MCIONE.com To: ppn@csf.colorado.edu Message-id: <3.0.1.32.19980605114809.0069b658@mail65.MCIONE.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" I need a hand here. The list I brainstorm and email with avoid this topic, deny it. I'm helping them look at it. But I don't know my topic. I bought Noam Chomsky's The Prosperous Few and the Restless Many (1994). Entranced, I read when I should have slept. Chomsky says we are being conquered like the Third World. "There's no doubt that imperial rule was a disaster. Take India. When the British first moved into Bengal, it was one of the richest places in the world. The first British merchant warriors described it as a paradise. That area is now Bangaldesh and Calcutta - the very symbols of despair and hopelessness." (p 54) "Japan fended it [European conquest a century ago] off almost entirely. That's why Japan is the one area of the Third World that developed. ... To strengthen the point, you need only look at the parts of Europe that were colonialized. Those parts - like Ireland - are much like the Third World." (p 60) I didn't realize that imperialism sucked the blood and life out of people. Why? Their culture being sat on smashes everything fine about it that's developed over many, many generations? ?Being systematically robbed takes the heart out of them? Loss of control and power over their lives? Lots more shit rolling downhill? And then the wonders of the conquerers coupled with their arrogance, their belief that they have the One Right Way to Live makes them question themselves? ?Domination leads to corruption of their traditional leaders? Which robs their culture of its integrity and balance? Of it's justice? Do the dominators hate the subsistence farmers for their independence? The wage earners in the city are more subservient? Do they hate us for the same reason? One Right Way to Live is Daniel Quinn talk (great stuff, his bestseller Ishmael has a gorilla describing human culture, good for a new student, clear, short and profound). It means that the top dogs have justified themselves by saying they are the only People. 10,000 years ago it was farmers. Later it was Eqyptians, Romans, Christians, scientists. The other cultures have no value. They are no better than animals. Do I sound on target? Nan Hildreth Nan.Hildreth@MciOne.com In the acclaimed Footprint of Nations Report, Wackenagel and Rees show us that we are the country with the largest ecological footprint. Not India with three times our population. Singapore, Hong Kong, the Netherlands, and Belgium equal or exceed us in excessive per person footprint above resources. But ours is the highest TOTAL footprint in excess of resources. That is, the excess per person times the number of people. We are 23% of the global impact although we are less than 5% of the globe's people. http://www.ecouncil.ac.cr/rio/focus/report/english/footprint/ranking.htm From cincotta@popact.org Fri Jun 5 11:17:59 1998 Received: from popact.org (popact.org [205.197.158.2]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with ESMTP id LAA06480 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 11:17:52 -0600 (MDT) Received: from cincotta.popact.org (dyna181.popact.org [205.197.158.181]) by popact.org (8.8.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA26376 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 13:21:50 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980605131920.0070d9f0@popact.org> X-Sender: cincotta@popact.org Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 13:19:21 -0500 To: ppn@csf.colorado.edu From: Richard Cincotta Subject: Re: Class and Mortality Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Martha (& PPN list): Speaking of the JAMA article, there was also an excellent article in Scientific American a few years back by Amartya Sen that featured similar (though less statistically-derived) conclusions. The article is entitled: "The Economics of Life and Death" (A. Sen, May 1993, Scientific American) (If I remember right) Sen proposed that international organizations evaluate quality of life by looking at current survivorship curves. It was a great article, and very revealing -- He compared male and female survivorship in Kerala, India with trends in African Americans. (African Americans came up short). From cincotta@popact.org Fri Jun 5 12:55:09 1998 Received: from popact.org (popact.org [205.197.158.2]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with ESMTP id MAA15591 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 12:55:06 -0600 (MDT) Received: from cincotta.popact.org (dyna181.popact.org [205.197.158.181]) by popact.org (8.8.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA27292 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:59:06 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <3.0.32.19980605145635.0070d9d4@popact.org> X-Sender: cincotta@popact.org Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1998 14:56:36 -0500 To: ppn@csf.colorado.edu From: Richard Cincotta Subject: Population, Poverty & Institutions Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Martha & PPNers, (For me) Sen's article (Economics of Life and Death, Sc. Amer., May 1993) and the recent article in JAMA demonstrate just how little people in poverty actually benefit from (or participate in) modern institutions -- whether the institution in question is the market, or government policies & programs. In fact, poverty seems less a function of income than a lack of access to institutions, particularly in developed countries. The conclusions of the JAMA research suggests to me that economics would benefit from a better theoretical understanding of how modern state-sanctioned institutions function -- and for whom. (Actually, the classical economists did this for a living). Two modern authors -- Douglass North and Irma Adelman -- have provided insight into how modern institutions (e.g., markets & trade, policies, educational and health programs, etc.) have evolved and function. [Now I'll blatantly promote my own work] Last year, Robert Engelman and I put together an occasional paper entitled: "Economics & Rapid Change: the Influence of Population Growth" (PAI Occasional Paper #3) which reviews an emerging consensus in economics (which we call the "institutional thesis") that population growth is mediated -- sometimes well, sometimes poorly -- by state-sanctioned institutions. We review that literature, beginning with the 1986 National Academy of Science study, and try to 'lay-out' the institutional thesis. In short, we assert that recognizing the role of institutions in adjusting to growth explains a great deal of the variation in economic response to population growth, both across nations and within them. -- The "institutional thesis," we find, makes substantial theoretical progress. But we make a case that economists need to look even more closely at institutions -- at how state-sanctioned institutions function, who makes the rules, and who benefits when societies undergo rapid change (increased needs for water, sanitation, schooling, food, etc.). When institutional adjustment occurs, we find the losers to often be the poor, the politically marginalized, many non-priced aspects of the environment (such as other species), people and assets beyond borders, and citizens of the future -- none of which are current "institutional participants," nor have they much to say about the rules of institutions (regardless of whether those institutions be market- or program-driven). In this model, it is no surprise that the poor and the environment are losers -- very often pitted against each other in lose-lose scenarios. Anyway, Occasional paper #3 can be obtained by requesting a copy from: Akia Talbot (atalbot@popact.org) or downloading the paper from the web: http://www.populationaction.org/why_pop/wealth.htm Richard P. Cincotta Senior Research Assoc. Population Action International 1120 19th St., NW Suite 550 Washington, DC 20036 USA (202)659-1833 x168 (202)293-1795 (fax) cincotta@popact.org See PAI Web site: http://www.populationaction.org/ From gimenez@csf.Colorado.EDU Fri Jun 5 14:40:12 1998 Received: from localhost (gimenez@localhost) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with SMTP id OAA22308 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:40:10 -0600 (MDT) Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1998 14:40:10 -0600 (MDT) From: Martha Gimenez To: ppn@csf.Colorado.EDU Subject: Re: P: help me learn about about imperialism (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Imperialism is one way of referring to the relationship between the advanced capitalist economies and the rest of the world. Dependency theory, World-Systems theory, Unequal exchange , structures of accumulation are other ways to analyze the same phenomenon: the economic growth and well being of some nations is predicated upon the poverty of others, with a few in between that achieve a modicum of unstable well being. To learn about this you need to do a great deal of reading - my suggestion is that you look into Immanuel Wallerstein's work on the World System. Also, Giovanni Arrighi's work is very clear and useful - The Long Twentieth Century comes to mind. Whatever theory you choose, the essential issue they all intend to explain is the intricate connection between the wealth of some nations and the poverty of others and just writing this reminded of a great book, William Murdoch, THE POVERTY OF NATIONS (john Hopkins U. Press) which examines this issue bringin in its implications for population very clearly. I used that text when I taught Population Control and Family Planning years ago. If this connection between economic growth in, to use World-systems concepts, the core countries and poverty in the periphery or poor countries is taken into account, then the problems that McKibben identified are compounded. To the extent that the connection between poverty and high fertility continues and world poverty remains systemically grounded and ineradicable, then it will be impossible to lower world population growth to levels that will make it possible to avoid ecological disasters. This is a hasty response to a complex question - it would be nice to hear and learn from others in PPN. Martha E. Gimenez Department of Sociology Campus Box 327 University of Colorado at Boulder Boulder, Colorado 80309 Voice: 303-492-7080 Fax: 303-492-5105 *********************************** On Fri, 5 Jun 1998, Nan Hildreth wrote: > I need a hand here. The list I brainstorm and email with avoid this topic, > deny it. I'm helping them look at it. But I don't know my topic. > > I bought Noam Chomsky's The Prosperous Few and the Restless Many (1994). > Entranced, I read when I should have slept. > > Chomsky says we are being conquered like the Third World. "There's no > doubt that imperial rule was a disaster. Take India. When the British > first moved into Bengal, it was one of the richest places in the world. > The first British merchant warriors described it as a paradise. That area > is now Bangaldesh and Calcutta - the very symbols of despair and > hopelessness." (p 54) > > "Japan fended it [European conquest a century ago] off almost entirely. > That's why Japan is the one area of the Third World that developed. ... To > strengthen the point, you need only look at the parts of Europe that were > colonialized. Those parts - like Ireland - are much like the Third World." > (p 60) > > I didn't realize that imperialism sucked the blood and life out of people. > Why? Their culture being sat on smashes everything fine about it that's > developed over many, many generations? ?Being systematically robbed > takes the heart out of them? Loss of control and power over their lives? > Lots more shit rolling downhill? And then the wonders of the conquerers > coupled with their arrogance, their belief that they have the One Right Way > to Live makes them question themselves? ?Domination leads to corruption of > their traditional leaders? Which robs their culture of its integrity and > balance? Of it's justice? > > Do the dominators hate the subsistence farmers for their independence? The > wage earners in the city are more subservient? Do they hate us for the > same reason? > > One Right Way to Live is Daniel Quinn talk (great stuff, his bestseller > Ishmael has a gorilla describing human culture, good for a new student, > clear, short and profound). It means that the top dogs have justified > themselves by saying they are the only People. 10,000 years ago it was > farmers. Later it was Eqyptians, Romans, Christians, scientists. The > other cultures have no value. They are no better than animals. > > Do I sound on target? > > > > Nan Hildreth Nan.Hildreth@MciOne.com > > In the acclaimed Footprint of Nations Report, > Wackenagel and Rees show us that we are the country > with the largest ecological footprint. Not India > with three times our population. Singapore, Hong Kong, > the Netherlands, and Belgium equal or exceed us in excessive > per person footprint above resources. But ours is > the highest TOTAL footprint in excess of resources. > That is, the excess per person times the number of people. > We are 23% of the global impact although we are less than 5% of the > globe's people. > http://www.ecouncil.ac.cr/rio/focus/report/english/footprint/ranking.htm > From Nan.Hildreth@Mcione.com Sat Jun 6 02:25:54 1998 Received: from pm04sm.pmm.mci.net (pm04sm.pmm.mci.net [208.159.126.153]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with ESMTP id CAA01338 for ; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 02:25:53 -0600 (MDT) Received: from acciinc. (usr17-dialup21.Atlanta.mci.net) by PM04SM.PMM.MCI.NET (PMDF V5.1-10 #27036) with SMTP id <0EU40087QFFZ3V@PM04SM.PMM.MCI.NET> for ppn@csf.colorado.edu; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 08:26:28 +0000 (GMT) Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 03:20:45 -0500 From: Nan Hildreth Subject: Economic globalization - a hot topic In-reply-to: X-Sender: 10ebt9o4ablg@mail65.MCIONE.com To: ppn@csf.colorado.edu Message-id: <3.0.1.32.19980606032045.006c8458@mail65.MCIONE.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" References: <3.0.1.32.19980605114809.0069b658@mail65.MCIONE.com> Dear Martha, Thanks for the book list. Economic globalization is a hot topic. Both Republican populist Pat Buchanan and liberal Noam Chomsky say that we are becoming a Third World country too! I explained MAI to a couple of Libertarian activists here. They were against it. My Sierra Club has been doing action alerts on it. Grassroots are very interested. We must teach a new vision besides the invisible hand. Besides Keynes' "fair is foul and foul is fair". Some way to take care of ourselves besides hoarding money and power. Or we will consume the world in short sighted self-interest. Can anyone put it in words for me? Nan Hildreth Nan.Hildreth@MciOne.com "Between 1972 and 1994, real wages of working Americans fell 19 percent, the longest slide in three centuries." (Patrick Buchanan, The Great Betrayal: How American Sovereignty and Social Justice Are Being Sacrificed to the Gods of the Global Economy, 1998, p 9) "... businesses, factories shutting down, workers being laid off, ... The price of free trade is painful, real, lasting - where is the benefit ....? As I began to write skeptically of free trade, I discovered that I was trampling on holy ground. For some conservatives, to question free-trade dogma is heresy punishable by excommunication." (ibid, page 18) From Nan.Hildreth@Mcione.com Sat Jun 6 02:26:01 1998 Received: from pm04sm.pmm.mci.net (pm04sm.pmm.mci.net [208.159.126.153]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with ESMTP id CAA01346 for ; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 02:25:59 -0600 (MDT) Received: from acciinc. (usr17-dialup21.Atlanta.mci.net) by PM04SM.PMM.MCI.NET (PMDF V5.1-10 #27036) with SMTP id <0EU40087QFFZ3V@PM04SM.PMM.MCI.NET> for ppn@csf.colorado.edu; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 08:26:36 +0000 (GMT) Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 03:18:39 -0500 From: Nan Hildreth Subject: A challenge to environmentalist intellectuals In-reply-to: <3.0.32.19980605145635.0070d9d4@popact.org> X-Sender: 10ebt9o4ablg@mail65.MCIONE.com To: ppn@csf.colorado.edu Message-id: <3.0.1.32.19980606031839.006e8378@mail65.MCIONE.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 02:56 PM 6/5/98 -0500, Richard wrote: > >When institutional adjustment occurs, we find the losers to often be the >poor, the politically marginalized, many non-priced aspects of the >environment (such as other species), people and assets beyond borders, and >citizens of the future -- none of which are current "institutional >participants," nor have they much to say about the rules of institutions >(regardless of whether those institutions be market- or program-driven). In >this model, it is no surprise that the poor and the environment are losers >-- very often pitted against each other in lose-lose scenarios. > Dear Richard and subscribers, I can see that I got a different point of view from folks here. I am a grass roots activist and wish I could just focus on it instead of doing so much hard thinking. My feedback will be my gift to you all. :-) Why do you talk about the poor? Why don't you talk about us? Can you say it more plainly? Have you envisioned the solutions as well as the problems? I expand on these below. First, why do you talk about the poor rather than us? I just returned from an activist training weekend. They told us that 70% of Texans consider themselves environmentalists. But Texas Sierrans are 1 of 1,000. Nationally we are only 2 of 1,000. Why? Because most Americans are "politically marginalized"? (For brevity, I cut out a fine quote about that from Chomsky.) Can you say it more plainly? At least in a conclusion? I have dishes to wash. At the activist training they said boil your campaign down to a simple story with a threat, a villain and a hero. Then boil it down even more to a slogan. True, there are no Devils but the ones in our heads. But .... My boss said that if you understand it, you can explain it simply. What you wrote makes a fine case against our focusing on reforming institutions by law. Instead for a new mentality and vision. "The world will not be saved by old minds with new programs but by new minds with no programs." As Daniel Quinn says http://www.bnetwork.com/welcome.html Last, have you tried to envision the solutions as well as the problems? We grass roots need you intellectuals to work on that. On how we might achieve sustainability. Folks have painted graffic pictures of the worst possible for a generation. We hear you! We belive you! But too often we feel overwhelmed by the horror of it. We need some positive visions to inspire us. Even worse, to help us from choosing pessimism and despair. Oh, am I tired of activists' despair! ;-D "... the world faces not a preordained future, but a choice." We believe that "The choice is between models." We must chose between the pessimistic model: "...the limits are real and close, and that there is not enough time, and that people cannot be moderate or responsible or compassionate. That model is self-fullfilling.... the result will also be collapse." And the optimistic one: "... the limits are real and close, and that there is just exactly enough time, with no time to waste. There is just exactly enough energy, enough material, enough money, enough environmental resilience, and enough human virtue to bring about a revolution to a better world." (Donella Meadows et al., Beyond the Limits, p 236). Our lack of a clear story of how to get out of this mess is the challenge of the decade. In 1992, "When ...Ted Turner funded a competition to find a fictional work demonstrating a plan for sustainability, ten thousand manuscripts poured in. And yet, reports Turner, "we did not have one plausible treatise on how we could get to a sustainable, peaceful future."' (Chellis Glendinning's, "My Name is Chellis and I'm in recovery from Western Civilization.", 1994, p 206) This great work before us needs your contribution. Because you're so good at ideas. Nan Hildreth Nan.Hildreth@MciOne.com Houston Sierra Population/Sustainability Contact 713-864-7108 "I am filled with humidity." --Texas House Speaker Gib Lewis From BOBB9199@SPLAVA.CC.PLATTSBURGH.EDU Sat Jun 6 05:31:30 1998 Received: from splava.cc.plattsburgh.edu (splava.cc.plattsburgh.edu [137.142.18.1]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with ESMTP id FAA08115 for ; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 05:31:28 -0600 (MDT) Received: from SPLAVA.CC.PLATTSBURGH.EDU by SPLAVA.CC.PLATTSBURGH.EDU (PMDF V5.0-8 #11626) id <01IXWORQXWXY001BQ4@SPLAVA.CC.PLATTSBURGH.EDU> for ppn@csf.colorado.edu; Sat, 06 Jun 1998 07:31:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 07:31:27 -0500 (EST) From: GLORIA BOBBIE Subject: economic globalization - a hot topic To: ppn@csf.colorado.edu Message-id: <01IXWORQXXW8001BQ4@SPLAVA.CC.PLATTSBURGH.EDU> X-VMS-To: IN%"ppn@csf.colorado.edu" MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Date sent: 6-JUN-1998 07:14:09 > Hi Nan and all, From: IN%"Nan.Hildreth@Mcione.com" 6-JUN-1998 04:27:49.46 >To: IN%"ppn@csf.colorado.edu" "PROGRESSIVE POPULATION NETWORK" >CC: >Subj: Economic globalization - a hot topic > >Dear Martha, > >Thanks for the book list. > >Economic globalization is a hot topic. Both Republican populist Pat >Buchanan and liberal Noam Chomsky say that we are becoming a Third World >country too! I explained MAI to a couple of Libertarian activists here. >They were against it. My Sierra Club has been doing action alerts on it. >Grassroots are very interested. > >We must teach a new vision besides the invisible hand. Besides Keynes' >"fair is foul and foul is fair". Some way to take care of ourselves >besides hoarding money and power. Or we will consume the world in short >sighted self-interest. > >Can anyone put it in words for me? I am an anthropologist (cultural/development) and will try to give a very brief summary of what our research has shown. > >Nan Hildreth Nan.Hildreth@MciOne.com > >"Between 1972 and 1994, real wages of working Americans fell 19 percent, >the longest slide in three centuries." (Patrick Buchanan, The Great >Betrayal: How American Sovereignty and Social Justice Are Being Sacrificed >to the Gods of the Global Economy, 1998, p 9) > >"... businesses, factories shutting down, workers being laid off, ... The >price of free trade is painful, real, lasting - where is the benefit ....? >As I began to write skeptically of free trade, I discovered that I was >trampling on holy ground. For some conservatives, to question free-trade >dogma is heresy punishable by excommunication." (ibid, page 18) In the business world profit is king....business students have the words "maximize profit" pounded into their heads. In capitalism there are three components which must work together smoothly for it to succeed as an economic ideology, the capitalist, the consumer and the laborer (everyone is a mixture of all three, but their is dominance which dictates the primary function). Keeping the above in mind, think of how business has progressed. Modern international business has its roots in colonialism and unfortunately has not gotten past the colonial mentality. We as a nation have forged into third world countries, not to develop them, but to extract profit from them. We pay the people in those countries sweatshop wages which does not actually increase their standard of living, justifying it with the reasoning that it is more than they had before. We are producing more goods, but are not creating markets in these countries, because the wages we pay, do not allow the producers of the goods to purchase them. On the homefront: It takes money to expand. The capitalist has little control over the price of materials as a rule, must satisfy the investor by showing a return or they will take their investments elsewhere so the only place to make cuts ends up being the laborers wage and benefits. We are all too familiar with the downsizing, layoffs, elimination of benefits, etc. which have occurred. However, the problem with this is, that it destroys markets at home as well and eventually too much is being produced and factories must close because they cannot sell t heir goods. Example: Nike....has a plant in anywhere USA...decides to move to Thailand where labor is cheap...closes the plant in USA laying off 1000 workers who can no longer purchase Nike shoes....moves to Thailand and pays slave wages so no market is created there.....what has happened is there are 1000 less people to purchase the shoes...multiply this by several plants and there is a surplus which cannot be sold...surpluses drive prices down and the company must downsize or close. It does not have to be this way, but until the mentality of the corporate world is change (perhaps by force via forms of worker rebellion like strikes, boycotts, etc) it will continue. There is proof that the current beliefs are false and that it does not have to be this way. If you think back to the attempts to get the minimum wage raised a few years ago, you will remember dire predictions of gloom and doom. Just the opposite happened. People had more money to spend and put into circulation in the economy, unemployment dropped rather than increasing as expected and GNP raised as was not expected. The sync between capitalist, laborer and consumer is off balance and must be righted if we are to reverse what is happening. This is a very abbreviated version but hopefully will help. Gloria From gimenez@csf.Colorado.EDU Sat Jun 6 08:38:54 1998 Received: from localhost (gimenez@localhost) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with SMTP id IAA13824; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 08:38:49 -0600 (MDT) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 08:38:49 -0600 (MDT) From: Martha Gimenez To: Richard Cincotta cc: PROGRESSIVE POPULATION NETWORK Subject: Re: Population, Poverty & Institutions In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19980605145635.0070d9d4@popact.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 5 Jun 1998, Richard Cincotta wrote: > Martha & PPNers, > > (For me) Sen's article (Economics of Life and Death, Sc. Amer., May 1993) > and the recent article in JAMA demonstrate just how little people in > poverty actually benefit from (or participate in) modern institutions -- > whether the institution in question is the market, or government policies & > programs. In fact, poverty seems less a function of income than a lack of > access to institutions, particularly in developed countries. What we call "poverty" is not simply an attribute of people but a systemically or structurally generated state of exclusion. The fact that this population does not benefit and does not participate is inherent in its location within the stratification system typical of class societies. > The conclusions of the JAMA research suggests to me that economics would > benefit from a better theoretical understanding of how modern > state-sanctioned institutions function -- and for whom. (Actually, the > classical economists did this for a living). Two modern authors -- Douglass > North and Irma Adelman -- have provided insight into how modern > institutions (e.g., markets & trade, policies, educational and health > programs, etc.) have evolved and function. For whom institutions work is a key question that prompts the consideration of the class relations underlying the functioning of institutions. Now that you mention Irma Adelman it reminded me of a book she and Cynthia Morris wrote in the early 1970s, ECONOMIC GROWTH AND SOCIAL EQUITY IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES.. The authors concluded, on the basis of empirical research, that unlike the prevailing wisdom among economists, economic growth was not beneficial to most people; on the contrary, the outcome of growth was greater inequality even in cases where it was accompanied by greater political participation. I will quote from their concluding chapter because their study is very relevant to understand the current effects of neo-liberalism and so-called "globalization:" "The basic premise of most national and international efforts to aid low income nations has been that sustained economic growth leads to higher real incomes for even the poorest segments of the population. ...(their) statistical analyses ... strongly suggest that this optimistic assumption has no basis in fact.... inequality of income tends to be the greatest where the exploitation of an abundance of natural resources coincides with a concentration of assets in the hands of expatriates ---[a polite way to refer to foreign capitalists and corporations or imperialism or dependency... etc.]---it tends to be the least where development strategies stress investment in human resources, greater diversity of manufacturing exports, and expansions of public sector output and investment. In short, our analysis supports the marxian view that economic structure, not level of income or rate of economic growth, is the basic determinant of patterns of income distribution." This is indeed such a an important analysis relevant to understand why it is possible for countries like Argentina, for example, to have high rates of economic growth and at the same time a middle class shrunk to a minimum, a large proportion of the population below the poverty level and double digit unemployment while the government, following the orders of the IMF and the World Bank, is reducing public sector investment to a minimum and aims to privatize everything, including social security, and "flexibilize labor contracts" (i.e., smashing the power of labor unions and reducing wages as much as possible). And Argentina is a rich (in natural resources) and underpopulated country, a bit smaller than India with less than 34 million inhabitants. If population were such an important variable in determining people's well being, Argentines should be relatively well off. But their income distribution and concentration of wealth has, in the last ten years, probably returned to 19th century levels. But the Adelman and Morris analysis is not only relevance to understand poverty and social inequality in developing countries but also to understand poverty and lack of equity in the developed countries. > [Now I'll blatantly promote my own work] Last year, Robert Engelman and I > put together an occasional paper entitled: "Economics & Rapid Change: the > Influence of Population Growth" (PAI Occasional Paper #3) which reviews an > emerging consensus in economics (which we call the "institutional thesis") > that population growth is mediated -- sometimes well, sometimes poorly -- > by state-sanctioned institutions. We review that literature, beginning > with the 1986 National Academy of Science study, and try to 'lay-out' the > institutional thesis. > > In short, we assert that recognizing the role of institutions in adjusting > to growth explains a great deal of the variation in economic response to > population growth, both across nations and within them. -- The > "institutional thesis," we find, makes substantial theoretical progress. > But we make a case that economists need to look even more closely at > institutions -- at how state-sanctioned institutions function, who makes > the rules, and who benefits when societies undergo rapid change (increased > needs for water, sanitation, schooling, food, etc.). I agree with the overall argument about the need for economists to acknowledge the significance of institutions but would stress also the need to examine the class relations and relative balance of power between classes underlying those institutions. For whom the institutions work is the KEY question. Thank you Richard for telling us about your work - I intend to download it and read it. Martha ****************** Martha E. Gimenez Department of Sociology University of Colorado at Boulder http://csf.colorado.edu/gimenez/ From gimenez@csf.Colorado.EDU Sat Jun 6 09:11:22 1998 Received: from localhost (gimenez@localhost) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with SMTP id JAA14340 for ; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 09:11:20 -0600 (MDT) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 09:11:19 -0600 (MDT) From: Martha Gimenez To: ppn@csf.Colorado.EDU Subject: John McMurtry,UNEQUAL FREEDOMS: THE GLOBAL MARKET AS AN ETHICAL SYSTEM (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by csf.Colorado.EDU id JAA14341 Dear PPNers, I generally do not approve of crosspostings unless they are clearly pertinent to whatever issues are being discussed at the time. Given the on going exchange of views on issues of equity, the importance of institutions to understand the outcome of economic processes, imperialism, the market, etc., I concluded it was appropriate to forward this book review. Martha ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1998 06:18:36 -0500 From: "W. Robert Needham" To: WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK Subject: John McMurtry,UNEQUAL FREEDOMS: THE GLOBAL MARKET AS AN ETHICAL SYSTEM Finally published. This book has it all. Destined to be a classic RE: NEW BOOK - May, 1998 by the author of "The MAI: The Plan to Replace Responsible Government" John McMurtry, UNEQUAL FREEDOMS: THE GLOBAL MARKET AS AN ETHICAL SYSTEM A complete guide to the theory and practice of the global market, with direct applicability to everyday life. Table of Contents below. Order from Garamond@web.net ISBN 1-55193-003-X Cdn.$24.95. "A devastating critique of market doctrine." - Gordon Laxer, University of Alberta "A brilliant, elegantly written exposé." - Harry Glasbeek, Osgoode Hall Law School "Some of the most exhilarating philosophy I have ever read." - G.A. Cohen, All Souls, Oxford University "Lays bare the foundations of a new economics ... bids well to become a classic." - William Krehm, Committee on Monetary and Economic Reform John McMurtry covers a broad range of important thinkers and major themes, from John Locke, Adam Smith, David Ricardo and Karl Marx to Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman, Robert Reich and the liberal contractarians; from human needs, national debts and environmental crises to issues of the global information economy and consumerism vs. citizenship. A path-breaking work, this book is essential reading for anyone attempting to come to grips with the crises of the contemporary world and the common ground of their solution. This book has been tested to ensure that every subsection can be taught or read as an independent debate site or explanatory critique, and at any level of instruction or understanding from first-year to PhD. At the same time, its 70 subsections connect together into a definitive, systematic deconstruction of the dominant paradigm of our epoch, and set out the clear coordinates of an alternative economics structured to serve rather than to consume and exploit human and environmental life-hosts. Student reasoning and analytic abilities have been shown to advance dramatically by the challenge of understanding the theoretical, practical and value premises and arguments underlying the contemporary world system, and its domination of social and ecological life-organization across the planet. An ideal textbook or sourcebook for any course in the humanities, social sciences, interdisciplinary or environmental studies. Courses and course topics in which this book have been or could be used as a primary or secondary text include social and political issues, ethics, world politics, value theory, international political economy, economic history, contemporary educational theory, cultural studies, international development, environmental studies, global ideologies, media and communications theory, labour history, structural social work, law and justice, theology and society, women and gender studies, sociology of politics, philosophy of the environment, Canadian studies, international relations and trade, peace and conflict studies, and informal logic. TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword Introduction: An Overview Understanding How We Live: Recognizing Value Programs Distinguishing between Representation and Reality Part One: Behind the Invisible Hand The Problem: A Question of Freedom The Pursuit of Freedom: An Irony of History The Postmodern Response The Freedom of No Alternative The Pursuit of Freedom The Founders of the Theory and Their Revisionists: From John Locke and Adam Smith to "Value-Free Economics" The Moral System of a Market Exchange Individual Freedom and the Neutral Market State: Are These Coherent Norms? The Case of Friedrich Hayek The Market as God The Problem of Evil The Regulating Principles of True Belief The Confusion of Moral Commandments and Physical Laws since Ricardo >From the Market System to the Cosmic Order Punishments for Disobedience to Market Laws The Underlying Principles of the Market Theology The Place of Free Will in the Market Theodicy Robert Reich's Conversion The Doctrine of Infallibility The Invisible Hand Revisited Part II: Market Theory and Practice: Arguments Pro and Con Freedom, Private Property, and Money: From John Locke to the New World Order John Locke on the Right to Private Property The Problem of Private Property In Slaves How Do We Distinguish Buying Slaves from Buying Labour? The Free Contract Solution The Problem of the Propertyless Unemployed Justifications for Private Property in Money without Limit The Trickle-Down Theory Where the Rich Refuse Contract Private Property for and against Life-Interests Abstraction as Disguise for Special Interest Do Property Rights Have Property Obligations? Money Investment and Community Fetters The New Crusade for Freedom Private Profit, Competition, and the Social Good Adam Smith's Moral Revolution I Am Rational, Therefore I Self-Maximize Dehumanizing Adam Smith The Corporate Person The New Global Market Sovereign The Money Ground of Value The Logic of Comparative Advantage The Homogenization of Nations in the World Market The Free Market and Democracy Freedom of the Consumer - If You Can Pay The Question of Need Consumer Sovereignty or Infantile Demand? The Truth of Consumer Choice Freedom of the Producer or the Non-Producer? The Knowledge-Based Economy Six Ways in which the Knowledge-Based Economy Is Structured against Knowing the Truth Education and the Market Model Freedom of the Press - for Those Who Own One The Invisible Curtain of the Media The Grammar of Censorship The Market Metaphysic: Rallying Cries and True Meanings Getting the State off Our Backs Removing Barriers to Trade No Free Lunches Part III: Planetary Health, the Global Market, and the Civil Commons The Decoupling of Capital from Civil and Environmental Life Freeing Capital from Society: The Function of Free Trade Freeing Corporations from Workers' Demands Freeing Corporations from Governments Rootless Investors and the Age of Disposable Life Seeing through the Rich to the Value Program The Mutations of the Profit System and Their Cure >From the Life-Code of Value to the Logic of the World-System Crisis Sacrificing Life to the Money-Sequence Towards a Cure: Relinking Banks to the Public that Charters and Funds Them Money Creation and Public Accountability The Economics of Life and Death Growth, Development, and the Mutations of the Money-Sequence The Pathologization of the Money-Sequence: From Means of Life to Means of Life Destruction Banks for and against the Public Interest: The Market Lessons of the Asian Tigers Pension and Mutual Funds: A Hidden Market Keel Taxing Money-Demand: The Unseen Principle of Justice Beyond the Mega-Machine to the Civil Commons Confronting the Death Spiral of the System The Life-Ground of the Civil Commons The Civil Commons and the State The Civil Commons and Real Capital Conclusion: The Way Ahead Index »«»« »« »« »« »« »« »« »« »« »« »« »« »« »« »« »« »« »« »« »« »« »« »« »« W. Robert Needham Director, Canadian Studies Program St. Paul's United College University of Waterloo Waterloo Ontario N2L 3G5 http://arts.uwaterloo.ca/ECON/needham.html From Nan.Hildreth@Mcione.com Sat Jun 6 17:23:29 1998 Received: from pm04sm.pmm.mci.net (pm04sm.pmm.mci.net [208.159.126.153]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with ESMTP id RAA29523 for ; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 17:23:27 -0600 (MDT) Received: from acciinc. (usr22-dialup60.mix2.Atlanta.mci.net) by PM04SM.PMM.MCI.NET (PMDF V5.1-10 #27036) with SMTP id <0EU500IZ2L0AN3@PM04SM.PMM.MCI.NET> for ppn@csf.colorado.edu; Sat, 6 Jun 1998 23:24:13 +0000 (GMT) Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 13:30:45 -0500 From: Nan Hildreth Subject: re: globalization - a hot topic In-reply-to: <01IXWORQXXW8001BQ4@SPLAVA.CC.PLATTSBURGH.EDU> X-Sender: 10ebt9o4ablg@mail65.MCIONE.com To: ppn@csf.colorado.edu Message-id: <3.0.1.32.19980606133045.006de7b0@mail65.MCIONE.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Thank you, Gloria For your elucid summary. It helped. The problem with Sierra's longstanding population campaign is that we focus on numbers of people over there instead of mentality here. And focus on changing laws rather than minds. Sierra population leadership is trying to "bring us into the 90's" by expanding our view to include consumption and global trends. Alas, too many of our folks protest rather than learn something new. I am the new kid. I find promoting a new mentality and questioning consumerism among Houston grassroots much easier than good old family planning assistance. It interesting that our local Libertarian activists find common cause with us on our city sprawl campaigns. At 07:31 AM 6/6/98 -0500, Gloria wrote: > >In capitalism there are three >components which must work together smoothly for it to succeed as an >economic ideology, the capitalist, the consumer and the laborer > >It does not have to be this way, but until the mentality of the corporate >world is change (perhaps by force via forms of worker rebellion like >strikes, boycotts, etc) it will continue. A new awareness is emerging by much patient talk. France turned down MAI because of a "threat to its culture" Pat Buchanan is teaching. Third World Network, an organization of Third World leaders reports officials are speaking out. Http://www.southbound.com.my/souths/twn/twn.htm For example, the Prime Minister of Malaysia Dr Mahathir Mohamed, in his speech in 1996 said "...developed countries interpret globalization as the breakdown of boundaries as barriers to economic exploitation." But the developing countries find that they are "totally exposed and unable to protect themselves.... the demise of small companies ... loss of the nominal independence they have ... death and destruction to many people" Perhaps even worse than the Cold War. The Prime Minister urged the "weak and poor to appreciate this possiblity and to fight 'tooth and nail' against it. Enlightened capitalists/management are watching the video, MindWalk, available at some Blockbuster. In elegant scientific terms, it talks about how to think differently and take responsibility. Also available from, to buy ($17) or rent ($4.50) http://movie.reel.com/content/moviepage.asp?MMID=2242 I am passing a copy around. Four of the five universities in Houston has had a conference on sustainability in 1998. Mostly for businessmen. For us consumers and laborers - some ask us if we are killing ourselves with overwork. http://www.pbs.org/affluenza/escape Most PBS will show Escape from Affluenza on July 7, 9 pm Eastern. It is the sequel to Affluenza which most will air again too. Check with your local channel. I am alerting friends to catch the show. Also check out http://www.newdream.org/main/index.html#puzzle > >The sync between capitalist, laborer and consumer is off balance and must >be righted if we are to reverse what is happening. This is a very >abbreviated version but hopefully will help. > One approach would be to ask that we all work together taking responsibility for our future. Protest less and teach more. Nan Hildreth Nan.Hildreth@MciOne.com Houston Sierra Population Contact Leadership is a hero's journey. The journey is not into a physical wilderness, it's a journey into the depths of one's own being. In this place, the hero (leader) is required to leave his or her ego behind and will be tested again and again until that task is done. "... where we had thought to slay another, we shall slay ourselves; where we had thought to travel outward, we shall come to the center of our own existence; where we had thought to be alone, we shall be with all the world." From fgbart@nwrain.com Sun Jun 7 11:01:39 1998 Received: from tacoma.nwrain.net (tacoma.nwrain.net [205.134.220.9]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with SMTP id LAA20023 for ; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 11:01:37 -0600 (MDT) Received: by tacoma.nwrain.net (Smail-3.2.0.91 1997-Jan-14 #1) id ; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 10:01:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 10:01:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: fgbart@tacoma.nwrain.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: PPN@csf.colorado.edu From: Francis Bartlett Subject: Re:McKibben's article Remarks on Population: This is my first venture into the internet fray of Population. First I believe that McKibben has laid out as clearly as anyone some of the most significant aspects of the problem and it should be read by all interested in this huge problem. I would like to go back to the beginnings of civilization 10,000 years ago since most of the mayhem man has done to the world has occurred since then. That event separated man from his synergistic relation with the natural world and placed him in one of man's own making, a process that has grown ever since and mostly under severe conditions of ignorance about both himself and the world he populated. In addition the ingredients of the population problem began to have an effect then. Ever since then this majestic life force, the basis of all life on earth. has come under man's tinkering and those few who expressed concern about it got little attention - Malthus et al. So it has taken 10,000 years to bring us to a population approaching 6 billion people and in its grand world-wide sweep we feeble humans nibble around the edges of it as it continues to jeopardize our own future. I cannot escape thinking that western culture (Christian) has the major role in creating the population problem. Chistianity is practiced by more people that Islam, number two, while the other religions have not been so aggressive in "colonizing" (converting?) the world. These powerful forces seldom seem to take a leading role in population control and as a matter of fact I believe they have been major contributors to it. Until religions can accept the ideas of ecology and evolution a major player in the game of population control is on the sidelines.--- At this long last time, we humans have learned much about ourselves and the natural world, enough to realize that things have not improved much from a long range point of view at least in the last half of this century. Capitalist world economies have created the conditions that westerners enjoy today, a small portion of the population supported at the expense of the rest. Capitalism has proven more capable than communism but yet the ones at the top of the pyramid dominate the rest of the world and always to their advantage, for governments, set up by the high enders always favor themselves. As yet humanity has been unable to develop a better way of organizing itself to provide more equitable conditions for the whole world. It is a daunting proposition to even envisage how that might evolve. This line of argument brings me to the point of wondering what on earth we smart homo Sapiens did for the 90,000 plus or minus thousand years we existed before civilization. Recent climate research points out that the climate during those millennia was very much different from that which Civilzation has enjoyed. Could it be that to keep a lid on human genius forces outside those of the immediate world were needed? With the severe climate changes during that lengthy period, providing food and shelter under widely varying conditions would keep humans from getting too fussed up about whether a leader was playing hokey pokey with an associate or not. There is no question that I have touched on huge aspects of the population problem that individuals may be unwilling to tackle. Yet the that population problem is not one that lends itself to the thinking involved with quarterly reports of enterprise. The pathetic concerns about immigration by Americans and the results of Ted Turner's competition indicate how ready in this "great" nation, we are to seriously confront the population problem and all the ancillary activities contributing to it. I believe that our educatioal system is almost completely missing the boat when it comes to informing the populace about what the population problem really amount to. I'm afraid that all of us are so wrapped up in our cultures that to see a path to change such deep seated conduct goes well beyond any culture's ability to affect how many children will be born tomorrow, next week, next month, next year, next decade. I hope you will read this letter and give your opinions about its content. Francis G. Bartlett From gimenez@csf.Colorado.EDU Sun Jun 7 14:11:19 1998 Received: from localhost (gimenez@localhost) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with SMTP id OAA28561 for ; Sun, 7 Jun 1998 14:11:17 -0600 (MDT) Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1998 14:11:17 -0600 (MDT) From: Martha Gimenez To: ppn@csf.Colorado.EDU Subject: Anniversary of Malthus' Essay On Population Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII A friend reminded me that today is the 200th anniversary of the publication of Malthus' famous (or infamous :) Essay on Population. I was a graduate student when I first read Malthus and found his views outrageous. So I proceeded to write a paper about it, "The Population Issue: Marx vs. Malthus" (published in Den Ny Verden in 1973); those of you interested in population theory can find it in http://csf.colorado.edu/authors/Gimenez.Martha/ That's a page with several of my published and unpublished work. I would be interested in your views of Malthus' principle of population and its relevance for understanding contemporary population issues. Perhaps we can commemorate the anniversary of the publication of this influencial text with a good discussion we can keep in PPN's archives to be used by those teaching courses on population theory and/or policies. Martha ***************** Martha E. Gimenez Department of Sociology University of Colorado at Boulder http://csf.colorado.edu/gimenez/ From gimenez@csf.Colorado.EDU Mon Jun 8 10:56:23 1998 Received: from localhost (gimenez@localhost) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with SMTP id KAA08595; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 10:56:20 -0600 (MDT) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 10:56:20 -0600 (MDT) From: Martha Gimenez Reply-To: Martha Gimenez To: Francis Bartlett cc: PROGRESSIVE POPULATION NETWORK Subject: Re:McKibben's article In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sun, 7 Jun 1998, Francis Bartlett wrote: > Remarks on Population: > > This is my first venture into the internet fray of Population. First I > believe that McKibben has laid out as clearly as anyone some of the most > significant aspects of the problem and it should be read by all interested > in this huge problem. snip snip I deleted the part of your message about going back to 10000 yrs because I am not sure of the usefulness of positing the existence of a "population problem" having its roots in the dawn of human civilization. > I cannot escape thinking that western culture (Christian) has the major > role in creating the population problem. Chistianity is practiced by more > people that Islam, number two, while the other religions have not been so > aggressive in "colonizing" (converting?) the world. These powerful forces > seldom seem to take a leading role in population control and as a matter of > fact I believe they have been major contributors to it. Until religions can > accept the ideas of ecology and evolution a major player in the game of > population control is on the sidelines.--- At this long last time, we > humans have learned much about ourselves and the natural world, enough to > realize that things have not improved much from a long range point of view > at least in the last half of this century. First of all, when we talk about a "population problem" we must be clear about what that expression means. What problem? From whose standpoint? Where is it? does it make sense to speak of a world population problem? Why? It cannot be taken for granted that there is total agreement about the existence of a "population problem." Second, it is easy to blame religions and, by implication, human agency in the creation of this "problem." It is easier to blame individuals or institutions such as religions that affect individuals' motivations and behavior, than to examine the more complex issues of the historically specific conditions and social relations that produce whatever it is we don't like and call "population problem." > Capitalist world economies have created the conditions that westerners > enjoy today, a small portion of the population supported at the expense of > the rest. Capitalism has proven more capable than communism but yet the > ones at the top of the pyramid dominate the rest of the world and always to > their advantage, for governments, set up by the high enders always favor > themselves. As yet humanity has been unable to develop a better way of > organizing itself to provide more equitable conditions for the whole world. > It is a daunting proposition to even envisage how that might evolve. If the capitalist organization of production has something to do with the emergence of conditions we call "population problem," then the task ahead is to theorize the connections between capitalism and population, rather than focus on abstract general or "natural" causes like Malthus did. I have written about these issues and will make available what I have in my web page in the near future. this is all I have to say - I find it difficult and unproductive to ponder about these matters in the abstract, general terms in which you prefer to do it. But perhaps other members of PPN might have other reactions to your message. Martha E. Gimenez Department of Sociology University of Colorado at Boulder http://csf.colorado.edu/gimenez/ ************************************ From mgarcia@marine.unc.edu Wed Jun 10 20:52:59 1998 Received: from poseidon.marine.unc.edu (poseidon.marine.unc.edu [152.2.92.1]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with ESMTP id UAA02703 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 20:52:56 -0600 (MDT) Received: from mgarcia1 (s020h015.dialup.unc.edu [204.84.241.79]) by poseidon.marine.unc.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA25396 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 22:52:53 -0400 (EDT) Reply-To: From: "Marco A. Garcia" To: Subject: RE: Class and Mortality Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 22:43:25 -0400 Message-ID: <000101bd94e2$b4e41c50$4ff154cc@mgarcia1.dyn.ml.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Martha, as far as I understand (in my limited biologist view of societal processes) class structure can be an important determinant of fertility rates, especially in developing countries. In Developed Country societies, childbearing constitutes a consumptive activity, an economic liability. I suspect many factors contribute to this situation; weak familiar kin and community networks, commoditized goods and services, parents do not generally expect economic returns from their children and the individualism of the capitalist culture that has resulted in a materialist and rational attitude towards children. In Third World countries, which social security systems have been reduced to nil as a result of economic adjustment measures, children are the only source of support for the poor elder and disabled that are unable to participate in the labor force. Also, in contrast to the norm in middle-class Western cultures, Third World children start providing for the family at very early ages. According to Caldwell (1982) by his 15th birthday, a Javanese boy has repaid the entire investment his family made in him. In Bangladesh, a son provides labor and income by the age of 6 and by the age of 12 he contributes more that he consumes. Infant mortality is another important issue that has a clear correlation with high fertility and class structure. The higher infant mortalities are observed in the poorest countries, the same that have the higher fertility rates. In the less developed regions, the average infant mortality rate is 69 per 1,000 births. This is a sharp contrast with the 1.9 child deaths per 1,000 births observed in Developed Countries. [Infant mortality statistics account only for children that die during the first year, but many more children die during later years due to lack of health care, nutrition and other factors associated with poverty] Among poor women, childbearing also represents the only available means to social and family empowerment. High fertility rates among the bottom of the class structure are not the result of ignorance, apathy or lack of access to contraceptives, as is usually depicted by white middle-class westerners. High fertility rates, are in fact a rational, well-founded economic/survival strategy for the poor. Marco A. Garcia Department of Marine Sciences, UNC-Chapel Hill Phone: (919) 918-7713 e-mail: mgarcia@marine.unc.edu www: http://mgarcia1.dyn.ml.org From gimenez@csf.Colorado.EDU Thu Jun 11 08:55:22 1998 Received: from localhost (gimenez@localhost) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with SMTP id IAA25674; Thu, 11 Jun 1998 08:55:18 -0600 (MDT) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1998 08:55:17 -0600 (MDT) From: Martha Gimenez To: "Marco A. Garcia" cc: PROGRESSIVE POPULATION NETWORK Subject: RE: Class and Mortality In-Reply-To: <000101bd94e2$b4e41c50$4ff154cc@mgarcia1.dyn.ml.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Wed, 10 Jun 1998, Marco A. Garcia wrote: > Martha, > > as far as I understand (in my limited biologist view of societal processes) > class structure can be an important determinant of fertility rates, > especially in developing countries. I fully agree, though I would say it is just as important in the developed countries. > > In Developed Country societies, childbearing constitutes a consumptive > activity, an economic liability. I suspect many factors contribute to this > situation; weak familiar kin and community networks, commoditized goods and > services, parents do not generally expect economic returns from their > children and the individualism of the capitalist culture that has resulted > in a materialist and rational attitude towards children. > > In Third World countries, which social security systems have been reduced to > nil as a result of economic adjustment measures, children are the only > source of support for the poor elder and disabled that are unable to > participate in the labor force. Also, in contrast to the norm in > middle-class Western cultures, Third World children start providing for the > family at very early ages. According to Caldwell (1982) by his 15th > birthday, a Javanese boy has repaid the entire investment his family made in > him. In Bangladesh, a son provides labor and income by the age of 6 and by > the age of 12 he contributes more that he consumes. While it is the case that as capitalism penetrates all social relations and populations become proletarianized the content of "rational" fertility behavior changes so that it is as "rational" to have several children in the LDCs as it is to have 2, 1 or none in the DCs, in both settings class location and location within the strata into which classes are fragmented continues to affect fertility decisions. If we focus our analysis on the individual or the household as decision making units, then it would seem that indeed children become consumer goods in the DCs while they are wanted as sources of labor and/or income in the LDCs. But in both cases it is, in the last instance, class location and the balance of power between classes which sets the boundaries within which "rational" fertility decisions are made. And when the balance of class power changes, people might find out the hard way that their "rational"decisions become, in retrospect, "irrational." This is why, even in countries with social security and welfare systems it is possible to find a substantial proportion of elderly in poverty and near poverty. > > Infant mortality is another important issue that has a clear correlation > with high fertility and class structure. The higher infant mortalities are > observed in the poorest countries, the same that have the higher fertility > rates. In the less developed regions, the average infant mortality rate is > 69 per 1,000 births. This is a sharp contrast with the 1.9 child deaths per > 1,000 births observed in Developed Countries. [Infant mortality statistics > account only for children that die during the first year, but many more > children die during later years due to lack of health care, nutrition and > other factors associated with poverty] While infant mortality rates have been declining in the DCs, there are significant differences that remain based on class, race and ethnicity. I haven't taught population courses for a while but when I did, I remember that while infant mortality in the U.S. was less than 10 per 1000, infant mortality in the inner cities and among Native Americans was double digit and comparable to the infant mortality in some Central American countries. > > Among poor women, childbearing also represents the only available means to > social and family empowerment. That might be the case - but it is also often the product of incest and sexual abuse. I remember reading a relatively recent study that pointed out that the fathers of the children of teen-age mothers were adults, often relatives or friends of the family. > > High fertility rates among the bottom of the class structure are not the > result of ignorance, apathy or lack of access to contraceptives, as is > usually depicted by white middle-class westerners. High fertility rates, are > in fact a rational, well-founded economic/survival strategy for the poor. I think that while that might be the case among some women, we cannot generalize. Fertility rates are irreducible to only one micro foundation, be it rational survival strategy, adherence to religious or social norms, sexual abuse, etc. I think empirical research can discover different microfoundations in different settings. I appreciate your observations - despite minor disagreements, i consider, like you, that it is impossible to understand variations in fertility and, for that matter in all population processes without investigating the effects of social class and the changing balance of power between classes. Martha E. Gimenez Department of Sociology Campus Box 327 University of Colorado at Boulder Boulder, Colorado 80309 Voice: 303-492-7080 Fax: 303-492-5105 ***************************** > > > Marco A. Garcia > Department of Marine Sciences, UNC-Chapel Hill > Phone: (919) 918-7713 > e-mail: mgarcia@marine.unc.edu > www: http://mgarcia1.dyn.ml.org > From slayman@2nature.org Fri Jun 12 14:28:37 1998 Received: from 2nature.org (2nature.org [204.164.18.10]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with SMTP id OAA28056 for ; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 14:28:34 -0600 (MDT) Received: by 2nature.org(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.1 (569.2 2-6-1998)) id 85256621.0071273A ; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 16:35:56 -0400 X-Lotus-FromDomain: SECOND NATURE From: "Stephen Layman" To: PPN@csf.colorado.edu Message-ID: <85256621.00711D78.00@2nature.org> Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 16:35:53 -0400 Subject: Resources to support sustainability education Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline ** apologies for cross-postings ** Dear Colleague, A new, free-access website (www.2nature.org) -- maintained by a nonprofit organization called Second Nature -- helps education professionals link the interdisciplinary principles of environmental sustainability to their teaching and campus operations, through online resources such as: Vision :: information about "Education for Sustainability" (EFS) and its relationship to higher education; Courses :: interdisciplinary syllabi and reading lists, with instructor comments; Bulletin Board :: online message board for you and your colleagues to discuss sustainability education; EFS Profiles :: case studies of EFS activities at various schools; Methods :: innovative teaching techniques and real-world applications; Biblio :: bibliographic references for books, articles, videos and other materials; EFS Essays :: topical essays authored by leaders in the field; and Calendar of EFS Events :: upcoming sustainability activities. The website's content can only grow through your efforts. Through (www.2nature.org), you can exchange innovative curriculum with your colleagues, dialogue with professionals from around the world about sustainability education, and highlight your own activities. Second Nature is a Boston-based, national nonprofit organization working to help higher education prepare future professionals for the increasingly complex environmental and social challenges we face. The organization offers colleges and universities a range of programs, training sessions, one-on-one consulting and resources to make the integration of environmental sustainability thinking "second nature" to higher education. Please visit (www.2nature.org) and become part of the online learning community! ----------------------- Steve Layman Bolton Starfish Program Manager Second Nature, Inc. 44 Bromfield Street, Fifth Floor Boston, MA 02108-4909 USA tel: 617-292-7771 ext. 124 fax: 617-292-0150 e-mail: sbolton@2nature.org http://www.2nature.org From fgbart@nwrain.com Fri Jun 12 17:28:15 1998 Received: from tacoma.nwrain.net (tacoma.nwrain.net [205.134.220.9]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.4/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with SMTP id RAA07653 for ; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 17:28:13 -0600 (MDT) Received: by tacoma.nwrain.net (Smail-3.2.0.91 1997-Jan-14 #1) id ; Fri, 12 Jun 1998 16:26:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1998 16:28:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: fgbart@tacoma.nwrain.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: PPN@csf.colorado.edu From: Francis Bartlett Subject: Fwd: RE: A different approach > >To: gimenez@csf.colorado.edu >From: Francis Bartlett >Subject: RE: A different approach >Cc: >Bcc: >X-Attachments: > >Martha: > >This morning's news included an item concerning the successful attempt of >a gay couple, by two men, to have a baby girl, to say the least a bizarre >event in the light of human history. This was accomplished by fertilizing >a donated egg by one of the men and through the powers of a surrogate >mother who carried the egg to full term successfully. > >The point of this exercise in my view is another example of mankind's >inability to recognize his willing contribution to increasing the numbers >of people on this earth willy nilly against all natural constraints. This >is done without any thought about the finite character of earth and the >limitless ability of man to procreate. In no other realm of the natural >world can any specie in the whole kingdom live under the same conditions >and man seems unwilling to recognize any responsibility for keeping his >own actions within those same limits with his "intelligence". It seems >that here in America the "leader" of the world with all the capabilities >we have developed this is one area where we have been completely remiss >and set an unworthy example for everyone. > >Any serious effort to stem the rising tide of humanity can hardly prevail >if a society like this in America can support the thwarting of natural >constraints on procreation and in addition do little that is effective in >establishing a rationally based "taboo, of olden times, against large >families" across the breadth of the culture. The ramifications associated >with this society's acquiescence to two males having a child go beyond the >limits of human capabilities, The magnitude of this problem cannot be >underestimated and certainly begs for stretching the minds of men beyond >anything they have tackled previously. These matters border on the >transcedental and must be so recognized. > >Francis G. Bartlett > > From gimenez@csf.Colorado.EDU Tue Jun 16 09:04:46 1998 Received: from localhost (gimenez@localhost) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.5/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with SMTP id JAA28510; Tue, 16 Jun 1998 09:04:43 -0600 (MDT) Date: Tue, 16 Jun 1998 09:04:40 -0600 (MDT) From: Martha Gimenez To: Francis Bartlett cc: PROGRESSIVE POPULATION NETWORK Subject: Re: Fwd: RE: A different approach In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 12 Jun 1998, Francis Bartlett wrote: > >Martha: > > > >This morning's news included an item concerning the successful attempt of > >a gay couple, by two men, to have a baby girl, to say the least a bizarre > >event in the light of human history. This was accomplished by fertilizing > >a donated egg by one of the men and through the powers of a surrogate > >mother who carried the egg to full term successfully. > > > >The point of this exercise in my view is another example of mankind's > >inability to recognize his willing contribution to increasing the numbers > >of people on this earth willy nilly against all natural constraints. This I would say, instead, that this instance illustrates a) the strength of pronatalist ideologies in this society b) that these ideologies affect men and women whatever their sexual preference or orientation might be (lesbian couples also want children) c) that changes in the forces of reproduction (to use Marx's concept that sees technology embedded always in social relations) produce changes in the relations of reproduction and a separation between relations of procreation and social relations of reproduction. those of you interested in the theoretical analysis of these issues can retrieve my article "The Mode of Reproduction in Transition: A Marxist-Feminist Analysis of the Effects of Reproductive Technologies." published in GENDER & SOCIETY (Fall, 1991). > >is done without any thought about the finite character of earth and the > >limitless ability of man to procreate. In no other realm of the natural > >world can any specie in the whole kingdom live under the same conditions > >and man seems unwilling to recognize any responsibility for keeping his > >own actions within those same limits with his "intelligence". It seems > >that here in America the "leader" of the world with all the capabilities > >we have developed this is one area where we have been completely remiss > >and set an unworthy example for everyone.. Sociel science views about ourselves and the social world in which we live take time to become diffused in the consciousness of the average person so that most individual's motives do not include awareness of the social consequences of behavior. Furthermore, reproduction is bound up so tightly with identity and self-worth (this is why pronatalism is so difficult to challenge) and so many people lead lives of alienated labor and "quiet desperation" within which childbearing is perhaps the major source of self-realization and happiness that as long as these conditions prevail, pronatalism will continue to prevail also. > > > >Any serious effort to stem the rising tide of humanity can hardly prevail > >if a society like this in America can support the thwarting of natural > >constraints on procreation and in addition do little that is effective in > >establishing a rationally based "taboo, of olden times, against large > >families" across the breadth of the culture. The ramifications associated > >with this society's acquiescence to two males having a child go beyond the > >limits of human capabilities, The magnitude of this problem cannot be > >underestimated and certainly begs for stretching the minds of men beyond > >anything they have tackled previously. These matters border on the > >transcedental and must be so recognized. There are no "natural constraints" on population any longer except in the abstract sense. Humans live in the context of institutions and it is these institutions which shape the so-called constraints. To deal with population growth and understand population issues effectively we must engage in historically specific analyses rather than resorting to "natural" explanations. I wonder what other members of PPN think about these technologies and their social effects. Martha *************** Martha E. Gimenez Department of Sociology University of Colorado at Boulder http://csf.colorado.edu/gimenez/ ******************** From ohalpern@hsph.harvard.edu Fri Jun 19 08:52:18 1998 Received: from ackroyd.harvard.edu (ackroyd.harvard.edu [128.103.208.29]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.8.5/8.8.4/CNS-4.1p-nh) with ESMTP id IAA18891 for ; Fri, 19 Jun 1998 08:52:15 -0600 (MDT) Received: from hsph.harvard.edu (hsph.harvard.edu [128.103.75.21]) by ackroyd.harvard.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA27852 for ; Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:52:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from hsph.harvard.edu by hsph.harvard.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id KAA06326; Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:52:14 -0400 Message-ID: <358A7C65.BA6A6AEF@hsph.harvard.edu> Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 10:57:41 -0400 From: Orit Halpern MIME-Version: 1.0 To: PROGRESSIVE POPULATION NETWORK Subject: Announcing Recent Launch of On-line Global Reproductive Health Forum References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Dear Colleagues: I'm writing you to announce the recent launch of the Global Reproductive Health Forum (GRHF), an innovative Internet networking project based at the Harvard School of Public Health. The GRHF is a clearinghouse Website that provides women around the world with access to critical information about our health and bodies, in addition to serving as an electronic space where women can come together and voice their opinions in the global debate around reproductive health and rights. The GRHF at http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/Organizations/healthnet supports a number of easily accessible services including: - E-mail discussion groups - Electronic journals - On-line conferences In addition, GRHF provides a free gateway to an extensive archive of on-line information about: - Gender issues - Reproductive rights - HIV/AIDS - Sexually transmitted diseases - Abortion - Maternal health - Contraception - Population and family planning Unlike most on-line resources, GRHF specifically solicits participation by women, particularly from under served populations and developing countries. We are currently building regional Internet networks by partnering with grassroots women's organizations in South Asia, West Africa and Latin America, to get more women on-line and maximize their use of the Internet. Our South Asia project is currently on-line at http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/Organizations/healthnet/SAsia/forum.html. This Site is designed for use by grassroots organizations, activists, researchers, students, government organizations and others interested in the field of reproductive health. Your input and participation are invaluable to us. We encourage you to submit your articles and viewpoints, and to give us feedback, both on our main Website and on our regional project sites. If you would like more information on our project, please contact Ra’eda S. Al-Zu’bi, Project Coordinator, at ralzubi@hsph.harvard.edu. We look forward to hearing from you in the near future. Orit Halpern, Project Manager Global Reproductive Health Forum Harvard School of Public Health