From BROWNH@CCSUA.CTSTATEU.EDU Thu Feb 1 09:34:34 1996 From: BROWNH@CCSUA.CTSTATEU.EDU Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 11:35:36 -0500 (EST) To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Subject: Help: directory design I am about to begin the development of an on-line e-mail directory for academics concerned with world history, and I need some help in its design. On what lists are such matters best discussed? I'd appreciate any suggestions you might have about its design or de- velopment. Haines Brown brownh@ccsua.ctstateu.edu Warping with ZOC (V2.11) From chriscd@jhu.edu Tue Feb 6 14:44:55 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I0WEIEF6EO8YH7OP@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Tue, 06 Feb 1996 16:39:05 -0500 (EST) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I0WEHQVY5C929ZZR@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Tue, 06 Feb 1996 16:38:29 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 1996 16:25:36 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: Fw: RE: Globalization's Challenge to Small States (reminder) Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English ------------------------------ From: "Randall W. Kindley" Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 03:37:42 -0500 To: INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY Subject: RE: Globalization's Challenge to Small States (reminder) [Just a reminder] Call for Papers Where: Society for the Advancement of Socio-Economics (SASE), Geneva Switzerland (sase@bootes.unm.edu) When: July 12-14, 1996 Panel Topic: Globalization as a Challenge to Small States Timelines: February 10,1996: Two-Page proposal March 1, 1996: Proposal Selection and Notification* June 15, 1996: Finished papers to mailed to panel participants. Respond to: Randall Kindley 5214 45th Ave. S. Minneapolis MN 55417-2334 Voice: (612) 721-6752 Fax: (612) 626-2242 e-mail: kindley@maroon.tc.umn.edu * A total of seven presenters and four alternates will be selected. An attempt will be made to balance selections among the three issue areas described below. Globalization and the Challenge to Small States: Small states are bellwethers of globalization. The ever faster exchange of resources, technology and information is making traditional institutions obsolete, opening formerly closed economies and sectors, and fostering devolution in governance. Our future is likely to be one in which relatively small political communities are integrated into a network of regional, continental and world political and economic associations. Even these will be fragmented by the uninhibited flow of information and capital among individuals and organizations. Today's Europe provides an example. Twenty-nine of the thirty-five non-CIS states west of the Bosporus have populations no larger than that of the Netherlands. All are becoming even more trade dependent, while information and electronic currency spill easily across their boundaries. The former Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia have dissolved. Cries for more autonomy ring out in Scotland and the Basque region. Economic irredentism (e.g., Alpa Adria) challenges traditional state control. The goal of this panel will be to assess the challenge of globalization in three areas: 1) concepts of unit, space and purpose in globalized small states 2) civic and institutional contexts in globalized small states, and 3) Policies, policy conflict and economic performance correlates in globalized small states. Papers to be presented will be chosen from these issue areas. All papers must demonstrate globalization's effect and must draw on comparisons across cases. Papers must also stress lessons applicable from research on small globalized states to other venues (e.g., large states, provinces and localities of large states or regions, etc.). Below are some possible topics in the three issue areas: I. Concepts of unit, space and purpose in globalized small states: What is globalization and how do differences in definition vary across sizes of states. How do these differences in conceptualizing globalization inform policy development? How are definitions of the nation-state being altered by globalization? What is the "focal" territorial community? That is what territorial community (world, continental, regional, national or local) is coming to be regarded as the group whose collective interests and identity should be maximized? Is there a new distribution or re-distribution of functions across the (territorial and functional) governance units; new or re-emergent conflicts across the units? Does globalization indeed foster the proliferation of governance units (e.g., decentralization). If so, does proliferation present coordination problems or are these more easily resolved as a result of enhanced information flows? Are non-territorial political communities a serious threat to territorial ones? What have become the purposive goals of communities and what values (jobs, welfare, income distribution, etc.) are to be maximized? What are the dimensions of small state security concerns? Has the possibility of conflict become greater with a larger number of state actors or can we expect a "peace of weakness" as a result of the lower political and military power of small sta tes? II. Civic and Institutional Contexts: Has globalization altered civil society? If so how? Have small state societies been more or less resilient in the face of change and why? Has social stability been altered by increased exposure and openness? If so how and are small states still the bastion of social stability? Why or why not? How have traditional postwar civic and economic governance institutions (e.g, social partnerships, etc.) been changed by globalization? How have these in turn changed or adapted to globalization? What are the contending non-territorial loyalties in small states? Are these greater or stronger in smaller state units than larger? Are new loyalties offsetting traditional identities (e.g., class, cultural group) in small states? III. Policies, Policy Conflict and Economic Performance Correlates: The literature of the seventies and eighties stressed the importance of class based institutional cooperation for economic success in small European states. How, and if so in what way, have the correlates of performance changed? Is there an "inoculation from openness" available to small states? Have there been and are there any instances of successful protectionism among the small states? Formerly, 'leading sectors' were the vanguards of small state economic success. Which sectors lead today? Is it possible anymore for small states to rely on leading sectors? Some argue that institutional cohesiveness, like that exhibited by Austria's Economic and Social Partnership, accounts for the ability of a small state to attract capital investment at reasonable rates, while others must pay higher rates for capit al (risk premia). Is this so? And how is globalization affecting the institutional pre-conditions for capital attraction? Are small states better economic managers and more flexible and adaptive than the large in making policy that attracts business and maintains a better business climate? What are some of the cornerstones of typical small state economic policy chang e in the face of globalization? Are small states better environments for "platforming" out to new and emergent investment and production markets? Supply-side corporatism is suggested as the new wave in competitiveness policy for small states. Has globalization caused 'institution building' paradigms of economic performance in small states to be overshadowed by human resource and organizatio nal development? What is the comparative state and practice of HRD/OD in small states? Does this new focus support or erode traditional governance institutions? Globalization presents contradictions in traditional small state economic governance: 1) capital may be easier to attract to very stable neo-corporatist states, but the preconditions for such arrangements are eroding, 2) globalization means that n ational governments are less capable of guaranteeing social pacts,but class organizations weakened by globalization are even less able to put together autonomous ones, 3) The EU means the erosion of monetary sovereignty as a tool in competitiveness policy , but so too are the non-monetary tools of competitiveness management, 4) competition among localities calls for greater national coordination at the same time that the center is loosing power. Given these contradictions in small state economic governance , what will the new or post-cold war settlement look like? ________________________________________________ End of Posting. Contact information at heading ________________________________________________ Prof. Chris Chase-Dunn Department of Sociology Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD. 21218 USA tel 410 516 7633 fax 410 516 7590 email chriscd@jhu.edu From chriscd@jhu.edu Fri Feb 9 13:07:37 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I10I5VPE8G8YCQJQ@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Fri, 09 Feb 1996 15:06:43 -0500 (EST) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I10I5D7WBK928X33@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Fri, 09 Feb 1996 15:06:15 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 1996 14:53:26 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: Fw: Re: Fw: RE: Globalization's Challenge to Small States (reminder) Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English ------------------------------ From: Mike Gurstein Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 10:43:37 -0500 To: chris chase-dunn Subject: Re: Fw: RE: Globalization's Challenge to Small States (reminder) I have taken the liberty of forwarding the attached message to a list I host on UNReform. If you or others are interested in subscribing to that list send a message To: UNReform@chatsubo.com Subject: subscribe (nothing in the message field). (others on your World System list might find the current discussion on the possible bankruptcy and dissolution of the UN of interest...) Regs Mike Gurstein Listowner UNReform From chriscd@jhu.edu Fri Feb 9 15:08:14 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I10J06MJJ48YGVFF@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Fri, 09 Feb 1996 15:31:26 -0500 (EST) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I10J02B0TC92AJDG@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Fri, 09 Feb 1996 15:30:55 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 1996 15:18:15 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: the world system Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English good news. Routledge has decided to publish a paperbound edition of _The World System: Five hundred years or five thousand?_ edited by Andre Gunder Frank and Barry K. Gills. now this excellent book can be ordered for classes. chris Prof. Chris Chase-Dunn Department of Sociology Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD. 21218 USA tel 410 516 7633 fax 410 516 7590 email chriscd@jhu.edu From chriscd@jhu.edu Fri Feb 9 20:51:06 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I10KKLAW1S92B6TE@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Fri, 09 Feb 1996 16:16:02 -0400 (EDT) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I10KK18MI892AUFH@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Fri, 09 Feb 1996 16:15:17 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 09 Feb 1996 16:02:31 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: Fw: Re: WTO ruling Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English the proto world state has a home page. c-d ------------------------------ From: acameron@mistral.co.uk (Angus Cameron) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 1996 14:59:26 -0500 To: INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY Subject: Re: WTO ruling I cannot give you any details of the specific case cited but the best people to ask would probably be the WTO itself, at least as a starting point. Their website is at http://www.unicc.org/wto/welcome. Their press department are also quite handy. Email requests for information to webmaster@wto.org.ch (I think!). Be warned, however, replies tend to come back as huge graphical files which look lovely when opened but can be a swine if you're stuck on a creaky old unix like I was. Angus Cameron Sussex University Prof. Chris Chase-Dunn Department of Sociology Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD. 21218 USA tel 410 516 7633 fax 410 516 7590 email chriscd@jhu.edu From chriscd@jhu.edu Tue Feb 13 07:58:10 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I15SDTL0SG92CI86@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Tue, 13 Feb 1996 09:53:26 -0400 (EDT) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I15SD7OYCW92D5QL@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Tue, 13 Feb 1996 09:52:53 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 09:39:34 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: Fw: (Fwd) Southeast Asian Appointment Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English ------------------------------ From: Samantha Arnold Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 14:56:30 -0500 To: INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY Subject: (Fwd) Southeast Asian Appointment IPE-netters: I am forwarding this advertisement for a tenure-line appointment at York; please feel free to re-post this message anywhere you think it is appropriate. Thanks. ______________ Dear Colleague. Attached is an advertisement for a tenure-line appointment in the Political Science Department at York University focusing on the international relations of Southeast Asia. I would be most grateful if you would bring the opening to the attention of anyone you feel would be interested. York is committed to a policy of employment equity and is especially concerned to identify qualified women canadidates and to encourage them to apply. Sincerely, Paul Evans YORK UNIVERSITY, FACULTY OF ARTS DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE Applications are invited for a tenure-track appointment at the assistant professor level in International Relations with a specialization in Southeast Asia. Candidates are expected to have a strong record in teaching and publication in multilateralism and regional security. Scholars with additional areas of expertise in issues such as sustainable development, gender, and international relations theory are also encouraged to apply. Appointment to commence July 1, 1996. Requirements: PhD or equivalent. Salary: Commensurate with qualifications. Applicants should send a curriculum vitae, appropriate samples of their scholarship, teaching evaluations, and arrange to have three letters of reference sent to: Professor Harvey G. Simmons, Chair, Department of Political Science, Room S669 Ross Building, York University, 4700 Keele Street, North York (Toronto), Ontario, Canada, M3J 1P3. This appointment is subject to budgetary approval. York University is implementing a policy of employment equity, including affirmative action for women faculty. In accordance with Canadian immigration requirements, this advertisement is directed to Canadian citizens and permanent residents of Canada. Deadline for Applications: March 1, 1996 From chriscd@jhu.edu Wed Feb 14 08:28:28 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I177UL9Z1S8YGD9A@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Wed, 14 Feb 1996 10:27:36 -0500 (EST) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I177UCA0IO92D1FT@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Wed, 14 Feb 1996 10:27:19 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 10:14:22 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: Fw: re: The Bell Curve & is .5=.5? Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English ------------------------------ From: John Selby Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 12:48:53 -0500 To: PROGRESSIVE SOCIOLOGISTS NETWORK Subject: re: The Bell Curve & is .5=.5? On Mon, 12 Feb 1996, INTT000 wrote: > > > "Our traders declare that we are no match for Germans and > [Japanese](1). Our men of science run about two continents and > proclaim the glory of foreign [schools](2) and the crying need for > technical instruction. Our politicians catch the general > apprehension and rush to heroic remedies. Looking round > impassionately from the calm atmosphere of [psychology or > sociobiology](3), ... the remedy lies beyond the reach of revised > educational systems, we have failed to realize that > [intelligence](4)... is not manufactured by home and school and > college; [it is](5) bred in the bone..." > > Who wrote this? > > Karl Pearson (used to be called Carl Pearson) wrote this in > 1903 in an article entitled "On the inheritance of the mental and > moral characters in man, and its comparison with the inheritance > of the physical characters", in which he claimed that a true > correlation coefficient of .5 was found. > > ( Notes: > I take the liberty to change the words in the brackets. In the > original text they are as follows: > (1) Americans > (2) universities > (3) anthropology > (4) the psychical characters > (5) they are ) > > So the interesting thing about Murray, Pearson et al. is not > really the content of their argument. Rather it is this long > ideological cycles that is interesting. In fact, technically our old > friend Pearson is better than the contemporary Murray et al. > Pearson, following the pioneering work of F. Galton, the famous > cousin of Darwin, invented correlation coefficient (the Pearson > product moment correlation coefficient) which we still use today. > However that is not the full term. The full term is this: the > correlation coefficient of inheritance. Furthermore, in the article > I quoted above Pearson claimed to find the "true" correlation > coefficient, which is .5. According to him, this .5 is not only true > for human and animal physical characteristics but also human > mental and moral characters. But is .5 =.5? That is one of the > technical questions I asked students here in a graduate seminar. > > So when Samuel Huntington advocated a theory of Clash > of Civilizations, is he alone in history? Lieutenant Colonel > Ishiwara Kanji, one of the designers of the Japanese "Greater East > Asia Coprosperity Sphere" made similar remarks in 1928 and > Joseph Chamberlain did the same in 1899. > > Interesting ideological cycles although I don't know where > to put post-structuralism and post-modernism. > > Tie-ting Su > Department of Sociology > McGill University, Montreal Of course, Murray has done the same thing with his earlier work on the underclass. See J.Macnicol "In pursuit of the underclass." Journal of Social Policy, july 1987:299-318, among other sources which make the same point that there is nothing new under the sun, especially nonsense. John Selby > > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________________ Please Reply to: John Selby Educational Development Unit Coventry University Coventry CV1 5FB E-mail j.selby@cov.ac.uk Telephone +44 1203 838149 (Direct Line) +44 1203 631313 (Switchboard) Fax +44 1203 838138 _____________________________________________________________________________ Prof. Chris Chase-Dunn Department of Sociology Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD. 21218 USA tel 410 516 7633 fax 410 516 7590 email chriscd@jhu.edu From wilkinso@polisci.sscnet.ucla.edu Wed Feb 14 13:47:37 1996 From: "Wilkinson, David POLI SCI" To: * World Systems Network Subject: Clash of Civilizations? Date: Wed, 14 Feb 96 12:46:00 PST Encoding: 6 TEXT Earlier references: Toynbee, The World and the West; Toynbee, section on Encounters between Civilizations in Space [not outer!], in A Study of History; Spengler on pseudomorphosis, in The Decline of the West; Davilevsky, Russia and Europe. From pad@iol.ie Wed Feb 14 15:35:52 1996 Wed, 14 Feb 1996 22:35:35 GMT Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 22:35:35 GMT To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu From: Karl Carlile Subject: GERRY ADAMS Would you please comment on the the piece below. KARL CALRLILE A REPLY TO GERRY ADAMS' ARTICLE PUBLISHED IN THE IRISH TIMES ON 12-2-96 >It was the absence of negotiations and the consequent failure to address and >resolve the causes of conflict which >made the re-occurrence of conflict >inevitable. The absence of negotiations are not what make the re-occurrence of conflict inevitable. What make the re-occurrence of conflict possible is the deep-seated contradictions inherent in six county society and indeed in Irish capitalist society as a whole. To suggest the absence of negotiations as cause is to mistakenly confine to surface phenomena the cause of conflict. Again negotiations don't necessarily resolve the causes of conflict. It is the struggle between social classes that can lead to the resolution of conflict. Furthermore it is simplistic to suggest that the ending of the ceasefire meant a re-occurrence of the conflict. Even during the so called Provo ceasefire conflict continues under other forms. Furthermore the character of negotiations is no more than a reflection of the relationship of power between the classes. Gerry Adams, not recognizing this fact, fetishes negotiations. >The people of this island do have the ability to come to an agreed and >democratic accommodation. The vehicle >for this is democratic and inclusive >dialogue and negotiations. If the people of Ireland do have this ability then this is tantamount to falsely claiming that the struggle for national self-determination of the Irish people is superfluous since discursive activity can be substituted for this struggle. The only thing that has significance is dialogue; all else is meaningless. This is postmodernism at its most cynical. Language substitutes itself for reality. Adams fails to understand that the character of specific dialogue reflects the asymmetrical power relations that underpin it. Words on their own are meaningless. The success of a political interest participating in dialogue is a function of both its political power and the character of its relationship with the relevant different political powers. It is not a function of its debating skills. If the Provos had no political power the Irish, British and American bourgeois governments would not have given it anything like the attention it has received. >The IRA cessation was, itself, the culmination of a long process of dialogue within Irish nationalist opinion aimed >at identifying a method of resolving the conflict and building a lasting political settlement. Again for Adams dialogue produced the IRA ceasfire. Words take on the power of concrete struggle. The armed struggle of the IRA generated dialogue, words, and these words in turn generated the IRA ceasefire. Adam's mystifies the power of words. He is the prisoner of words and images. Consequently his world is one of fantasy; an Irish Don Quixote. The real situation is that the Provos ceased their armed struggle because of concrete political considerations and not because of mere dialogue. The very fact that the IRA found it necessary to end the ceasefire is proof of the limitations of dialogue, of language. The IRA bombing in the London docklands has already generated a modification in the political situation in a way that dialogue could not. Indeed the only reason that Sinn Fein have been allowed to even talk with the Irish government is because of the political significance of their armed campaign. If the IRA had not waged their campaign then no dialogue would have taken place. Therefore it was not, as Adams believes, language that led to language. The gun compelled the bourgeoisie to enter into talks with the Provos. The problem is that the guns of the IRA are not proving powerful enough to achieve an independent 32 county republic. >The Irish Government of that time, Sinn Fein, the SDLP and key elements of Irish America were all agreed that >inclusive negotiation, without preconditions or vetoes, is the only way to resolve the conflict and secure a lasting >peace. It was agreed that peace could be achieved only by replacing the failed political structures with a new >political arrangement on the island, based on democratic principles of agreement and consent. If the only way to resolve the conflict is through "inclusive negotiation" then why has it not been achieved? If a settlement, as Gerry Adams believes, is simply a matter of the different parties sitting around a table to talk then there can be no reason why all the parties would object to this. However because it is far from as simple as this the parties have not engaged in this inter-communicative exercise. It has not been achieved because words have their limits and are not as Adams believes the essence of social being. The armed conflict reflects class interests which are concrete material interests. A resolution cannot then be a simple matter of discursive reason; of the application of reason to a socio-historical problem. A problem of this kind can only be resolved through politics which entails class struggle. Social conflicts never have and never will be solved by means of discursive activity. >There was an intensive and unprecedented dialogue within Irish nationalist opinion in its broadest sense, a >dialogue which required courage, imagination and a new approach on all sides, not least on the part of the then >Taoiseach, Albert Reynolds, and the SDLP leader, John Hume, who, despite intense opposition, turned their >backs on the failed policies of isolation and took the risk required in the building of the Irish peace process. Whether the dialogue "required courage, imagination and a new approach" is irrelevant. Of relevance, however, is that Reynolds, Spring and Hume were simply serving their own class interests by engaging in such dialogue. They "turned their backs on the failed policies of isolation" simply because they had found another and perhaps more effective strategy to either crush, encourage the Provos to surrender or accept a compromise. Sections of the Irish bourgeoisie had changed their strategy in an attempt to further stabilise bourgeois conditions on the island. But it must be remembered that it may be "the failed policies of isolation" that played a strategic role in generating the kind of Provo leadership that is prepared to fall for what maybe a new strategy of sections of the bourgeoise. > With a clear commitment by all the major Irish nationalist parties proactively to pursue a new, negotiated and >democratic political arrangement, and a public commitment by the British government to convene with the Irish >Government the necessary peace talks to achieve this agreement, the Sinn Fein leadership gave an assessment >to the IRA leadership of the prospects for a lasting political settlement. It was on the basis of clearly-stated >commitments and agreements that the IRA announced a complete cessation of military operations on August >31st, 1994. The above remarks suggest that the present Sinn Fein leadership accepted the word of its enemy, an enemy it had been struggling against for over twenty five years. Adams does not understand that these manoeuvres by London may have formed part of a political strategy to defeat the Provos. Adams now wants to criticize the British government because the Adamites may have made the significant political mistake of naively taking their enemy at his word. However there are those who would suggest a more sinister reason for their apparent political innocence. > In the 18 months of the IRA cessation, the British government stalled the commencement of all-party peace talks >time and time again. The unilateral dumping of the Mitchell report, and the introduction of a unionist proposal for >a six-county election, placed an unbearable strain on the peace process. Sinn Fein warned repeatedly of the >dangers. Our warnings were treated as threats when they were intended to alert those responsible that the peace >process needed to be consolidated and built upon. Again all this simply proves that words are not a substitute for concrete reality. If it is only a matter of rational dialogue then there is no reason why Unionism, London and Dublin cannot sit around the table with the Provos to arrive at a solution. This has not happened because social problems in the six count state Ireland cannot be reduced to mere words. >The stalling, the negativity, the introduction of new preconditions was steadily undermining the position of those, >myself included, who had argued that a viable peaceful way forward could be constructed. The above remarks mean that Adams admits that his position has been undermined which can only mean that the Adamites may have played a vital part in the Provos suffering a defeat at the hands of the Tory government. Adams does not understand that this may be just what London intended as part of a possible strategy to split the Provos and make its defeat easier. This may then mean that the Adamites are John Major's best allies. >Against this background and with consternation I, and those who had worked to put this peace process together, >watched as Private Lee Clegg was released and then promoted, as David Trimble and Ian Paisley marched >through the nationalist community in Garvaghy Road, as Irish prisoners were mistreated in English jails, as >plastic bullets were fired at peaceful demonstrators, as nationalist homes continued to be wrecked in RUC raids. >And, most fundamentally, we pointed out, with a growing sense of desperation, that there could be no negotiated >peace without peace negotiations; that without peace talks there was no peace process. Adams may be surprised to know that there is nothing new in this. This is the kind of conduct British imperialism has engaged over many years. More surprising might have been the discontinuation of this conduct by the British state. Given British imperialism's enduringly oppressive role in Ireland it is ironical that the Adams' leadership naively believed British imperialism's promises. Then when the British bourgeoisie fails to meet these promises it engages in posturing that suggests surprise. Such a naive belief in British imperialism's good intentions mistakenly suggests that imperialism can play a non-oppressive neutral role and that it is not inherently oppressive. The politics of the present Provo leadership, the Adamites, also paints American imperialism in bright colours by depicting the Clinton administration as facilitator of the struggle for Irish national self-determination. In this way it promotes the view that British and American imperialism are progressive and not essentially oppressive of other peoples. Essentially then the Adams leadership is pro-imperialist. >Attempts to isolate Sinn Fein failed in the past. The Taoiseach knows that our party is committed to dialogue, >that we are not involved in armed actions and that we have a democratic mandate. Adams declares that Sinn Fein is "committed to dialogue". This is a truism of no political significance. Many political organizations, including fascist ones, are committed to dialogue. But they are committed to many other things too. It has been known for many years that Sinn Fein have always been committed to dialogue. It has always been known that Sinn Fein, as such, are not involved in armed actions. However Sinn Fein has been under the control of the IRA leadership and the latter has been engaged in armed action. Sinn Fein has enduringly supported the armed struggle of the IRA and has been its political arm. There is also dual membership of both organizations. The only reason Sinn Fein have received more than generous media and political attention is because of this relationship to the IRA. It may also be because the Adams leadership is in the process of betraying what was the original political aim of the Provos. There is no other reason why the bourgeoisie now treat as royalty the leadership of an organization that it has so persistently sought to suppress, sometimes with great savagery, over many years. > What of those whom we represent? Are they to be discriminated against by the Irish Government in a crude >attempt by that government to pressurise an organisation for which Sinn Fein and our electorate have no >responsibility or control? The Taoiseach also knows that I have honoured every commitment I made. He knew >how fragile the peace process was. All of us have to reflect on our stewardship of the peace process. Mr Bruton >must reflect, as I must, on the lessons of the last 18 months. Sinn Fein have a responsibility for the existence of the IRA by their failure to seriously criticise it and by their general political support for the actions of the IRA. >One thing is clear. It is not possible to make peace in Ireland unless the British government WANTS to make >peace also. It is also very important that the Taoiseach's unilateral decision to refuse to accord Sinn Fein our >democratic rights is set aside so that we can all find ways through dialogue to rescue the peace process. (capitals mine) This is tantamount to claiming that there cannot be a successful struggle for national self-determination by the Irish people. Political conditions in Ireland depend, according to Gerry Adams, on whether "the British government wants to make peace". No longer is it a problem of the Irish masses defeating British imperialism and thereby forcing its troops out of Ireland. Instead the masses simply wait until British imperialism wants to take its troops out of Ireland. Contrary to what Adam claims the struggle for national self-determination of the Irish people can only achieve success through the establishment of a workers' republic or a federation of workers' republics supported by sections of the petit bourgeoisie. Such a workers' republic or federation of workers' republics can only be consolidated through the establishment of a fedration of workers' republics on both the islands of Ireland and Britain. From wilkinso@polisci.sscnet.ucla.edu Wed Feb 14 18:19:34 1996 From: "Wilkinson, David POLI SCI" To: * World Systems Network Subject: Erratum Date: Wed, 14 Feb 96 17:13:00 PST Encoding: 2 TEXT Oops, DaNilevsky not DaVilevsky. From pad@iol.ie Thu Feb 15 07:37:51 1996 Thu, 15 Feb 1996 14:36:01 GMT Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 14:36:01 GMT To: wsn@csf.Colorado.EDU From: Karl Carlile Subject: GERRY ADAMS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Would you please comment on the the piece below. KARL CARLILE A REPLY TO GERRY ADAMS' ARTICLE PUBLISHED IN THE IRISH TIMES ON 12-2-96 >It was the absence of negotiations and the consequent failure to address and >resolve the causes of conflict which >made the re-occurrence of conflict >inevitable. The absence of negotiations are not what make the re-occurrence of conflict inevitable. What make the re-occurrence of conflict possible is the deep-seated contradictions inherent in six county society and indeed in Irish capitalist society as a whole. To suggest the absence of negotiations as cause is to mistakenly confine to surface phenomena the cause of conflict. Again negotiations don't necessarily resolve the causes of conflict. It is the struggle between social classes that can lead to the resolution of conflict. Furthermore it is simplistic to suggest that the ending of the ceasefire meant a re-occurrence of the conflict. Even during the so called Provo ceasefire conflict continues under other forms. Furthermore the character of negotiations is no more than a reflection of the relationship of power between the classes. Gerry Adams, not recognizing this fact, fetishes negotiations. >The people of this island do have the ability to come to an agreed and >democratic accommodation. The vehicle >for this is democratic and inclusive >dialogue and negotiations. If the people of Ireland do have this ability then this is tantamount to falsely claiming that the struggle for national self-determination of the Irish people is superfluous since discursive activity can be substituted for this struggle. The only thing that has significance is dialogue; all else is meaningless. This is postmodernism at its most cynical. Language substitutes itself for reality. Adams fails to understand that the character of specific dialogue reflects the asymmetrical power relations that underpin it. Words on their own are meaningless. The success of a political interest participating in dialogue is a function of both its political power and the character of its relationship with the relevant different political powers. It is not a function of its debating skills. If the Provos had no political power the Irish, British and American bourgeois governments would not have given it anything like the attention it has received. >The IRA cessation was, itself, the culmination of a long process of dialogue within Irish nationalist opinion aimed >at identifying a method of resolving the conflict and building a lasting political settlement. Again for Adams dialogue produced the IRA ceasfire. Words take on the power of concrete struggle. The armed struggle of the IRA generated dialogue, words, and these words in turn generated the IRA ceasefire. Adam's mystifies the power of words. He is the prisoner of words and images. Consequently his world is one of fantasy; an Irish Don Quixote. The real situation is that the Provos ceased their armed struggle because of concrete political considerations and not because of mere dialogue. The very fact that the IRA found it necessary to end the ceasefire is proof of the limitations of dialogue, of language. The IRA bombing in the London docklands has already generated a modification in the political situation in a way that dialogue could not. Indeed the only reason that Sinn Fein have been allowed to even talk with the Irish government is because of the political significance of their armed campaign. If the IRA had not waged their campaign then no dialogue would have taken place. Therefore it was not, as Adams believes, language that led to language. The gun compelled the bourgeoisie to enter into talks with the Provos. The problem is that the guns of the IRA are not proving powerful enough to achieve an independent 32 county republic. >The Irish Government of that time, Sinn Fein, the SDLP and key elements of Irish America were all agreed that >inclusive negotiation, without preconditions or vetoes, is the only way to resolve the conflict and secure a lasting >peace. It was agreed that peace could be achieved only by replacing the failed political structures with a new >political arrangement on the island, based on democratic principles of agreement and consent. If the only way to resolve the conflict is through "inclusive negotiation" then why has it not been achieved? If a settlement, as Gerry Adams believes, is simply a matter of the different parties sitting around a table to talk then there can be no reason why all the parties would object to this. However because it is far from as simple as this the parties have not engaged in this inter-communicative exercise. It has not been achieved because words have their limits and are not as Adams believes the essence of social being. The armed conflict reflects class interests which are concrete material interests. A resolution cannot then be a simple matter of discursive reason; of the application of reason to a socio-historical problem. A problem of this kind can only be resolved through politics which entails class struggle. Social conflicts never have and never will be solved by means of discursive activity. >There was an intensive and unprecedented dialogue within Irish nationalist opinion in its broadest sense, a >dialogue which required courage, imagination and a new approach on all sides, not least on the part of the then >Taoiseach, Albert Reynolds, and the SDLP leader, John Hume, who, despite intense opposition, turned their >backs on the failed policies of isolation and took the risk required in the building of the Irish peace process. Whether the dialogue "required courage, imagination and a new approach" is irrelevant. Of relevance, however, is that Reynolds, Spring and Hume were simply serving their own class interests by engaging in such dialogue. They "turned their backs on the failed policies of isolation" simply because they had found another and perhaps more effective strategy to either crush, encourage the Provos to surrender or accept a compromise. Sections of the Irish bourgeoisie had changed their strategy in an attempt to further stabilise bourgeois conditions on the island. But it must be remembered that it may be "the failed policies of isolation" that played a strategic role in generating the kind of Provo leadership that is prepared to fall for what maybe a new strategy of sections of the bourgeoise. > With a clear commitment by all the major Irish nationalist parties proactively to pursue a new, negotiated and >democratic political arrangement, and a public commitment by the British government to convene with the Irish >Government the necessary peace talks to achieve this agreement, the Sinn Fein leadership gave an assessment >to the IRA leadership of the prospects for a lasting political settlement. It was on the basis of clearly-stated >commitments and agreements that the IRA announced a complete cessation of military operations on August >31st, 1994. The above remarks suggest that the present Sinn Fein leadership accepted the word of its enemy, an enemy it had been struggling against for over twenty five years. Adams does not understand that these manoeuvres by London may have formed part of a political strategy to defeat the Provos. Adams now wants to criticize the British government because the Adamites may have made the significant political mistake of naively taking their enemy at his word. However there are those who would suggest a more sinister reason for their apparent political innocence. > In the 18 months of the IRA cessation, the British government stalled the commencement of all-party peace talks >time and time again. The unilateral dumping of the Mitchell report, and the introduction of a unionist proposal for >a six-county election, placed an unbearable strain on the peace process. Sinn Fein warned repeatedly of the >dangers. Our warnings were treated as threats when they were intended to alert those responsible that the peace >process needed to be consolidated and built upon. Again all this simply proves that words are not a substitute for concrete reality. If it is only a matter of rational dialogue then there is no reason why Unionism, London and Dublin cannot sit around the table with the Provos to arrive at a solution. This has not happened because social problems in the six count state Ireland cannot be reduced to mere words. >The stalling, the negativity, the introduction of new preconditions was steadily undermining the position of those, >myself included, who had argued that a viable peaceful way forward could be constructed. The above remarks mean that Adams admits that his position has been undermined which can only mean that the Adamites may have played a vital part in the Provos suffering a defeat at the hands of the Tory government. Adams does not understand that this may be just what London intended as part of a possible strategy to split the Provos and make its defeat easier. This may then mean that the Adamites are John Major's best allies. >Against this background and with consternation I, and those who had worked to put this peace process together, >watched as Private Lee Clegg was released and then promoted, as David Trimble and Ian Paisley marched >through the nationalist community in Garvaghy Road, as Irish prisoners were mistreated in English jails, as >plastic bullets were fired at peaceful demonstrators, as nationalist homes continued to be wrecked in RUC raids. >And, most fundamentally, we pointed out, with a growing sense of desperation, that there could be no negotiated >peace without peace negotiations; that without peace talks there was no peace process. Adams may be surprised to know that there is nothing new in this. This is the kind of conduct British imperialism has engaged over many years. More surprising might have been the discontinuation of this conduct by the British state. Given British imperialism's enduringly oppressive role in Ireland it is ironical that the Adams' leadership naively believed British imperialism's promises. Then when the British bourgeoisie fails to meet these promises it engages in posturing that suggests surprise. Such a naive belief in British imperialism's good intentions mistakenly suggests that imperialism can play a non-oppressive neutral role and that it is not inherently oppressive. The politics of the present Provo leadership, the Adamites, also paints American imperialism in bright colours by depicting the Clinton administration as facilitator of the struggle for Irish national self-determination. In this way it promotes the view that British and American imperialism are progressive and not essentially oppressive of other peoples. Essentially then the Adams leadership is pro-imperialist. >Attempts to isolate Sinn Fein failed in the past. The Taoiseach knows that our party is committed to dialogue, >that we are not involved in armed actions and that we have a democratic mandate. Adams declares that Sinn Fein is "committed to dialogue". This is a truism of no political significance. Many political organizations, including fascist ones, are committed to dialogue. But they are committed to many other things too. It has been known for many years that Sinn Fein have always been committed to dialogue. It has always been known that Sinn Fein, as such, are not involved in armed actions. However Sinn Fein has been under the control of the IRA leadership and the latter has been engaged in armed action. Sinn Fein has enduringly supported the armed struggle of the IRA and has been its political arm. There is also dual membership of both organizations. The only reason Sinn Fein have received more than generous media and political attention is because of this relationship to the IRA. It may also be because the Adams leadership is in the process of betraying what was the original political aim of the Provos. There is no other reason why the bourgeoisie now treat as royalty the leadership of an organization that it has so persistently sought to suppress, sometimes with great savagery, over many years. > What of those whom we represent? Are they to be discriminated against by the Irish Government in a crude >attempt by that government to pressurise an organisation for which Sinn Fein and our electorate have no >responsibility or control? The Taoiseach also knows that I have honoured every commitment I made. He knew >how fragile the peace process was. All of us have to reflect on our stewardship of the peace process. Mr Bruton >must reflect, as I must, on the lessons of the last 18 months. Sinn Fein have a responsibility for the existence of the IRA by their failure to seriously criticise it and by their general political support for the actions of the IRA. >One thing is clear. It is not possible to make peace in Ireland unless the British government WANTS to make >peace also. It is also very important that the Taoiseach's unilateral decision to refuse to accord Sinn Fein our >democratic rights is set aside so that we can all find ways through dialogue to rescue the peace process. (capitals mine) This is tantamount to claiming that there cannot be a successful struggle for national self-determination by the Irish people. Political conditions in Ireland depend, according to Gerry Adams, on whether "the British government wants to make peace". No longer is it a problem of the Irish masses defeating British imperialism and thereby forcing its troops out of Ireland. Instead the masses simply wait until British imperialism wants to take its troops out of Ireland. Contrary to what Adam claims the struggle for national self-determination of the Irish people can only achieve success through the establishment of a workers' republic or a federation of workers' republics supported by sections of the petit bourgeoisie. Such a workers' republic or federation of workers' republics can only be consolidated through the establishment of a fedration of workers' republics on both the islands of Ireland and Britain. From chriscd@jhu.edu Thu Feb 15 07:52:58 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I18KV3HXTC92AVCK@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Thu, 15 Feb 1996 09:50:40 -0400 (EDT) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I18KUMBEQ892CNDK@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Thu, 15 Feb 1996 09:50:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 09:37:10 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: world-system flows Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English in connection with some lectures i am giving for the social system component of an earth systems science course, i am looking for figures that illustrate nicely the global (or regional) flows of the 'stuff' of world systems, like protein, raw ores, trained professionals, manual workers, weaponry, patent licenses, investment, profits, cargo, recreation days, research support, development assistance, etc. any suggestions would be greatly appreciated cheers, craig craig k harris dept of sociology michigan state university east lansing michigan 48824-1111 tel: 517-355-5048 fax: 517-432-2856 craig.harris@ssc.msu.edu From rross@vax.clarku.edu Thu Feb 15 10:25:50 1996 id <01I18QADLLXO8Y68GG@vax.clarku.edu>; Thu, 15 Feb 1996 12:25:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 12:25:35 -0500 (EST) From: "ROBERT J.S. (BOB) ROSS, CHAIR OF SOCIOLOGY" Subject: Re: GERRY ADAMS In-reply-to: <199602151436.OAA05432@GPO.iol.ie> To: Karl Carlile My comments are two. The reponse to Adams has about a three sentence point to make, to the effect that the negotiating process is posed by Adams as having some political autonomy apart from a) the IRA's armed struggle and b) class conflict in Ireland. The writer disagrees. It would have been better to have done so more concisely. The second comment is that the argument is in aid of position a which, whatever its analytical merits, is politically blind and morally obtuse. The IRA's coming in part way from armed struggle had put it in better position than it had been in for many years to obtain strcutural guarantees in the north; it will now be much harder. I might predict the IRA's support would shrink even smaller than it already is; but then, John Major is a powerful recruiter for the IRA. For myself, killing innocent and distant civilians, however much it may make rulers take notice, has lost its appeal. From chriscd@jhu.edu Fri Feb 16 09:10:53 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I1A1SJZH1C8YGVN8@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Fri, 16 Feb 1996 11:07:17 -0500 (EST) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I1A1S3WDOW92DMC9@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Fri, 16 Feb 1996 11:06:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 1996 10:53:11 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: Fw: Economic Institutions/ Social Movements Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English ------------------------------ From: geigsm@sussex.ac.uk ( Geigsm) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 1996 08:47:54 -0500 To: INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY Subject: Economic Institutions/ Social Movements Research Project Announcement Global Economic Institutions and Global Social Movements Patterns, Dynamics, Impacts, Principles in the IMF, World Bank and WTO The 1st of February 1996 marks the beginning of a two year research project examining the relationship between selected global economic institutions and global social movements. The project is based at the University of Sussex and is funded by the Economic and Social Research Council of Great Britain. Growing global economic institutions (GEIs) and growing global social movements are two of the outstanding trends in governance at the end of the 20th Century. What is the relationship between these forces, and what consequences do those relations have for policy - and in turn for poverty, equality, ecological sustainability, community and democracy? These questions drive the Global Economic Institutions - Global Social Movements project. The broad aims of this research are: 1. On the empirical level the task is to trace and describe the institutional links that have been developing between the IMF, World Bank, WTO and global social movements. 2. Theoretically, the task is to contribute to the debate about GEIs, accountability and democracy in light of their relationship with global social movements. The project has three core objectives: 1. Explore the issue of subsidiarity, constituency and legitimacy in the GEI-social movement relationship. 2. Reach some conclusions and recommendations about the institutional mechanisms that have been developed in the GEI-social movement relationship. We will also stimulate and provoke discussion about future modifications in GEIs. 3. Interact with members of the policy community in GEIs and social movement organizations to increase communication and further debate. The research team is coordinated by Robert O'Brien who is also exploring relations between labour movements and the World Trade Organization. Anne Marie Goetz is focusing on relations between international feminism and the World Bank. Jan Aart Scholte is examining the interplay between transnational social movements and the International Monetary Fund. Marc Williams is considering the impact of environmentalist campaigns on this trinity of global economic institutions. Through their joint efforts the research will assess commonalties and contrasts in the patterns of engagement between environmentalist, labour and women's movements on the one hand and the IMF, World Bank and WTO on the other A report with policy suggestions for social movements, governments and global governance agencies will be issued in 1998. People involved in similar research, officials of global economic institutions or members of social movements engaged in similar issues are encouraged to make contact with the project. The mailing address is: Dr. Robert O'Brien Global Economic Institutions-Global Social Movements School of European Studies University of Sussex Falmer, Brighton BN1 9QN Great Britain Telephone:44 1273 606755 Fax: 44 1273 625972 E-mail: GEIGSM@sussex.ac.uk From wilkinso@polisci.sscnet.ucla.edu Fri Feb 16 15:44:30 1996 From: "Wilkinson, David POLI SCI" To: apenaa@Sage.EDU Subject: Comp. Civs Rev. / ISCSC Date: Fri, 16 Feb 96 14:16:00 PST Encoding: 7 TEXT While replying to an e-mail inquiry from Adeline Apena, it occurred to me that some WSN subscribers might be interested, as she is, in receiving the Comparative Civilizations Review, the publication of the International Society for the Comparative Study of Civilizations. It is $15/yr to Midori Rynn, Dept. of Sociology and Criminal Justice, Scranton University, Scranton PA 18510. From wilkinso@polisci.sscnet.ucla.edu Wed Feb 21 13:36:48 1996 From: "Wilkinson, David POLI SCI" To: BAMYEHM@woods.uml.edu Subject: RE: Comp. Civs Rev. / ISCSC Date: Wed, 21 Feb 96 12:35:00 PST Encoding: 23 TEXT Mohammed A. Bamyeh has written me asking for further information on the International Society for the Comparative Study of Civilizations; again I am cc'ing WSN on the assumption that others may be interested. ISCSC was founded in the 1960's in Europe, involving Toynbee and Sorokin; recentered in the US in the 1970's; now displaying some degree of both "core shift" and "globalization. Its President is Prof. Shuntaro Ito, Center for the Comparative Study of Civilizations, Reitaku University, Hikarigaoka, Kashiwa-shi, Chiba-ken 277, Japan. Dues $25 (less for students) to Treasurer, Midori Yamanouchi Rynn, Sociology, University of Scranton, Scranton PA 18510-4605. Dues include subscription to Comparative Civilizations Review (2 issues per year) and ISCSC newsletter. Annual scholarly meetings: this year, Pomona (simultaneous with World History Association), June 20-23. Many and varied topics: Program Chair is Michael Andregg, 1976 Field Ave,. St. Paul MN 55116. "Civilizationists" are not a subdivision of any standard departmental structure I know of: academics appear from Sociology, History, Philosophy, Comparative Literature, Geography, Political Science, and elsewhere; non-academic members also numerous, even less classifiable except by interest in human phenomena which tend to be long-duration and large-scale. No web site yet, alas. David Wilkinson From chriscd@jhu.edu Fri Feb 23 09:20:45 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I1JUAKLFK08YHJZN@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Fri, 23 Feb 1996 11:19:00 -0500 (EST) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I1JUAEN2N492GTQM@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Fri, 23 Feb 1996 11:18:53 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 1996 11:05:57 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: Fw: New Book Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English ------------------------------ From: "E. K." Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 18:57:12 -0500 To: INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY Subject: New Book A NEW BOOK (1996) GLOBAL RESTRUCTURING AND PERIPHERAL STATES: THE CARROT AND THE STICK IN MAURITANIA By Mohameden Ould-Mey Since the early 1980s, Structural Adjustment Programs(SAPs) have represented the development policy most often pursued in developing countries. Global Restructuring and Peripheral States addresses SAPs and their implications for Third World states. Taking a pioneering geopolitical and economic approach, Ould-Mey examines the restructuring of international relations through the process of globalization and its unfolding within peripheral states such as Mauritania. Ould-Mey discusses the emergence of a 'global command economy' where the conception, design, and funding of development is increasingly controlled by a few international organizations, such as the Group of Seven Industrialized Nations, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank. He argues that SAPs succeeded in reversing nationalistic policies through a carrot and stick strategy of providing loans in exchange for fundamental changes in the political economy of borrowing countries. "This is an important book, almost unique for the powerfull link its establishes between the economic rhetoric of the Structural Adjustment Programmes and their real political target: The denationalization of the State." Samir Amin, Third World Forum This book received Honorable Mention in the 1995 Malcolm H. Kerr dissertation competition in social sciences at the 29th Middle East Studies Association Annual Meeting held in Washington D. C. on December 8, 1995. The book was published by Rowman and Littlefieeld, Lanham, Maryland 20376. 330 pages For info call 1-800-462-6420 Prof. Chris Chase-Dunn Department of Sociology Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD. 21218 USA tel 410 516 7633 fax 410 516 7590 email chriscd@jhu.edu From dws@scs.howard.edu Fri Feb 23 13:52:50 1996 Date: Fri, 23 Feb 96 15:46:14 -0500 From: David Schwartzman To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Subject: Archives GET From wilkinso@polisci.sscnet.ucla.edu Mon Feb 26 16:58:36 1996 From: "Wilkinson, David POLI SCI" To: * Grads in Political Science Subject: Course Syllabus Date: Mon, 26 Feb 96 15:54:00 PST Encoding: 12 TEXT After many vicissitudes I think I've succeeded in putting a syllabus for a Spring 1996 UCLA political science graduate course in "Civilizations and World Systems" onto the Web at http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/ssc/labs/wilkinso/s96ps239.htm Note that's wilkinso and not wilkinson ! Should anyone try to access this and fail (I did at first, somehow having gotten write access but no read access!), I'd appreciate having a copy of any access failure message forwarded to me. David Wilkinson From chriscd@jhu.edu Tue Feb 27 07:40:33 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I1PC03LG4G8Y5A1I@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Tue, 27 Feb 1996 09:40:02 -0500 (EST) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I1PBYTHYKG92H79H@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Tue, 27 Feb 1996 09:39:43 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 09:26:38 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: Fw: _SJ_ announcement Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English ------------------------------ From: John L Gulick Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 17:14:03 -0500 To: chriscd@jhu.edu Subject: _SJ_ announcement Japan's Changing Role in the World-System Just at the moment when it is achieving full recognition as the hub of the world economy's most dynamic region of capital accumulation, Japan has been beset by a prolonged recession, crisis in the system of political legitimation, and a questioning of its national identity and role in international affairs. _Japan Enters the Twenty-First Century_ (Vol. 21:1), edited by Gregory Shank, offers a retrospective analysis of the changes and continuities in Japanese economy and culture as it uneasily assumes the status of hegemonic leadership in the East Asian Pacific Rim. This 252-page edition contains articles by twelve social scientists and scholars of Japan who explore tensions and compatibilites between the Japanese and U.S. governments in the post-Cold War era; new investment and organizational strategies employed by Japanese transnational corporations; the "shake-up" in the ruling alliance of big business, state bureaucrats, and LDP elected officials; the new illegal immigration into Japan; and the possibilities and limitations of justice and equity for marginal groups in Japanese society. _Japan Enters the Twenty-First Century_ is a crucial resource for U.S. and all "progressives" who wish to know more about the much-neglected topic of Japan's changing role in the world polity and economy. Detailed historical and empirical studies on issues ranging from the potential demise of "corporate culture" to property crimes make the issue an excellent complement to recent broad-ranging world-systems material on rivalry and hegemony in the late Twentieth Century. Contents include: Satoshi Ikeda, "Japanese Accumulation Structure and the Postwar World-System" Saskia Sassen, "Economic Internationalization: The New Migration in Japan and the United States" Momo Iida, "The Fall of the 1955 System in Japanese Politics and the Current Crisis of Hegemony" Tetsuya Fujimoto and Won-Kyu Park, "Is Japan Exceptional? Reconsidering Japanese Crime Rates" This issue is available for $12.00 per copy. Allow an additional $2.00 for postage and handling. A 20% discount is available to bookstores or individuals ordering 10 or more copies. Subscriptions also available: $ 35.00/yr. (U.S.). Checks should be made payable to _Social Justice_. VISA/Mastercard are accepted. E- mail: "gregorys9@aol.com". Snail-mail: _Social Justice_, P.O. Box 40601, San Francisco, CA 94140. ****************************************************************** _Social Justice_:_Japan Enters the 21st Century_ I would like to order: __ copies __ my check, payable in U.S. currency to _Social Justice_ for $ _______ is enclosed. __ charge to my __ VISA __ Mastercard for the amount of $ ________. expiration date _______ account # _______________ signature _______________________________________ Name _______________________________________________ Address ____________________________________________ City _____________________ State ____________ Zip ________________ _Social Justice_, P.O. Box 40601, San Francisco, CA 94140 ******************************************************************* From OWENJACK@FS.isu.edu Tue Feb 27 10:59:42 1996 From: "J B Owens" Organization: Idaho State University To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 11:00:35 -0600, MDT Subject: CFP: Globalizing Regional Histories ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 08:30:19 -0500 Reply-to: H-NET List for World History From: Sandria Freitag (American Historical Association), Renate Bridenthal (Brooklyn College), Patrick Manning (Northeastern University), Anand Yang (University of Utah), Jacquelyn Kent (SUNY Cortland) CALL FOR PAPERS: Globalizing Regional Histories As the initial phase of a project the American Historical Association hopes to undertake jointly with various area studies associations on GLOBALIZING REGIONAL HISTORIES, we seek expressions of interest from those willing to participate in panel sessions being organized at the annual meetings of the American Historical Association, African Studies Association, American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies, American Studies Association, Association of Asian Studies, Latin American Studies Association, Middle East Studies Association, World History Association and perhaps others. Panel topics will focus on the range of issues that emerge from processes by which community identities are constructed across national and regional boundaries, both contiguous and diasporic. This should enable us to discuss economic processes, cultural formulations, and changing political claims for such groups over long historic periods as well as in the most recent burst of accelerated globalization. One might ask, for example, how we historicize the contradiction that, while the global commodification of culture tends to homogenize, a strong counter- tendency of local identity politics simultaneously emerges. Some specific examples of processes by which ethnic/racial/religious identities are constructed would include material conditions (guest workers, immigration, other movements of people, capital, technology) and ideological conditions (diasporic literatures, newly "imagined communities"). Examples of people whose communal identity crosses contiguous political units are Kurds, Basques, Mayans; diasporic ones are many. The organizers have broadcast this wide appeal in the hope of assembling some valuable interdisciplinary and cross-regional panel proposals for a variety of association meetings as listed above. Please submit informal proposals, either for individual papers or for panels, with an initial deadline of May 1, 1996. (We expect to issue subsequent calls for papers based on the results of the first round.) Please also indicate your preference for the meeting at which the paper or panel would be presented. Send proposals to: Globalizing Regional History c/o Sandria Freitag, Executive Director American Historical Association 400 A Street, S.E. Washington, DC 20003 e-mail: sfreitag@violet.berkeley.edu In preparing your proposal, you may wish to consult with others working on this project. Please feel free to contact any of the following: Renate Bridenthal -- for Western and Eastern Europe and North America Anand Yang -- for Asia and the Pacific Patrick Manning -- for Africa and World Jacquelyn Kent -- for Latin America and the Caribbean From dassbach@mtu.edu Thu Feb 29 08:03:19 1996 From: "Carl H.A. Dassbach" Subject: [PEN-L:3190] Bill of Rights as Peaceful protest (fwd) To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 10:03:16 -0500 (EST) Forwarded message: From: "Carl H.A. Dassbach" Subject: [PEN-L:3190] Bill of Rights as Peaceful protest (fwd) To: ssdept-l@mtu.edu Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 10:00:56 -0500 (EST) Reply-To: ssdept-l@mtu.edu Forwarded message: Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 06:07:52 -0800 Errors-To: mperelman@facultypo.csuchico.edu Reply-To: pen-l@anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu Originator: pen-l@anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu Sender: pen-l@anthrax.ecst.csuchico.edu From: dhenwood@panix.com (Doug Henwood) Subject: [PEN-L:3190] Bill of Rights as Peaceful protest (fwd) X-Comment: Progressive Economics > ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- > >This is not a typical chain letter, in that by passing it on to as >many people as you can, you are taking part in what may yet become the >world's biggest practical joke. The U.S. Government has recently >passed an act which enforces censorship on the internet. > >A group of internet users has now come together to kick back at this >oppression, and have a bit of fun at the same time. The aim of this >exercise is to re-establish the United States as "The land of the >Free", not a fascist state where freedom of speech and thought are >curtailed. Communist Russia fell as a result of such limits being >placed upon the minds of the general populus. > >On receiving this letter, please pass it on to as many friends or >E-mail lists as you can. We predict that if everybody copies the >letter to 5 other addresses, by February 29th 1996, this letter should >have reached in excess of 2 million people. That's when the fun >begins........ > >On February 29th, please send the following message which includes a >copy of the Bill of rights. By sending the letter on the above date, >you will contribute to either one huge petition for freedom, or else >lead to a crash of the whitehouse server. Send all letters to: >President@Whitehouse.gov > >Remember that solidarity is the key to success !!!!! > >Dear Mr. President, > >Do you remember this: > >THE BILL OF RIGHTS > >Amendment I > >Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or >prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of >speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to >assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. > >Amendment II > >A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free >state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be >infringed. > >Amendment III > >No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without >the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be >prescribed by law. > >Amendment IV > >The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, >papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, >shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon >probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly >describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be >seized. > >Amendment V > >No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise >infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand >jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the >militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor >shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in >jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case >to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or >property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be >taken for public use, without just compensation. > >Amendment VI > >In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a >speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and >district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district >shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of >the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the >witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining >witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his >defense. > >Amendment VII > >In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed >twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no >fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of >the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. > >Amendment VIII > >Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor >cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. > >Amendment IX > >The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be >construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. > >Amendment X > >The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor >prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states >respectively, or to the people. > > ><---- End Forwarded Message ----> >Censorship -- the REAL indecency in cyberspace!!! From OWENJACK@FS.isu.edu Thu Feb 29 09:55:03 1996 From: "J B Owens" Organization: Idaho State University To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Date: Thu, 29 Feb 1996 09:55:33 -0600, MDT Subject: Historical Encyclopedia of World Slavery I am sorry if I have already posted this information. This is the second time I have received this information, and I can't remember if and where I reposted it. Better safe than sorry. Jack Owens, Idaho State University ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 19:16:02 -0600 From: Junius Rodriguez To: owenjack@ux1.isu.edu Subject: Historical Encyclopedia of World Slavery Any advertisement that you can provide for the following notice would be most appreciated: ABC-CLIO seeks scholars interested in contributing assigned essays for inclusion in its planned Historical Encyclopedia of World Slavery. This two-volume reference work, targeted for publication in early 1998, will offer a comprehensive assessment of the complex institution of slavery across cultures and throughout time. Unparalleled in scope, this project promises to produce a reference set that stands alone as the best source available for an encyclopedic survey of slavery in world history. This project will cover the history of slavery and the slave trade from antiquity to the present. Entries will consist of specific peoples, kingdoms, settlements, nations, tribes, political entities, armies, campaigns, individuals, charters, decrees, slave-trade routes, historical events, laws, and practices. Additional entries will explore the nature of antislavery thought and will highlight leaders in the worldwide abolitionist movement. If you are interested in writing for this project and would like to receive a topics list, please submit a letter of inquiry and a curriculum vitae to: Junius P. Rodriguez General Editor, Historical Encyclopedia of World Slavery Eureka College 300 East College Avenue Eureka, Illinois 61530 Should you prefer, you may fax this material to (309) 467-6386, or you may send it by e-mail to jrodrig@eureka.edu From caliskak@boun.edu.tr Thu Feb 29 11:50:32 1996 Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 10:25:53 +0300 (MEST) From: Koray Caliskan To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu GET