From chriscd@jhu.edu Mon Apr 1 11:35:36 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I311X23Y0W90OLLN@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Mon, 01 Apr 1996 13:30:50 -0400 (EDT) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I311WQYW7491XSV8@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Mon, 01 Apr 1996 13:29:42 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 13:16:56 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: Fw: New book on Mexico Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English ------------------------------ From: Gerardo Otero Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 20:21:14 -0500 To: anthap1@oakland.edu Subject: New book on Mexico Westview Press just published my edited book NEOLIBERALISM REVISITED: ECONOMIC RESTRUCTURING AND MEXICO'S POLITICAL FUTURE. Here's one bit from the announcement: Having unilaterally opened its borders to international competition and foreign investment in the mid-1980s, Mexico has become one of the world's leading proponents of economic liberalization. Nevertheless, as the recent uprising of native peoples in Chiapas has made clear, economic reforms are not universally welcomed. This book addresses the challenges brought about by the restructuring of the Mexican economy at a time when multiple organizations of civil society are demanding a democratic poltical transition in a system that has been dominated by one party for nearly seventy years. The contributors identify the key social and political actors -- both domestic and international -- involved in promoting or resisting the new economic model and examine the role of the state in the restructuring process. They explore such questions as: In what ways is the state intself being reconstituted to accomodte the demand for change? How have Canada and the United States responded to the increased internationalization of their economies? What are the challenges and prospects for transnational grassroots networks and labor solidarity? Answers are provided by scholars from anthropology, economics, history, political science, and sociology, all of whom promote interdisciplinary approaches to the issues. Each chapter traces the structural transformations within the central social relationships in Mexican society during the last decade or so and anticipates future consquences of today's changes. CONTENTS: Neoliberal Reform and Politics in Mexico: An Overview, GERARDO OTERO. NAFTA and the Struggle for Neoliberalism: Mexico's Elusive Quest for First World Status, GUSTAVO DEL CASTILLO V. The Debt Crisis and Economic Restructuring: Prospects for Mexican Agriculture, MARILYN GATES. From Export-Oriented to Import Oriented Industrialization: Changes in Mexico's Manufacturing Sector, 1988-1994, ENRIQUE DUSSEL PETERS. Mexico's "Old" and "New" Maquiladora Industries: Contrasting Approaches to North American Integration, GARY GEREFFI. The Mexican Political Pretransition in Comparative Perspective, ILAN SEMO. The Private Sector and Political Regime Change in Mexico, FRANCISCO VALDES UGALDE. Economic Restructuring and the Transformation of Mexican Corporatism, JUDITH TEICHMAN. Democracy for Whom? Women's Grassroots Political Activism in the 1990s, Mexico City and Chiapas, LYNN STEPHEN. Rural Reforms and the Zapatista Rebellion: Chiapas, 1988-1995, NEIL HARVEY. Crossing Borders: Labor Internationalism in the Era of NAFTA,, BARRY CARR. Mexico's Economic and Political Futures, GERARDO OTERO. U.S. orders: (303) 444-3541, fax: (303) 339-3356, credit card: (800) 386-5656. Canadian orders, credit card: (800) 387-0117. PRICES: US$16.95 (pb) and US$54.50 (hc). From chriscd@jhu.edu Mon Apr 1 11:36:35 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I311UYI9OW90P6JE@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Mon, 01 Apr 1996 13:35:26 -0400 (EDT) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I311UK8WBK91XDN8@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Mon, 01 Apr 1996 13:27:56 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 13:15:11 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: Fw: Re: Update on Scholarship Awards Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English ------------------------------ From: "T R. Young" <34LPF6T@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU> Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 07:33:42 -0500 To: PROGRESSIVE SOCIOLOGISTS NETWORK Subject: Re: Update on Scholarship Awards The Marxist Section of ASA invites nominations for two Awards for Progressive Scholarship: The Al Syzmanski Memorial Award is given for the best Graduate Student paper submitted in competition for the award. The Marxist Section seeks to honor Al Syzmanski for his contributions to Marxist scholarship, and for his selfless devotion to the Marxist Section. Submissions should be sent to Martin Murray, Dept. of Sociology, State University of New York at Binghamton, Binghamton NY 13901. Deadline: May 15. The Marxist Scholarship Award recognizes outstanding works in any field of Marxist Sociology. The rules for submission are: 1) Any works published in 1993 or 1994 are eligible; 2) Nominations may come from ASA members or authors of the works nominated; 3) Authors of nominated works need not be Marxist Section members. Submissions should be sent to Stephanie Shanks-Meile, Dept. of Sociology and Anthropology, Indiana University Northwest, 3400 Broadway, Gary IN 46408. Deadline: May 15. T.R.YOUNG@CMICH.EDU From claudiu@ix.netcom.com Mon Apr 1 19:58:41 1996 Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 18:56:18 -0800 From: claudiu@ix.netcom.com (Claudiu Secara ) Subject: New Books To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu.All.around, we.see.old.structures.and.social.orders.being@dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com altered. Uncertainties exist about what this means and where the world is headed. Change is moving quickly. We know you will agree. That is why we would be even more delighted would you take a few minutes and browse through the pages of our books dealing with the subject. Would you still find it stimulating and worthwhile, a note of encouragement for their next edition will reward our endeavor. The two book were shown at the London Book fair March 17 - 19 as part of Algora Publishing stand, and also at Paris' Salon du Livre, March 22 - 27, as part of the United States collective stand, where actually sold out. THE BOOKS CAN BE ORDERED BY CALLING 800-879-4214. THE NEW COMMONWEALTH, FROM BUREAUCRATIC CORPORATISM TO SOCIALIST CAPITALISM, by Claudiu A. Secara, 316 p. 1996, (ISBN 0-9646073-1-X), $12.95, Algora Publishing. The notion of an insider elite's influence on world events has gained some credibility nowadays with the general public. Of course, the extremist groups play on such mounting evidence by exacerbating the mass hysteria upon the fears and the ignorance of a public faced with the unknown of a new economic order. At the same time, the more academically-minded studies continue to ignore the subject due to its high-priestly vested interests in preserving the sacred story, a tendency, always, served by downplaying such influences. This book brings academic logic and common sense reflection to the subject of the philosophy of modern history and leads the reader through the intricate web of the history of high-ground politics and international intrigues with a touch of irony and intellectual impartiality. This is the fascinating story, mainly, of world industrialization, as nation s coalesced into regional unions and their small time rulers were being further rationalized into the novel structure of the emerging global aristocracy. The book is addressed mainly to the educated reader interested in history (old-time and contemporary), international politics, social and economic issues. POST-SOVIET, EUROSLAVIA, by Claudiu A. Secara, 60 p. 2nd ed. 1996, (ISBN 0-9646073-0-1), $4.95, Algora Publishing. Out of the roughly 700 million population, the new Eurasian Community has approximately 180 million Russian speaking natives, but it includes about 360 million Slavic speaking population, or, in other, words, the needed simple majority. The paper examines why in such Commonwealth's general election chances are that a continental new representative parliament would muster enough votes to have the red panslavism reign as the popularly elected Sovereign of Euroslavia. From dasmith@orion.oac.uci.edu Tue Apr 2 00:31:55 1996 Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 23:31:49 -0800 (PST) From: David Smith To: world-system network Subject: THIRD WORLD CITIES IN GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE My new book was published by Westview Press in mid-January. But I've been too busy with teaching, hiring, recruiting grad students, etc., to put out a posting on it 'til now (note: if you find shameless self-promotion objectionable, please hit the delete key NOW): THIRD WORLD CITIES IN GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE: THE POLITICAL ECONOMY OF UNEVEN URBANIZATION by David A. Smith (Sociology, UC-Irvine) Westview Press. January 1996. 202 pages. hc, $55.00, paper, $21.95. This book links what happens "on the ground" in cities where people live to the larger political and economic forces at work, putting these connections in a world-historical framework using a case study approach. The "urban revolution" taking place in cities of underdeveloped nations is drastically altering those previously predominantly agrarian societies. The book use a political economy of the world-system approach -- which focuses on global inequality and dependency -- as the context for city growth in the Third World. This view critiques the conventional ecological perspective on the city which assumes an equilibrium model, here rapid urban growth and various types of demographic and socioeconomic inequalities are seen as "transitional" phases on the path to modernity. In contrast, the book sytematically argues that uneven development and urban inequality are the inevitable result of the expansion of the capitalist world-system. Chapters in the text provide statistical evidence for cross-national patterns, discuss the logic of comparative historical-structural case studies, and provide regional and country studies of West Africa/Nigeria and East Asia/South Korea (exploring the viability of the concept of "semiperipheral urbanization"). The conclusion presents a empirical summary of results, theoretical synthesis, and thoughts on the policy implications of the global perspective. The book is designed for the general audience of the educated public, as well as academic specialists and researchers in comparative urban research and development studies. Since it contains a solid overview and critique of important literatures, as well as new research, it could be used as a text for advanced undergraduates classes and graduate seminars. To order by phone with your credit card, call 1-800-386-5656. (If you'd like an examination copy you can get one for $5, if you provide info on the course, enrollment, and current text(s).) Westview Press is now a division of Harper Collins; their internet address is http://www.harpercollins.com. From chriscd@jhu.edu Tue Apr 2 14:29:53 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I32KSP2PJK91XMCQ@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Tue, 02 Apr 1996 15:59:10 -0400 (EDT) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I32KRZJNV491YFFA@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Tue, 02 Apr 1996 15:40:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 15:26:58 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: Fw: Capitalism Conference Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English ------------------------------ From: A.J.Varty@sussex.ac.uk (Alan Varty) Date: Tue, 2 Apr 1996 02:44:18 -0500 To: INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY Subject: Capitalism Conference ---------------------------------------------------------------------- THE DIRECTION OF CONTEMPORARY CAPITALISM An International Interdisciplinary Conference University of Sussex Friday 26th to Sunday 28th April 1996 With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the de facto conversion of China, capitalism is now for the first time in history an economic system that encompasses the whole globe. The direction of the interlinked capitalist economies, and of the societies built on them, is therefore now the direction of the whole world. Yet since 1989 interest in the specific dynamics of capitalist economies and capitalist societies has if anything declined, to be replaced by reflections on 'postmodernity' in which the economic realm is scarcely mentioned except in discussions of shopping. This conference, which is organised by the innovative Social and Political Thought Graduate Programme at Sussex University, aims to examine the direction in which contemporary societies are moving by looking at those societies essentially as capitalist societies, and by refocusing on a question that recent discussion in social and cultural theory has tended to lose sight of: how are the social, cultural, political and legal changes they are undergoing related to changes in their economic organisation? A range of distinguished speakers from different countries and disciplines will be addressing some of the major developments in capitalist economies and societies over the last few decades: the internationalisation of capital flows, the privatisation and deregulation of domestic economies, the 'informationalisation' of the economy, the 'desecuritising' of employment, an apparent attenuation of state sovereignty, the erosion of the taken-for-granted nature of cultural traditions, a partial transformation in the position of women, a liberalisation of sexual attitudes, an increased orientation towards consumption, the decline of socialist politics, and the rise of new forms of exclusive nationalism on the one hand, and of the politics of environmentalism, 'civil society', and identity on the other. They will be asking how universal these changes are, how they are related to each other, what they mean for the future, and what their implications are for social theory and political philosophy. Sessions will be convened under the broad headings of Economy and State, Society and Culture, and Philosophical and Historical Perspectives. The conference promises to be one of the most exciting events of the year for those interested in the underlying direction of modern societies. The conference fee is 35 pounds sterling (waged) or 15 pounds sterling (students and unwaged; limited places), including refreshments. The conference will run from 5.15 pm on the Friday till 5.30 pm on the Sunday, with some supplementary question and answer sessions with particular speakers early on Sunday evening. A cafeteria/restaurant will be open on campus over the weekend, serving inexpensive hot meals. Details of local accommodation will be sent with booking confirmations. Conference organiser: Andrew Chitty, Arts B, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton BN1 9QN, UK Tel: (+44) 1273 606755 ext. 2101 Fax: (+44) 1273 625972 E-mail: sptconf@sussex.ac.uk Co-organisers: Gareth Bish, Philip Larkin, Christine Roscoe, John Varty. Updated details of the conference are available on our web site: http://www.sussex.ac.uk/USIS/dcc.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- PROVISIONAL PROGRAMME Friday 4.00-5.15 pm Registration ECONOMY AND STATE Friday 5.15-6.45 pm Disembedding and Deregulation Elmar Altvater (Free University, Berlin) 'The Unchained World Market' Alan Scott (University of East Anglia) 'Free Markets by Design?' Friday 6.45-8.15 pm Dinner Friday 8.15-9.45 pm Two parallel sessions: Models of Capitalism John Scott (University of Essex) 'Established and Emergent Variants of Capitalist Development' Ronald Dore (London School of Economics) 'Still Capitalism with Such Feeble Capitalists? The Case of Japan' Hans Singer (University of Sussex) 'State and Markets in Developing Countries' The End of Full Employment and the Changing Nature of Work Andrew Glyn (Corpus Christi College, Oxford) 'Why Has Full Employment Disappeared?' Anne Gray (Independent consultant) 'Flexibilisation of the Labour Market: Its Effect on Workers' Struggles' Discussant: Stephen Wood (London School of Economics) Saturday 9.15-10.45 am Globalisation and the Nation-State Michael Mann (UCLA) 'The Future of the Nation-State' Martin Shaw (University of Sussex) 'The Global State: Perspectives on the Globalisation and Fragmentation of State Power' SOCIETY AND POLITICS Saturday 11.00 am - 12.30 pm Civil Society and Capitalism Jeffrey Alexander (UCLA) 'Rethinking 'Capitalism' in the Context of the Revival of 'Civil Society'' Respondent: Krishan Kumar (University of Kent) Saturday 12.30-2.00 pm Lunch Saturday 2.00-3.30 pm Reflexive Modernisation and Risk Mike Rustin (University of East London) 'The Reflexive Modernisation Thesis' Frank Furedi (University of Kent) 'Risk-Consciousness: The Escape from the Social' Saturday 3.45-5.15 pm Two parallel sessions: Nationalist and Right-Wing Movements in Europe Piero Ignazi (University of Bologna) 'The Origin of the New Extreme Right Movements' Klaus Eder (Humboldt University, Berlin) 'Mobilizing Collective Identities:A New Problem for Social Movement Theory and Research.' Social Movements from Above and Below Orlando Fals Borda (National University of Colombia, Bogota) 'The Political Impact of Social Movements in Latin America' Leslie Sklair (London School of Economics) 'Social Movements for Global Capitalism: The Transnational Capitalist Class in Action' Saturday 5.30-7.00 pm Two parallel sessions: Is There a Future for Socialist Movements After 1989? Adam Michnik (Gazeta Wyborcza, Warsaw) Hilary Wainwright (Red Pepper / University of Manchester) The Rise of Identity Politics Shere Hite (El Mundo, Madrid) 'Women and the New Identity Movements: Whose Side Are We On?' Respondent: Gita Sahgal (independent film-maker and writer) Saturday 7.00-8.30 pm Dinner Saturday 8.30-10.00 pm Gender, Sexuality and the Market Alan Sinfield (University of Sussex) 'Consuming Sexualities: The Politics of the Pink Pound' Angela McRobbie (Loughborough University of Technology) 'Getting to Grips with Consumption: A Feminist Critique' Discussant: Judith Williamson (Middlesex University) PHILOSOPHICAL AND HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES Sunday 9.30-11.00 am Two parallel sessions: Contemporary Capitalism and Law Bob Fine (University of Warwick) 'The Recovery of 'Rights' in Contemporary Social Theory' Chris Thornhill (King's College, London) 'Understanding the Law: Hermeneutics and Sovereignty' Contemporary Capitalism and Social Justice Jan Narveson (University of Waterloo, Ontario) 'Capitalism: Still the Right Answer to the Right Question?' Respondent: David Pepper (Oxford Brookes University) Sunday 11.15 am - 12.45 pm Communitarianism and Capitalism Hans Joas (Free University, Berlin) ''It's the Values, Stupid': Value Oriented Movements and Capitalist Society' David Willetts (Minister for Public Service, British Government) 'Conservatism and Community' Jonathan Boswell (St. Edmund's College, Cambridge) 'Remaking Prescriptive Communitarianism: Groups, Firms or Society?' Sunday 12.45-2.15 pm Lunch Sunday 2.15-3.45 pm Critical Theory and Contemporary Capitalism Helmut Dubiel (Institute for Social Research, Frankfurt) 'The Critical Theory of Disorganised Capitalism' Respondent: Ivan Vejvoda (University of Sussex) Sunday 4.00-5.30 pm The Historical Place and Destiny of Capitalism Ellen Meiksins Wood (York University, Toronto) 'Capitalism or Modernity?' Bob Jessop (Lancaster University) 'Political Economy and the Governance of Complexity: The Future of Capitalist Regulation in a Post-Modern Age' Sunday 6.30-7.30 pm Supplementary Sessions Question and answer sessions with some of the main conference speakers, in parallel. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- BOOKING FORM Please make cheques or international money orders payable to 'The University of Sussex'. Send cheque and booking form in an envelope marked 'DCC Booking' to: Andrew Chitty, Arts B, University of Sussex, Falmer, BN1 9QN. We can arrangement payment from abroad by credit card. Please telephone Andrew Chitty at (+44) 1273 606755 ext. 2101 Date: ................ Amount Enclosed: 35 pounds 15 pounds (Circle Appropriate) (limited places) Other: ................... (Please Specify) If the amount is different to 35 or 15 pounds, e.g. in the case of a double booking, can you please make sure that we have all the relevant information about each participant. Thank you. Title: Prof., Dr., Mr., Mrs., Ms. (Circle Appropriate) Surname: .................................................... Forename(s): .................................................... Department: .................................................... Institution: .................................................... Correspondence Address: .................................................... .................................................... .................................Postcode:.......... Telephone: ......................................Fax:.......... E-Mail (if used): ......................................@............. Would you like the following information? (Please tick): Full Programme (when finalised)? ............................... University of Sussex Campus Map? ............................... Brighton/Lewes Accommodation details? ............................... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 30 March 1996 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 jpoland@ait.ac.th Wed Apr 3 06:44:59 1996 Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 20:44:59 +0700 (GMT) From: Jean Poland To: Net World-System Subject: Hello from Thailand Hello all from about 20 km north of Bangkok [bkk]. Some of you know that I was supposed to be in Burma, but Myanmar govt got nervous about my wife's fellowship to help librarians, so we ended up in Thailand. I resubbed to WSN, piggybacking on her email: jpoland@ait.ac.th [Jean Poland]. I can be emailed direct at that address, and mail sent to DePauw is automatically forwardd. If you send mail here, AIT [Asian Institute of Technology] for me, it would help to put "tom" in subj line. For those wsners who don't care about the above, my apologies for a system message, but this is the fastest and most efficient way to let most of my correspondents know how to reach me. Feel free to pass this new address on. It will be good until about July 25th, at which time we'll start wending our way back to what will in early August be a COOL central Indiana. Hot is the operant word here. tom hall From chriscd@jhu.edu Wed Apr 3 08:59:29 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I33P8KUOM890P40E@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Wed, 03 Apr 1996 10:59:02 -0400 (EDT) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I33P8G0U0W91YCU1@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Wed, 03 Apr 1996 10:58:53 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 03 Apr 1996 10:45:27 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: Journal of World-Systems Research upgrade Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English This to announce a finer look for the JWSR homepage and contents. Have a looksee at http://csf.colorado.edu/wsystems/jwsr.html We have put all the contents into html so it looks nice in Netscape or other World Wide Web client software. The gopher (text) version is still available for those who have only gopher or ftp capability. Volume 2 is under production and will include an article by W. Warren Wagar on world-system praxis with ten comments from scholars and activists; a special thematic section edited by Nick Kardulias on world-systems and anthropology, and several other excellent research papers. Thanks to Salvatore Babones for all his help on JWSR. chris Wagar 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 SOCTB%EMUVM1.BITNET@vaxf.Colorado.EDU Wed Apr 3 22:49:49 1996 by VAXF.COLORADO.EDU (PMDF V5.0-4 #12962) 03 Apr 1996 22:39:52 -0600 (MDT) by EMUVM1.CC.EMORY.EDU (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with RFC822 id 6366; Thu, Date: Thu, 04 Apr 1996 00:30 -0500 (EST) From: Terry Boswell Subject: emancipatory research To: "wsn@csf.colorado.edu" Carl Dassbach recently suggested that world-system research has lost the critical and emancipatory character of its origins. Instead, he is disappointed to find a plethora of "normal science" research using what were once insurgent concepts. My impressions run in exactly the opposite direction. I maintain a stronger allegiance to world-system perspectives than perhaps any other precisely because of what I see as a strong critical and emancipatory tone in much of the research. Rather than disappointed, I also see the "normal science" research as both validation of the theory and extension of the perspective. Perhaps a difference in our views stems from my understanding of a world-system perspective as inherently emancipatory. Just as a sociological perspective frees its adherents from the blinders of idiosyncratic personal experience, a world-system perspective frees one from the narrow focus of societal processes and dynamics. But perhaps others see it differently, that the theory is neutral with no inherent qualities and thus applications are only liberating by deliberate design. I would be interested in hearing what others think. From denemark@UDel.Edu Fri Apr 5 20:07:47 1996 Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 22:07:39 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Denemark To: world system network Subject: world system events at ISA The annual meeting of the International Studies Association will take place in San Diego, April l6-20. For those who will attend, the world historical systems sub-section will be sponsoring a number of events. Wednesday Panel C-24 Roundtable: World Development and World History: On Andre Gunder Frank Chair: Sing Chew Humboldt State Papers: "Asia in the World System" George Asiniero United Nations University "The Construction of Frank Justice Rather Than Frankenstein Injustice" Pat Lauderdale Arizona State University "Geography Sees A Single World" Phil Wagner Simon Fraser University "Let's Be Frank About World History" Albert Bergesen University of Arizona Response: Andre Gunder Frank ***** Thursday Panel A-25 ***** Civilizations and World Politics This is the third annual panel focusing on a body of work by a single author. Chair: Sandra Halperin University of Pittsburgh Paper: "Civilizations and World Politics" David Wilkinson UCLA Discussants: Elena Ermolaeva Johns Hopkins University Kajsa Ekholm University of Lund Robert A. Denemark University of Delaware Chris Chase-Dunn Johns Hopkins University ***** Thursday Panel B - 25 ***** Pulsations in World Historical Development Chair: Barry K. Gills University of Newcastle upon Tyne Papers: "Capital and Power in the Process of World Historical Development: A Perennial Political Economy" Barry K. Gills University of Newcastle upon Tyne "Pulsations in the World System" George Modelski University of Washington and William Thompson Indiana Univeristy "The Social Structuring of Decline" Jonathan Friedman University of Lund and Kajsa Ekholm University of Lund "Pulsation, Hegemonic Shift, or Crisis: Re-Assessing the 'Rise of the West' from a World ystem Perspective" Andre Gunder Frank University of Amsterdam "The Comparative Study of Pulsations in Different Kinds of World-Systems" Chris Chase-Dunn Johns Hopkins University and Tom Hall DePauw University Discussant: Robert A. Denemark University of Delaware **** Thursday C - 25 **** Greening World System Theory Chair: Albert Bergesen University of Arizona Papers: "Oscillations in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Long Swings of Production in the World Economy, l790-l990." Peter Grimes Johns Hopkins University "Population, Long Economic Waves, Deforestation, and World History" Sing Chew Humboldt State University "Toxic Waste Emissions in the International Stytem: A Cross-National Analysis" Albert Bergesen University of Arizona "Environmental Disputes and the International Context" Calvin Morrill University of Arizona ***** WHS Business Meeting: Friday l2:l5, Dover Room. ***** PLEASE PLAN TO ATTEND Agenda: l. Next Year's Panels 2. Publication Plans for Volume of Papers Presented at WHS conference in Lund, Sweden 3. Planning for Next WHS Conference From danny@staff.cs.su.oz.au Sat Apr 6 00:03:45 1996 Subject: Journal Review - Review (Fernand Braudel Center) To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1996 17:03:37 +1000 (EST) From: "Danny Yee" X-URL: http://www.anatomy.su.oz.au/danny/ journal: Review publisher: The Fernand Braudel Center edited: Immanuel Wallerstein subject: economics, economic history other: quarterly, US$28.00 per annum contact: review@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu _Review_ is a quarterly journal "for the study of economies, historical systems, and civilizations", "committed to the pursuit of a perspective which recognizes the primacy of analyses of economies over long historical time and large space, the holism of the socio-historical process, and the transitory (heuristic) nature of theories" (to quote the full name of its publisher and its editorial policy). Coupled with a liberal publication policy, this allows room for a wide range of articles, ranging from case studies of fairly narrow topics and restricted regions and times to broader analyses of global history and world-systems theory. Ideologically _Review_ has a "left" bias, but its primary focus is not political. The four issues of Volume XVIII (1995) run to 678 pages of text. Number one is a special issue on "labour unrest in the world economy, 1870-1990". The other issues are more varied, so I describe in detail the contents of issue number four, which contains five articles. The first is a critique of Samuel Huntingdon's definition of "civilization" (in a debate in _Foreign Affairs_), arguing that he failed to acknowledge the context of his work, in particular alternative conceptions of civilization derived from Hegel, Toynbee, and Braudel and Wallerstein. The second is a study of the incorporation of the Colorado delta area of Baja California into the periphery of the world-economy between 1900 and 1910, a study which, despite its narrow geographical and temporal focus, successfully connects to wider perspectives. The third is a time-series study of development dependency in Mexico and Brazil which attempts to combine quantitative comparative analysis with historical studies of individual nations. The fourth, based on interviews with Cuban and Mexican left intellectuals, surveys changing attitudes to national autonomy in a world dominated by global capitalism. The final article (in Spanish, with an English summary, illustrating _Review's_ custom of printing the occasional foreign language article) is about the move away from universalist movements of resistance to more particularist ones. As a generalist I find some of the material in _Review_ narrow, but I usually end up reading most of the articles in each issue. Though my personal preference is for monographs, there is nothing like an interdisciplinary journal for broadening one's perspective. _Review_ is not expensive (there is a very good discount rate for subscribers outside the OECD) and I will renew my subscription. -- %T Review %E Immanuel Wallerstein %I The Fernand Braudel Center %C Binghamton, New York %O quarterly, US$28.00 per annum %G ISSN 0147-9032 %K journal, economics, economic history %U review@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu 6 April 1996 ------------------------------------------------ Copyright (c) 1996 Danny Yee (danny@cs.su.oz.au) http://www.anatomy.su.oz.au/danny/book-reviews/ ------------------------------------------------ From chriscd@jhu.edu Mon Apr 8 11:53:43 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I3AQTPPDV490OXVX@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Mon, 08 Apr 1996 12:16:22 -0400 (EDT) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I3AQT8X81S91ZC78@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Mon, 08 Apr 1996 11:59:27 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1996 10:46:01 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: Fw: FOREIGN POLICY INTERNSHIP for summer Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English ------------------------------ From: Carlos Osorio Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 11:39:38 -0500 To: Note Redalc , Note Lasnet , H-Latam-n , Central America List , note Canala-l , Note Activ-l Subject: FOREIGN POLICY INTERNSHIP for summer This is a very interesting research project. Please pass to others that may be interested. INTERNSHIP - FOREIGN POLICY - DECLASSIFIED PAPERS THE NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE, an independent, nonprofit research institute and library, seeks a student intern to assist part-time on a project concerning The History of the Guatemalan Armed Forces. The intern will research U.S.-Guatemala relations since the 1970's, examining bilateral diplomatic, political, human rights, defense and security issues. The research will contribute to a broad archive project on the role of the United States in Central America, resulting in publication of a collection of declassified government documents on the subject. The National Security Archive undertakes research projects to enrich the debate on American public policy by making available to scholars, researchers and Congress internal government documentation on a variety of key foreign, defense and intelligence issues. The intern will participate in the project in a number of substantive ways. Depending on the project's needs and the interests of the intern, those may include: tracking down bibliographies on U.S.-Guatemala relations, assembling a set of secondary sources for reference (from Facts on File, specialized journals and newspapers, human rights reports, university theses, and Internet on-line databases); collecting data from government documents (DOD, CIA, DOS, NSC) on security assistance, intelligence and human rights; building an extensive chronology of events; drafting glossary entries on key names and organizations; and investigating leads on U.S.-Guatemala relations. The internship is unpaid. Academic credit is often possible; students should contact the appropriate persons at their school for more details. REQUIREMENTS: The position is available immediatedly. Please note that applicants must be able to make a commitment for a minimum of four months (one semester), 10-20 hours a week. Foreign students are welcome. We can give you a hand making housing arrangements. The Archive is seeking applicants with strong writing and research skills, and some understanding of U.S. policy in Latin America. Proficiency in Spanish is helpful but not required. TO APPLY: Please send a letter, a resume, a writing sample, transcripts and two recommendations: Carlos Osorio National Security Archive Suite 701 Gelman Library 2130 H St., NW Washington D.C. 20037 You may send a resume and a letter in advance by fax or e-mail to: Fax: 202/994-7005 E-mail: cosorio@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu Students in the Washington D.C. area call Carlos Osorio at 202/994-7219. The Archive just moved its offices to The Gelman Library, and applicants are welcome to drop in and introduce themselves. From chriscd@jhu.edu Mon Apr 8 12:14:42 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I3AQTPPDV490OXVX@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Mon, 08 Apr 1996 12:11:29 -0400 (EDT) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I3AQSPLPGW91ZU67@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Mon, 08 Apr 1996 11:59:01 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1996 10:45:33 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: Fw: FOREIGN POLICY INTERNSHIP for summer Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English ------------------------------ From: Carlos Osorio Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1996 11:39:38 -0500 To: Note Redalc , Note Lasnet , H-Latam-n , Central America List , note Canala-l , Note Activ-l Subject: FOREIGN POLICY INTERNSHIP for summer This is a very interesting research project. Please pass to others that may be interested. INTERNSHIP - FOREIGN POLICY - DECLASSIFIED PAPERS THE NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE, an independent, nonprofit research institute and library, seeks a student intern to assist part-time on a project concerning The History of the Guatemalan Armed Forces. The intern will research U.S.-Guatemala relations since the 1970's, examining bilateral diplomatic, political, human rights, defense and security issues. The research will contribute to a broad archive project on the role of the United States in Central America, resulting in publication of a collection of declassified government documents on the subject. The National Security Archive undertakes research projects to enrich the debate on American public policy by making available to scholars, researchers and Congress internal government documentation on a variety of key foreign, defense and intelligence issues. The intern will participate in the project in a number of substantive ways. Depending on the project's needs and the interests of the intern, those may include: tracking down bibliographies on U.S.-Guatemala relations, assembling a set of secondary sources for reference (from Facts on File, specialized journals and newspapers, human rights reports, university theses, and Internet on-line databases); collecting data from government documents (DOD, CIA, DOS, NSC) on security assistance, intelligence and human rights; building an extensive chronology of events; drafting glossary entries on key names and organizations; and investigating leads on U.S.-Guatemala relations. The internship is unpaid. Academic credit is often possible; students should contact the appropriate persons at their school for more details. REQUIREMENTS: The position is available immediatedly. Please note that applicants must be able to make a commitment for a minimum of four months (one semester), 10-20 hours a week. Foreign students are welcome. We can give you a hand making housing arrangements. The Archive is seeking applicants with strong writing and research skills, and some understanding of U.S. policy in Latin America. Proficiency in Spanish is helpful but not required. TO APPLY: Please send a letter, a resume, a writing sample, transcripts and two recommendations: Carlos Osorio National Security Archive Suite 701 Gelman Library 2130 H St., NW Washington D.C. 20037 You may send a resume and a letter in advance by fax or e-mail to: Fax: 202/994-7005 E-mail: cosorio@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu Students in the Washington D.C. area call Carlos Osorio at 202/994-7219. The Archive just moved its offices to The Gelman Library, and applicants are welcome to drop in and introduce themselves. 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 Apr 9 13:47:08 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I3CCV0W44G91ZQZD@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Tue, 09 Apr 1996 15:41:45 -0400 (EDT) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-9 #5488) id <01I3CCTTO41S921CPM@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Tue, 09 Apr 1996 15:40:46 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 09 Apr 1996 14:26:54 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: more on emancipatory research Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 11:28:17 PST From: "Denis O'Hearn" Subject: Re: emancipatory research To: SOCTB%EMUVM1.BITNET@vaxf.Colorado.EDU On Thu, 04 Apr 1996 07:07:59 +0000 SOCTB%EMUVM1.BITNET@vaxf.Colorado.EDU wrote: > Carl Dassbach recently suggested that world-system research has lost the > critical and emancipatory character of its origins. Instead, he is > disappointed to find a plethora of "normal science" research using what were > once insurgent concepts. My impressions run in exactly the opposite direction. > I maintain a stronger allegiance to world-system perspectives than perhaps > any other precisely because of what I see as a strong critical and > emancipatory tone in much of the research. Rather than disappointed, I also > see the "normal science" research as both validation of the theory and > extension of the perspective. There is perhaps some truth in both Carl Dassbach's and Terry Boswell's observations. I think Carl is right that many world-systems concepts have been hijacked for other uses, but his target may be somewhat misplaced. Rather than those who use world-systems concepts for "normal science" purposes I am more concerned about those who use them for intrinsically conservative political purposes. An example is the way European Union policymakers and pundits have taken the concept of "periphery", robbed it of its logical meaning in terms of exploitation and economic oppression, and redefined it simply in geographical terms for their own purposes. EU "peripherality" policies now give measly handouts to Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain etc. to improve their physical infrastructures (thus probably increasing their peripherality in w-s terms) in return for these states' support for Euro-core-interested policies like the single market, maastricht, etc. Where w-s concepts have become mainstream and respectable perhaps there IS need to worry. On the other hand, understanding space and transport in the world-system is not "normal" science but an important step in understanding how economic oppression is established and reproduced. As Terry says, it's validation and extension. How can we analyze British or US hegemony (hopefully to transcend them), for instance, without understanding how they controlled spatial distribution and transport networks through the Navigation Acts, wars, threats of wars, interstate economic regulation, and so on. Space and transport are a big part of imperialism and we can't get very emancipatory without understanding them. > Just as a sociological perspective frees its adherents from the blinders of > idiosyncratic personal experience, a world-system perspective frees one from > the narrow focus of societal processes and dynamics. But perhaps others see it > differently, that the theory is neutral with no inherent qualities and thus > applications are only liberating by deliberate design. While w-s has the potential to free one from these narrow focuses, there is nothing inherently liberating about moving our focus from national societies to global systems (maybe I misunderstand Terry's point here). It seems quite possible to construct a very conservative form of "world-system" analysis (is this not in a sense what the Council on Foreign Relations has been up to in much of their stuff through the years on grand areas, hegemonies and bigemonies, etc?). From elena@jhu.edu Mon Apr 15 17:55:17 1996 id <01I3KZGHHVKW90RFHQ@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 19:55:08 -0400 (EDT) id <01I3KZGGQQ1S90QL3Q@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Mon, 15 Apr 1996 19:55:07 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 19:54:55 -0400 From: Elena M Ermolaeva Subject: ANNOUNCEMENT OF NEW ARCHIVE To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu WELCOME TO DAII, Data Archive of Interregional Interactions. This is a recently established world-wide and interdisciplinary archive which contains data sets and other information relevant to the topic of interregional interactions. GOALS: to accumulate, preserve and facilitate the exchange of raw data important for research, education, and public programming in the humanities. FORM OF DATA: no restrictions. The Archive is designed as a complementary forum to World-Systems Electronic Archive. This new archive will not impose any restrictions on the form of data. The records may encompass paper questionnaires, coding sheets, newspapers, maps, as well as information on machine readable diskettes and objects of material culture. Both printed and handwritten versions will be accepted. PROJECTS/ITEMS ANALYSES: *Population * The Policy * Social Stratification * Legal Apparatus * Commerce * Crafts and Technology * Religion * Settlement Pattern * Subsistence * Cognitive Variables * Warfare * etc. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE: The Archive is headed by a Committee composed of scholars from Johns Hopkins University as well as outsiders. We tried to balance the representation by geographical areas as well as by... gender. This is a tentative list of Committee members (in alphabetical order): Elena Ermolaeva (Sociology, Johns Hopkins U.) Patricia Fernandez-Kelly (Institute for Policy Studies, Johns Hopkins U.) William Haller (Sociology, U. of Pittsburgh) Michael Howard (Sociology/Anthropology, Simon Frazer U., Canada) Nina Rostegaeva (Institute of Sociology, Moscow, Russia) Slava Shipilov (Institute of Sociology, Moscow, Russia) CURRENT ACQUISITIONS: * Interregional interactions in pre-contact (1779) Hawaii (politico-military events, intermarriages, information exchange, data on rise and fall) (Elena Ermolaeva) * Updated version of Muller and Bornschier's "Comparative World Data" with added observations for some of the variables up to 1985 (William Haller) * Maquiladoras in Ciudad Juarez Mexico. The set is formed by approximately 400 interviews with women working in maquiladoras. Questions asked focused on demographic characteristics, migratory background, family composition and income distribution (Patricia Fernandez-Kelly) * Interviews with Immigrant Children and Families in Miami. Set of 50 interviews conducted between 1993 and 1995 focuses on economic adjustment and ethnic identity (Patricia Fernandez-Kelly) * Greater Homewood: A Blueprint for Community Action. Raw statistical and demographic data encompassing 23 census tracts in the City of Baltimore. Research conducted during 1995 (Patricia Fernandez-Kelly) * Over 530 data sets conducted by scholars of the Institute of Sociology, Russian Academy of Sciences The list of acquisitions will be updated and listed on e-mail networks, including WSN and IPE networks. For more information about accommodation of your data, or for obtaining copies of Achive Acquisitions, or on other matters, please contact elena@jhu.edu From chriscd@jhu.edu Wed Apr 24 13:12:56 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-13 #5488) id <01I3X7SC6N9C8WVYTF@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Wed, 24 Apr 1996 14:18:35 -0400 (EDT) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-13 #5488) id <01I3X7IAWUNK8Y59GX@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Wed, 24 Apr 1996 13:55:12 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 12:41:39 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: Fw: 1997 ISA-IPE Section Paper/Panel Proposals Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English ------------------------------ From: Lev Gonick Date: Tue, 23 Apr 1996 12:52:04 -0400 To: INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY Subject: 1997 ISA-IPE Section Paper/Panel Proposals *****IMPORTANT NOTICE****** CALL FOR PAPER AND PANEL SUBMISSIONS to the 1997 Annual Meetings of the International Studies Association IPE Section are availabe on-line. Please point your web browser to http://csf.colorado.edu/ipe/isasection.html *************************** Lev Gonick lev.gonick@csf.colorado.edu 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 elena@jhu.edu Thu Apr 25 00:18:54 1996 id <01I3XR7O9GRK8Y51KG@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Thu, 25 Apr 1996 02:16:37 -0400 (EDT) id <01I3XSTBWNB48Y5G7U@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Thu, 25 Apr 1996 00:05:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 00:04:29 -0400 From: Elena M Ermolaeva Subject: New acquisition of DAII To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu --Boundary (ID x4c+Fl61bPgsSpee93tmzA) This is a new acquisition of Data Archive of Interregional Interations (see the Announcement on April 15, 1996). For more information about accommodation of your data, for obtaining copies of Archive Acquisitions, or on other matters, please contact elena@jhu.edu *********************** Rick Wicks (Sweden) We have just completed a study for Sida (the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency -- Swedish foreign aid) on the economic effects of commercial and charitable exports of used clothes to less-developed countries, with particular focus on the question whether charitable exports should continue to be subsidized by Sida (and under what circumstances, if so). ==================================================== Here is a summary of the report: The report includes a variety of statistics on the used-clothes trade in general (for instance, the 127 gross used-clothes exporters in 1990, and the 181 gross used-clothes importers, with values, weights, average prices, and weights per capita), as well as some specifics of U.S. and Swedish imports and exports. There is also discussion of images of the used-clothes trade in labor and popular media, trends in national trade policies and practices, NGO attitudes and involvement, as well as a brief exploration of some similar issues with food aid, and some excerpts regarding the used-clothes trade in 18th century Britain. To summarize the report, both theoretical analysis and empirical evidence are unclear as to the actual effects of commercial used clothes imports in developing countries, which generate a lot of employment and income while providing consumers with cheap but usable goods, although they can reduce domestic production, particularly if domestic industry is not exporting, and if factor markets are not functioning well (so that there is significant unemployment, and reallocation of labor and capital are difficult). If there are positive externalities of textile or clothing production in developing economies, such damage could be compounded. On the other hand, there may be distributional advantages in used-clothes trade and consumption, since the poor seem to benefit on both the supply and the demand sides. If there is net damage from used-clothes imports, then subsidies which increased the damage would obviously not be good, and probably constitute illegal dumping besides. However, this problem could be avoided if subsidies targeted those "too poor to enter the market". But such targeting is very difficult to do (NGOs may not be as good at it as they are sometimes thought to be), it's expensive, and it often seems to increase opportunities for corruption and other forms of abuse. Besides, anecdotal evidence suggests that much of the used-clothes so distributed would end up on the market again anyway, thus defeating the point of the targeting. Given all the uncertainties above, we cannot answer whether subsidizing used clothes exports is good or bad based only on the direct effects, but rather we have to look at the alternative costs. The simplest answer is not necessarily the best: Just because we have used clothes and possible subsidy funds, it's not necessarily the best idea to use the funds to send the clothes to poor people. Given that there are thriving used clothes markets worldwide and in most less developed countries, there is no need for subsidies to make them available to the public, and on the other hand, they can readily be converted into cash through the commercial network, so there is no need for subsidies simply to get them used. Poor people who need clothes need many things. The most useful thing for them would be cash, or income-generating projects, so that they can decide for themselves what they want to buy. Used clothes can be sold and the proceeds used, along with erstwhile subsidies, for such projects. Thus, greater benefits are possible for poor people with a more imaginative approach. A possible exception would be if supply has broken down due to some catastrophe, and clothing is simply not available in the market. In that case, relief agencies would have to make a determination whether used clothes were the most available and most effective form of clothing assistance, and if so, subsidized deliveries could be warranted. NGOs seem increasingly skeptical of using used clothes in this manner, however. ==================================================== --Boundary (ID x4c+Fl61bPgsSpee93tmzA)-- From TLOYA@socsci.ss.emory.edu Thu Apr 25 08:18:06 1996 From: TLOYA@socsci.ss.emory.edu 25 Apr 96 10:18:23 EST5edt Organization: Emory University To: WSN@csf.colorado.edu Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 10:22:44 EST5EDT Subject: WS videos? Hi. I'm new to WNS. I'm a grad student at Emory University, and I'm looking for videos to use in an undergraduate strat course that could serve as a vehicle to discuss world system theory, or that illustrate key WS dynamics (students are reading Braun's "The Rich Get Richer.") For example, years ago I saw a documentary on (If I recall correctly) United Fruit Company's exploits in Cuba before the revolution, including interviews with UFC's CEOs, board members, and some members of US govt. at the time. Any suggestions? Thanks for your thoughts. T. Loya From rross@vax.clarku.edu Thu Apr 25 10:51:14 1996 id <01I3YJN64B9Y90P92T@vax.clarku.edu>; Thu, 25 Apr 1996 12:53:29 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 12:53:29 -0500 (EST) From: "ROBERT J.S. (BOB) ROSS, CHAIR OF SOCIOLOGY" Subject: Re: WS videos? In-reply-to: <1CCC3A2845@ssmain.ss.emory.edu> To: TLOYA@socsci.ss.emory.edu On Thu, 25 Apr 1996 TLOYA@socsci.ss.emory.edu wrote: > Hi. I'm new to WNS. I'm a grad student at Emory University, and I'm looking for videos to use in an > undergraduate strat course that could serve as a vehicle to discuss world system theory, or that > illustrate key WS dynamics (students are reading Braun's "The Rich Get Richer.") For example, years > ago I saw a documentary on (If I recall correctly) United Fruit Company's exploits in Cuba before the > revolution, including interviews with UFC's CEOs, board members, and some members of US govt. at the > time. > > Any suggestions? > > > Thanks for your thoughts. > > T. Loya > > I believe the documentary in question is "Controlling Interest." Put out by California Newsreel, the film, now a bit old, focusses on Chile and Brazil, and theoverthrow of Allende. The CEO interviews are among the best the part. Bob Ross From rkmoore@iol.ie Thu Apr 25 10:59:52 1996 Thu, 25 Apr 1996 17:58:34 +0100 (BST) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 17:58:34 +0100 (BST) To: PHILOFHI@YORKU.CA, WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK From: rkmoore@iol.ie (Richard K. Moore) Subject: Article: Doublespeak and The New World Order ******************************** As published in New Dawn, March-April 1996 ******************************** Doublespeak and The New World Order Copyright 1996 by Richard K. Moore rkmoore@iol.ie ftp://ftp.iol.ie/users/rkmoore/cyberlib 23 January 1996 The New World Order (you know what the NWO is -- the corporate-sponsored "free-trade" globalization steamroller) exploits language in precisely the way Orwell predicted. Words are used to mislead and conceal -- not clarify -- and are twisted to designate the opposite of their true meanings. Concepts are tagged as being either "good guys" or "bad guys" by dressing them up in "white hat" words (like "reform" or "free") or "black hat" words (like "bureaucracy" or "politics"). This use of language is a form of propaganda -- and this _vocabulary propaganda_ is much more subtle and effective than _content propaganda_. Content propaganda misinforms about issues, but vocabulary propaganda interferes with the ability to think or talk about issues in a way that can lead to understanding or enable effective political organizing. As Orwell predicted, this kind of propaganda makes language volatile. In his scenario, one might read in the morning paper about an action against an enemy, with no mention that the same folks were faithful allies as recently as yesterday's edition. In actuality, the shifts in today's doublespeak are more subtle and evolutionary. As you watch new language being created, you can map out the NWO agenda: the white-hat items are to be promoted, the black-hat items to be suppressed. A classic example was the Oliver North hearings. Words like "good soldier", "patriotic", "freedom fighter", and "legality" -- not to mention "constitutional balance of powers" -- took quite a beating. By labeling state-armed mercenary terrorists (ie., the Contras) as "freedom fighters", the whole linguistic ground of the hearings was warped beyond hope. Those who should have been indicting the pathetic little desk colonel and impeaching his boss were instead prefacing their remarks with kowtows toward the "freedom fighters" (if there was time remaining after the prayer service). There was no ability to discuss the affair from a meaningful moral or constitutional perspective, and the hearings dissolved into circus rhetoric/coverup, as was intended by the NWO language masters. If we want to discuss the world situation with any kind of useful understanding, we need to explicitly decode the NWO doublespeak, and learn how to translate it into straight language. This is not an easy task, because the doublespeak process has, over time, warped political language to the point where it is nearly useless. Words like "socialism" or "tariffs", being so heavily tarred with the black brush, can't be used meaningfully without an explanatory preface. Even the word "government" is tricky to use -- the echoes of "bureaucrat", "inefficient", and "corrupt" reverberate unconsciously. Meanwhile, words like "market" and "competitive" have been promoted with the white brush to Unquestioned Axioms of The Universe. Easier would it be to hold back the tides with a horse and lance, than to resist "market forces", or so it would seem. Following is my attempt to associate accurate meanings with some of the NWO's most topical phrases. Perhaps these definitions will ring true to you, and help you better understand what the NWO is about. With the doublespeak unraveled, the media becomes a source of accurate information after all -- NWO statements, though coded, are actually fairly descriptive of the sinister NWO agenda. ____________________________________________ "COMPETITIVENESS": the attractiveness of a venue to multinational investors, particularly: laxity of regulation and taxation; the degree to which a developed country regresses to Third-World status. The phrase "Britain must be made more competitive for today's markets" decodes as "Britain must have lower wages and lower corporate tax rates so that it can compete with low-income parts of the world in attracting _generic_ corporate investments". _Genuine_ competitiveness, as demonstrated by Japan, involves marshalling the nation's skills & resources toward adding value in focused markets -- achieved by promoting synergy and making coordinated investments. NWO-peddled "competitiveness" is like prostitution -- it values a nation's human and societal resources at scrap street value. ____________________________________________ "CONSERVATISM": a policy of radically restructuring politics and economics in order to produce investment opportunities and undermine democracy; contrast with _actual_ conservatism: a policy of preserving existing institutions in the interest social and economic stability. Ronald Reagan was the clearest exemplar of this particular line of doublespeak. His rhetoric emphasized "returning to traditional values" while he was in fact dismantling long-evolved institutions and pursuing policies of unprecedented and untried social and economic transformation. _Genuine_ conservatism acts as a societal gyroscope, resisting nearly every kind of change, regardless of its direction. Conservatism's catch prase might be "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." A very important point to notice is that the assault by the NWO on existing democratic institutions has reversed the field in the game of Radical vs. Conservative: for most of the twentieth century, it has been the democracy-minded progressives who sought radical change, and the capitalist right wing who were the conservatives. But since Reagan & Thatcher, the right-wing has taken the initiative for radical change (in the wrong directions), and it is now the progressives who have a vital interest in maintaining the political status quo (ie., constitutional democracy and national sovereignty). In this case, doublespeak succeeds in separating the progressives from their natural constituency. Progressive activists _should_ be reaching out to the silent majority -- arousing stick-in-the-mud conservatives to join the cause against reckless NWO-induced changes. By pre-empting the term "conservatism", the right-wing radicals have tricked most of the conservative-tending masses into following the wrong parade. Progressives _must_ reclaim their natural ground. To have any hope of assembling a significant constituency, they must find a way to break through the doublespeak jargon and help the general population to see that its interests are not being served by the new "conservatism", and that reckless changes are its true agenda. We see a bizarre distortion of this desirable conservative reaction in the Militia mentality in America. Militia "conspiracy theories" are actually quite close to the mark: the U.S. government _is_ being sold out to international interests; the U.N. _is_ beginning to establish a sovereignty-threatening military force; the Constitution _is_ being trashed; the establishment in Washington _is_ effectively a bunch of traitors. But it's not the progressives who are bringing this message to these hard-core backwoods conservatives -- instead the message is getting to them with a doublespeak reverse spin that manages to label the sellout of America as a "liberal" conspiracy! Since a Democrat happens to be in the White House, the NWO myth spinners have been able to transform anti-establishment sentiment into anti-liberal sentiment. Instead of addressing the real enemies of the Constitution (the corporate elite), the Militia tilts its lance toward the liberals and progressives who should be instead its natural allies in defending democracy. Divide and Conquer shows up once again as the most potent tool of autocratic control. Language is a field of battle, the media is the artillery, and vocabulary is the ammunition. The NWO has taken the field by storm, and is proceeding with coordinated attacks on several fronts, using all the latest hi-tech vocabulary ammunition. They've laid a bed of land mines that cripple us when we try to stand on them: "liberalism", "conservatism", "prosperity", "democracy". Progressives must wake up to the attack, and somehow find a way to fight back. The achilles heal of the NWO lies in its runaway successes: its high-handed treatment of nearly everyone has created an awesome potential counter-reaction -- if people can be made to see who the real perpetrators are, those who are engineering the decline of democratic civilization. Even its doublespeak successes can be turned against it, if people can learn to read the NWO agenda by learning to decode the propaganda it dishes out. The NWO crowd actually reveals all in their propaganda, so arrogantly confident are they that their doublespeak enigma device won't be seen through by the people. ____________________________________________ "DEMOCRACY": a government with a competitive party electoral system, in which multinationals are able to exert effective influence; Note: unrelated to whether the government represents the people or supports their welfare. If multinational interests are served, then no amount of popular unrest, nor vote rigging -- not even civil war -- will serve as credible evidence that a "democracy" is a sham. If corporate interests aren't served, no amount of civil accord, prosperity, and popular support qualifies the government as "democratic". Doublespeak audacity reached an outrageous climax when CCN broadcast live coverage of Yeltsin shelling his own Assembly, and billed it as a victory for "democracy"! (Did they realize they were televising an exact repeat of Lenin's shelling of an earlier Constituent Assembly? Would that have altered their assessment?) What Yeltsin's bloody power grab _was_ a victory for was the corporate-sponsored dismantlement of the Russian economy, a program the Western-backed Yeltsin has played his part in flawlessly. With a subtle doublespeak twist within a twist, the media refers to Yeltsin as a "liberal element" -- in fact he is a "neo- liberal" element, which translates as "NWO stooge". _Genuine_ democracy must be judged by its responsiveness to the informed desires of the people, its success in promoting their welfare, and their satisfaction with its performance. The mechanisms used to attain a functional democracy can have many forms. The media says only competitive political parties can deliver democracy, but don't believe it. The record is clear that multi-party elections are no guarantee whatever of democratic process. Not only can parties be limited to those representing elite minority (or foreign) interests, but the autonomous authority of the military (typically subsidized by major NWO powers) often overshadows governmental policy. To understand what democracy is really about, we need to re-examine our most cherished assumptions. Is the U.S. a democracy? Is Cuba a democracy? Do you think you can tell? Cuba doesn't have competitive parties or elections. But policies are worked out by representatives from different segments of society, are explained forthrightly (at length!) on the media, and feedback is listened to. Literacy, health care, and nutrition levels (until recently) have been the envy of comparable economies. And Castro has been overwhelmingly popular for most of his tenure. The U.S. has parties and elections. But policies are worked out by corporate interests, sold through misleading media rhetoric, and popular opposition is dismissed as emotional reaction. Literacy, health care, and nutrition levels -- in fact human welfare by any measure -- are on a steady decline. The esteem of government and elected officials looms ever lower on the horizon, nearly ready to set into a sea of total disgust. The elections themselves are circuses where certain topics are selected as being "the issues" and the crowd is entertained with an orchestrated wrestling match where Hulk Republican and Pretty Boy Democrat dance around the limited ring of issues. When the match is over, the establishment gets back to its un-discussed agendas. Because there are no substantive issues raised during the campaign, the rhetoric fades into memory. There's no platform, and no distinct "change of government", as there used to be in Britain, before Tony Blair infiltrated the Labour Party. Such elections are more like a shuffling of board members in a corporation -- the faces change, the policies continue to be set as before -- outside any democratic process. Pink Floyd asked "Can you tell a green field from a cold steel rail?". I ask you: Can you tell a self-governing people from a stone parliament building? ____________________________________________ "DEVELOPMENT": the restructuring of an economy to facilitate extraction of wealth by multinationals; transforming an economy so as to become more dependent on trade with multinationals; the theft of national assets by multinationals. "Development" is usually pursued where the potential profit is greatest. This means that the investment is as little as possible and the exportation of eventual revenues is as great as possible. The result is a net drain on the "developing" economy. Fair play, you might say, if the "developing" country is able to take advantage of the situation to bootstrap its way into general economic prosperity (South Korea?), or if an infrastructure is created which benefits the general economy. But these collateral benefits are not the purpose of "development", and the consequences are usually otherwise. Brazil is an example where "development" was heralded as a great success (at least for a period), due to the large flow of money through the country. But the local benefits were concentrated in relatively small, elite management and land-owner classes, and the consequence for the general population was the destruction of their food supply and agricultural economy to the benefit of agri-export operators. Meanwhile the rainforests burn to make room for displaced farmers or new agri-business "developments". In other cases, a country might be left with an infrastructure to support export operations, such as a selectively deployed highway system, which may not be appropriate for the general development needs of the country, and which increases its dependence on oil imports. In many cases, "development" involves the granting of mineral rights, land leases, tax discounts, or exemptions from regulations, as enticements to attract corporate "investment". In rare cases, such grants are valued appropriately, but all too frequently a cash-strapped Third-World country is compelled to give away long-term rights to valuable national assets while getting very little in return, usually some low-paying jobs and under-valued royalties. Whether the asset be copper, oil, or agricultural land, the multinational investor extracts billions in profits while the host country gets a relatively minor pittance of the actual value of the arm-twist stolen asset. ____________________________________________ "FREE TRADE": the systematic destabilization of national and regional economic arrangements, by means of treaties such as GATT and NAFTA, in order to take economic decision making as far as possible from any democratic process, and centralize global economic control into the hands of the corporate elite. "Free trade", it would seem from the corporate media's propaganda, is universally accepted by all reputable economists as the One True Path to prosperity and progress. Such a belief, which does not in fact enjoy a consensus among economists, is historical nonsense. The Great Economies, such as those of the U.S., Imperial Britain, and modern Japan, were developed under nurturing protectionist policies. Only when they achieved considerable economic strength did these countries begin to adopt "free trade" policies, as a way to prevent other nations from catching up. An economy (see also: "Reform") is an ecosystem. A strong economy is one that has diversity and synergy. When "free trade" is imposed on an underdeveloped economy, it develops in a distorted way, and is over- dependent on external market fluctuations. Such weakness increases the bargaining leverage of the multinationals, which is the obvious objective of "free trade" in the first place. "Free trade", which is part of the "globalization" agenda, brings a shift economic sovereignty from nation states, where there is hope of democratic participation, to corporate-approved international commissions, where only the corporate voice holds sway. ____________________________________________ "GLOBALIZATION": the undermining of the nation state as a focus of economic organization; the reduction to commodity status of worldwide raw-goods suppliers; the monopolization of distribution channels by transnational trading companies; the reduction of health & quality standards to least-common- denominator levels; the most honest self-characterization of the NWO agenda. Capturing more broadly the scope of the "free trade" campaign, "globalization" expresses the intent to homogenize the world economy -- to make national borders transparent to the transfer of capital and goods, and enable a higher-order of centralized global management. The claim is frequently made that this will lead to a leveling of prosperity levels on a global basis, but with some exceptions, the evidence is all to the contrary. What we see instead, and as we should expect from how "development" is structured and "free trade" is implemented, is that "globalization" leads to a _greater_ prosperity disparity between the "developed" and "developing" nations, as measured by the disposable income and living standards of the general populations. The greatest _real_ prosperity gains have been achieved by those countries which created domestic synergy in their economies through selective protectionism (eg., Japan). The availability of low-cost worldwide transport and the multinational scope of corporate operations -- together with deregulation of trade barriers -- leads to a situation where every producer is competing with every other producer throughout the world. Distributors can thus shop for the best deal globally, and continue to sell at whatever price they can get in their markets. As the distribution channels are increasingly concentrated into fewer hands (mega-store chains, conglomerate food importers, etc.), a classic cartel/robber-baron scenario is developing, and will become more pronounced as globalization progresses. The "robber-baron" scenario looks like this: On one side you have separated, unorganized producers, all competing with one another to supply the distributors. On the other side, you have the consumers of the world, also separated and unorganized, buying what they can afford from what is offered in their local outlets. In the middle you have the distributors, who like robber barons of old, have (increasingly) monopoly control over the the flow of goods from producer to market. Not only can producer prices be driven down in one-sided bargaining, but producers can be selectively driven out of business, and in general the distributors have the power to dictate whether and how the producers do business. The classic example of a robber baron regime was California in the heydey of the Southern Pacific Railroad. SP would audit the books of firms which shipped goods on their lines, and adjust each firm's shipping rates so that profits on sales were shared "fairly" with SP. We see this kind of thing today when the same drugs from the same distributors are sold at radically different prices in different countries -- those who can afford more, pay more. It's the corporate version of a graduated income tax -- but for the people, it's taxation without representation all over again. As for non-price consumer concerns -- environmental protection, content labelling, pesticide levels, other health issues -- we can expect to see a rapid reversal of the "green" gains which have occurred since the sixties. Initially we see some localized improvements in standards, as the EU, for example, levels its regulatory playing field. But the long-term decision-making role for these policies is being shifted to corporate-dominated entities (WTO, GATT, Brussels). This means that as the distributors tighten their noose of control, and after local regulatory power has been disabled, the distributors will wield their awesome influence to reduce "anti-competitive" environmentalist "shackles" on "free markets" and "consumer savings". This is of course already happening. We have the EU telling the Germans that UK beef is safe, when the UK can't even get its story straight about whether adequate controls are being implemented. The EU, and even more so the WTO, have every motivation to go out of their way to decide in favor of more trade, and minimize appraisal of any negative consequences. Their business is to increase business, and they are a level removed from the influence of citizen's concerns. That's why "globalization" amounts to a partial sovereignty shift from democracy (where it exists) to corporate feudalism. "Globalization", among the terms in the NWO phrase book, comes closest to being an honest use of language. The NWO does indeed, as "globalization" suggests, want to systematize commerce on a global scale, to homogenize the world in who-knows-how-many aspects -- to bring forth a new world order. The deception comes in the implication that "globalization" will bring increased prosperity, that "free markets" will get goods to those who need them, and that the abundance of the earth will become available to humanity on a more equitable basis. As the song goes, "It ain't necessarily so". ____________________________________________ "PRIVATIZATION": (1) the theft of citizen assets by corporate interests, achieved through discounted sell-offs of intentionally under-valued public properties; (2) the creation of new investment opportunities by means of dismantling successfully operating public services. Media discussion of privatization is generally limited to the narrow issues of consumer benefits and operating efficiency. Even on these grounds, the arguments presented are usually far from convincing. They are frequently simply a recitation of the axioms "public is inefficient", "private is efficient" -- often in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Privatization is not just a change of managers, it is a change of ownership. It removes equity from citizens, and removes or minimizes public control over asset development and pricing. In many cases following privatization, employment is reduced as an immediate step in reducing costs and enhancing the profit picture -- without the social costs of the unemployment being considered in the overall accounting for the transaction. The aim of a privatized operation shifts from providing a public service, to making a profit. Short-term profit pressures may reduce investment in long-term maintenance and upgrades, since their payback period may be beyond the horizon of the investor's plans for cashing out. Despite inflated claims to the contrary, consumer benefits tend to be minimal -- any reduction in rates would be a direct loss from the bottom line, and token reduction are usually enough for PR purposes and to satisfy regulatory constraints. The obvious fact that the operator needs to take out a profit is seldom mentioned when the benefits of privatization are proclaimed, as if efficiency benefits (if any) would accrue fully to the consumer. In their personal finances, citizens appreciate the value of asset ownership. Owning a car or home offers significant cost savings over the lifetime of the investments, and greatly benefits the citizen in the face of inflation and fluctuating rental rates. With privatization, citizens are transformed from owners to renters, and suffer a long-term equity loss that may be many times greater than the discounted sale price of the asset. A privatized rail system may offer cheaper rates the first few years, but in the long run it will charge whatever the traffic will bear -- in tomorrow's inflated economy. ____________________________________________ "REFORM": the modification or replacement of an existing economic or political system, so as to create new corporate investment opportunities -- it is not required that the new system perform effectively, only that it deliver corporate profits. A system is in need of "reform" whenever corporate investors think of a new angle to make new profits. Obvious failures of the "reform" process, such as unemployment and poverty, are never the fault of "reform", but of incomplete implementation. Belief in "reform" is like religious faith: no amount of counter-evidence can phase the True Believer. "Reform" is like clear-cutting. A forest is an ecosystem, with wildlife, streams, underbrush, etc. Careful forestry can harvest timber without destroying the ecosystem -- but clear-cutting destroys all at once. An existing political/economic arrangement is also an eco-system: it is the subtle fabric that weaves the society together and enables its functioning. "Reform" -- as we see in the Soviet breakup/selloff/ripoff -- can destroy the existing framework all at once, and replace it with one that doesn't fit, that would take years or decades to take root and begin producing, and will be owned by someone else at the end of the day. _Genuine_ reform would take into account the existing conditions, and if a change is needed, would make incremental changes over time, evolving a working system toward sounder functioning. Most significant, it would reflect local customs and preferences -- it would not seek to impose a cookie-cutter standard paradigm upon all cultures and traditions. ____________________________________________ "THIRD-WORLD ASSISTANCE": (1) the subsidization of non- competitive First-World industries by means of channeling earmarked funds through Third-World hands; (2) carrot-money to entice "development" in preferred NWO directions; (3) hush- money to fund domestic suppression in host countries In order to encourage acquiescence by the taxpayers who foot the bill for it, "assistance" or "aid" almost always comes wrapped in the rhetoric of humanitarianism. Recently in Germany a more honest sales- pitch has been launched, announcing that for every mark that was spent as development aid, 1.15 marks came back as orders for German business. This is no surprise to anyone who's followed the numbers, but perhaps the publicity will invite the German people to ask why German business doesn't pay more of the "aid" bill. Heaven knows the Third World needs _real_ financial aid -- not interest-bearing loans and not funds earmarked for externally-defined purposes. When strapped for development funds, it is difficult for a country to turn down offers, even when strings are attached. But money which leaves crippling debt in its wake, or which encourages the development of a dependent economy, would be better refused -- it's like buying things you don't need using a credit card you know you can never pay off. In fact, the bulk of "assistance" has been channeled directly to military and "security" forces, in the form of weapons, training, and cash. In some cases this results in lucrative contracts for First World arms manufacturers, but the main objective is to create a political climate subservient to NWO designs. The military muscle enables unpopular and NWO-submissive regimes to retain power and drain their country's resources by participating recklessly in the "aid/development" game -- running up their country's credit cards at the NWO bank. Viewed from the broadest perspective, the definition of "Third-World assistance" is "the NWO version of imperialism". It succeeds -- in too many cases -- in accomplishing the following imperialist objectives: (1) controls the development priorities of the subject states (2) manages the ruling class in the subject states (3) puts the subject states into a condition of eternal debt (4) extracts profits and resources with minimal taxation and labor costs (5) provides markets for First-World goods, enhanced by absence of development in directions of self-sufficiency Like all highly-leveraged NWO enterprises, this is all accomplished with minimal occupation forces, no colonial administrations, and no public understanding of what's going on -- and the bill is being paid by those who benefit the least. If the NWO strategists weren't so sinister, you'd have to respect them. ________________________________________________________________ CyberLib maintained by Richard K. Moore rkmoore@iol.ie PO Box 26 www or ftp: Wexford, Ireland ftp://ftp.iol.ie/users/rkmoore ________________________________________________________________ From DennyB@vax1.Mankato.msus.edu Thu Apr 25 13:49:47 1996 V4.2-13 #3750) id <01I3YNP1BZDC0038RO@MSUS1.MSUS.EDU>; Thu, Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 14:42:55 -0500 From: Denny Braun Subject: Re: WS videos? To: WSN@CSF.Colorado.edu Organization: Department of Sociology, Mankato State University References: <1CCC3A2845@ssmain.ss.emory.edu> TLOYA@socsci.ss.emory.edu wrote: > > Hi. I'm new to WNS. I'm a grad student at Emory University, and I'm looking for videos to use in an > undergraduate strat course that could serve as a vehicle to discuss world system theory, or that > illustrate key WS dynamics (students are reading Braun's "The Rich Get Richer.") For example, years > ago I saw a documentary on (If I recall correctly) United Fruit Company's exploits in Cuba before the > revolution, including interviews with UFC's CEOs, board members, and some members of US govt. at the > time. > > Any suggestions? > > Thanks for your thoughts. > > T. Loya You might also try "Hungry For Profit." This one hour film was originally put out over a decade ago by, I believe, PBS. It describes the machinations of multinational corporations in Third World Countries and the subsequent starvation that ensues as they ironically increase food exports to rich, western nations. PBS took a great deal of heat from corporate sponsors, hence it had only a limited showing. But--the good news is that Food First picked it up and shortened it to a half hour VCR tape which they sell for $25. Although the material is somewhat dated, the dynamics and trends are virtually the same today as then. Contact: Institute for Food and Social Development 145 Ninth Street San Francisco, CA 94103 (415) 864-8555 The title is slightly different from the PBS title, but they only have 3 or 4 tapes so it should be no problem identifying it. Hope this helps. Denny -- Denny Braun Department of Sociology Mankato State University Mankato, MN 56002-8400 Voice: (507) 389-5609 FAX: (507) 389-5615 From br00510@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu Fri Apr 26 00:01:12 1996 From: br00510@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu Subject: Re: Article: Doublespeak and The New World Order To: rkmoore@iol.ie Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 02:01:45 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: from "Richard K. Moore" at Apr 25, 96 05:58:34 pm From gehrig@banyan.doc.gov Fri Apr 26 10:42:42 1996 Date: Fri, 26 Apr 96 12:42:03 EDT From: (Greg Ehrig) To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Subject: comments on Doublespeak and the New World Order X-Incognito-SN: 234 X-Incognito-Format: VERSION=1.60g ENCRYPTED=NO I am a little confused about the NWO definitions that Moore wrote about in his post yesterday: Specifically, the following: The "competitiveness" definition seems to say that 1st world countries are being forced by the NWO conspiracy to lower their standard of living to 3d world conditions, but the section following "globalization" seems to contradict this, saying that "globalization" leads to a greater disparity between the first and third worlds. Which is happening? And I guess I should ask: Which is desirable from the Progressive point of view? After all, isn't the fact that jobs are moving to the third world a _desirable_ thing? If wages are decreasing in the first world, the have to be rising in the third world. Perhaps I am interpreting the article incorrectly, but it seems the author's ideal situation is that of preventing third world countries from having producers, (i.e. no jobs, no producers) but sending aid money to be used for high levels of consumption (of first world products) in the third world. I think you hit the right note on the Conservative vs. Liberal swap of meanings. I was reading an account of the issues that liberals espoused in the 1870-1920 time frame: Free Trade, Curtailment of government power, Resisting Leviathan etc...... It seems Liberals are now conservatives, and conservatives liberals - makes the language most confusing, don't you think? Speaking of which, do you really think _Thatcher_ and _Reagan_ were plugging for less government sovereignty? The democracy part maybe I could buy, but you do remember the dustup over the EU....? CONSERVATIVE, n. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others. ---Ambroce Bierce, The devil's dictionary One more nitpick: Who are these long-term strategic deep-thinker "NWO Strategists? If they are corporate managers, are they the same guys who are always being castigated as not being able to look beyond the next quarterly performance review? Is it what we laughingly call our President? From TLOYA@socsci.ss.emory.edu Fri Apr 26 11:42:27 1996 From: TLOYA@socsci.ss.emory.edu 26 Apr 96 13:42:58 EST5edt Organization: Emory University To: WSN@csf.colorado.edu Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 13:47:11 EST5EDT Subject: WS videos Thanks to all who sent in suggestions for films/videos useful for teaching WS theory at the undergraduate level. Our media collection had all the recommended film/videos. This morning I showed "controlling interest," to coincide with ch. 4 of Denny Braun's "The rich get richer," which was a terrific vehicle for discussion. Tom Loya Thomas A. Loya Department of Sociology 1555 Pierce Drive Emory University Atlanta GA 30033 From BAMYEHM@woods.uml.edu Fri Apr 26 11:56:15 1996 From: BAMYEHM@woods.uml.edu Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 13:56:10 EDT To: WSN@CSF.COLORADO.EDU Subject: the carnage in lebanon From: MX%"MIDDLEEAST@aol.com"@MRGATE@WOODS Subject: EYEWITNESS TO MASSACRE, 2 Articles by Robert Fisk - MER Special To: BAMYEHM@AM M I D - E A S T R E A L I T I E S - S P E C I A L [To receive MER regularly please send a message to MIDDLEEAST@AOL.COM with the words "Send MER". ********************************************************** The American media is so "inadequate" to say the least, when it comes to the Middle East. Below, excerpts from two articles by Robert Fisk published in THE INDEPENDENT in London: MASSACRE IN SANCTUARY; EYEWITNESS By Robert Fisk The Independent 4/19/96, page 1 Qana, southern Lebanon - It was a massacre. Not since Sabra and Chatila had I seen the innocent slaughtered like this. The Lebanese refugee women and children and men lay in heaps, their hands or arms or legs missing, beheaded or disembowelled. There were well over a hundred of them. A baby lay without a head. The Israeli shells had scythed through them as they lay in the United Nations shelter, believing that they were safe under the world's protection. Like the Muslims of Srebrenica, the Muslims of Qana were wrong. In front of a burning building of the UN's Fijian battalion headquarters, a girl held a corpse in her arms, the body of a grey- haired man whose eyes were staring at her, and she rocked the corpse back and forth in her arms, keening and weeping and crying the same words over and over: "My father, my father." A Fijian UN soldier stood amid a sea of bodies and, without saying a word, held aloft the body of a headless child. "The Israelis have just told us they'll stop shelling the area," a UN soldier said, shaking with anger. "Are we supposed to thank them?" In the remains of a burning building - the conference room of the Fijian UN headquarters - a pile of corpses was burning. The roof had crashed in flames onto their bodies, cremating them in front of my eyes. When I walked towards them, I slipped on a human hand... Israel's slaughter of civilians in this terrible 10-day offensive - 206 by last night - has been so cavalier, so ferocious, that not a Lebanese will forgive this massacre. There had been the ambulance attacked on Saturday, the sisters killed in Yohmor the day before, the 2-year-old girl decapitated by an Israeli missile four days ago. And earlier yesterday, the Israelis had slaughtered a family of 12 - the youngest was a four- day-old baby - when Israeli helicopter pilots fired missiles into their home. Shortly afterwards, three Israeli jets dropped bombs only 250 metres from a UN convoy on which I was travelling, blasting a house 30 feet into the air in front of my eyes. Travelling back to Beirut to file my report on the Qana massacre to the Independent last night, I found two Israeli gunboats firing at the civilian cars on the river bridge north of Sidon. Every foreign army comes to grief in Lebanon. The Sabra and Chatila massacre of Palestinians by Israel's militia allies in 1982 doomed Israel's 1982 invasion. Now the Israelis are stained again by the bloodbath at Qana, the scruffy little Lebanese hill town where the Lebanese believe Jesus turned water into wine. The Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres may now wish to end this war. But the Hizbollah are not likely to let him. Israel is back in the Lebanese quagmire. Nor will the Arab world forget yesterday'a terrible scenes. The blood of all the refugees ran quite literally in streams from the shell-smashed UN compound restaurant in which the Shiite Muslims from the hill villages of southern Lebanon - who had heeded Israel's order to leave their homes - had pathetically sought shelter. Fijian and French soldiers heaved another group of dead - they lay with their arms tightly wrapped around each other - into blankets. A French UN trooper muttered oaths to himself as he opened a bag in which he was dropping feet, fingers, pieces of people's arms. And as we walked through this obscenity, a swarm of people burst into the compound. They had driven in wild convoys down from Tyre and began to pull the blankets off the mutilated corpses of their mothers and sons and daughters and to shriek "Allahu Akbar" (God is Great") and to threaten the UN troops. We had suddenly become not UN troops and journalists but Westerners, Israel's allies, an object of hatred and venom. One bearded man with fierce eyes stared at us, his face dark with fury. "You are Americans," he screamed at us. "Americans are dogs. You did this. Americans are dogs." President Bill Clinton has allied himself with Israel in its war against "terrorism" and the Lebanese, in their grief, had not forgotten this. Israel's official expression of sorrow was rubbing salt in their wounds. "I would like to be made into a bomb and blow myself up amid the Israelis," one old man said. As for the Hizbollah, which has repeatedly promised that Israelis will pay for their killing of Lebanese civilians, its revenge cannot be long in coming. Operation Grapes of Wrath may then turn out then to be all too aptly named. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ REALITY BITES FOR PR MEN AT QANA By Robert Fisk The Independent' - 4/22/96 Qana, Southern Lebanon Herve de Charette's face was as white as death. The French Foreign Minister, neatly clad in blue suit and tie, had gingerly walked through the scene of last week's massacre at the UN's compound, nodding diplomatically as the UN's Fijian commander described the 12 minutes in which Israeli shells slaughtered up to 120 refugees, the sliced-up corpses that his soldiers were forced to pick up, the difficulty in identifying parts of the children who had been torn to pieces. Mr de Charette listened with distaste. But then he was confronted by a survivor. Fawzaya Zrir, a small, frail woman in a scarf, simply walked up to the French Foreign Minister and began talking to him with an odd mixture of affection and anger. "For us, France is our mother and God is our father," she said in a flight of rhetoric that might have been written by the Quai d'Orsay public relations men, who beamed happily at this fortunate encounter. Then things began to go wrong. "We have lived through hell," Mrs Zrir continued. "The people were chopped into pieces by the Israeli bombs. They bleed, these people. You should have seen the heads." At the French foreign minister's right, a Lebanese softly translated the woman's dreadful words. The PR men began to look uneasy. "We have lived here 40 years and now we are treated like animals," the woman cried. "Do you know what the dogs did at night after the killings? They were hungry and I saw them in the ruins eating fingers and pieces of our people." Mr de Charette stared at her as if he had seen a ghost. This had clearly not been part of the programme, a schedule that was supposed to have whisked the foreign minister from a light lunch at UN headquarters in Naqqoura to a photo-opportunity on the roof of the wrecked UN battalion HQ, a three-minutes press conference to give the impression of openness and a swift drive back to the coast and a helicopter to Beirut - everything, in fact, that would enhance France's much-trumpeted love for Lebanon. Reality had very definitely not been part of the programme. A UN soldier was quite blunt about it. "This place is going to be turned into one of those awful pilgrimage sites for the great and the good," he muttered. "Boutros-Ghali sent his emissaries today to express their horror. But they'll do no more than they did after Srebrenica. They'll tut-tut and shrug it off. and they wont even have the guts to condemn Israel even now - for this wickedness." And indeed, the UN Secretary-General did send General Frank Van Kappen of the Netherlands army - not, perhaps, a happy choice after the Dutch army's disgrace at Srebrenica and he duly marched round the site of the worst carnage, asking how many rounds landed, where the Katyusha missiles were fired from and whether he could be shown this site to discover if any Israeli shells bad fallen there. He would be meeting with General Amnon lipkin Shahak, the Israeli chief of staff, he said. Yes, he would be asking to meet the soldiers who fired the fatal artillery rounds - "fat chance of that," another UN soldier said as he listened to all this - and with that, Van Kappen, an immense figure in his steel flak jacket and huge helmet clanked out of the compound with a colonel from the Royal Engineers. Mr de Charette was even more gentle of spirit. What had happened on Thursday was 'unfortunate", an event for which France wished to show its sympathy for the Lebanese. So how did it rank in the scale of civilian atrocities? How did it rank, for example, beside the Sarajevo market massacre? "Frankly," the Foreign Minister replied sharply, "I have not had an opportunity to make categories of unhappiness we have to work to do is to make it impossible for this to happen in the future in Lebanon." And so say all of us. Did he believe Israel had given sufficient explanation of the massacre? "I hear there is an inquiry we have to await the result." The problem, however is that neither America nor Europe are going to condemn a country which pounded refugees of Qana with 155mm shells for 12 minutes; and such condemnation is about the only palliative that the Lebanese might accept for the moment. And you can see their point. On the coast road back to Beirut last night there were burning cars, civilians deliberately targeted by Israeli warships north of Sidon, three of whom had been badly wounded. Had this being a Syrian warship shelling Israeli civilians on the Haifa-Tel Aviv road, of course, Mr Clinton himself would have deplored -rightly- an act of "international terrorism". But not a word of criticism about this scandalous targeting of Lebanese civilians was uttered by the foreign ministers of America, Russia, France and Italy as they sought to bring an end to an apparently unstoppable war. ********************************************************** MID-EAST REALITIES News, Information, & Analysis that Governments, Interest Groups, and the Corporate Media Do Not Want You To Know! To receive MER regularly message to MIDDLEEAST@aol.com with the words "Send MER". The half-hour cable TV Program "Mid-East Realities" shows weekly on the Cable systems in the Washington, D.C. area. For information about the program and how to have it shown in your local area send a message with the words "MER TV". + + + E N D + MERSPE27 + + -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 13:13:34 -0400 From: MIDDLEEAST@aol.com Subject: EYEWITNESS TO MASSACRE, 2 Articles by Robert Fisk - MER Special To: MIDDLEEAST@aol.com Sender: owner-nemer-l@igc.apc.org From BAMYEHM@woods.uml.edu Fri Apr 26 11:56:24 1996 From: BAMYEHM@woods.uml.edu Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 13:56:12 EDT To: WSN@CSF.COLORADO.EDU Subject: desperate appeal from lebanon 2 From: MX%"samer@acs.bu.edu"@MRGATE@WOODS Subject: no subject (file transmission) To: BAMYEHM@AM ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 09:44:00 -0600 (MDT) Subject: email from Beirut (fwd) ----------------------------Original message---------------------------- this was written by a young man in Beirut.. read it and pass it on >> This is the situation: >> >> We are ready to evacuate >> immediately, I think!!! Things here are NOT improving. I do not know >> how much longer we can communicate - be it thru e-mail or phone. The >> Israeli's are shelling nothing but civilian targets. They hit not a >> single Hizbullah target. The sea ports are closed because of Israeli >> gunboats warding off ships!! They shot three of the power stations, >> rendering one of them totally nonfunctional. According to the new, one >> of them has attained damages worth 3 millions USDs. They are also >> shooting the telephone switchboards. They have gunned one of the main >> ones, and off and on they have destroyed major telephone cables around >> the country. I know that at least 18000 phones are out! Things are >> really NOT optimistic here. Schools have been shut down for at least >> one more week. I do not know if my uni will open. Please distribute >> this message please to as many people as you can; it is important that >> they see the truth. >> >> >> Today..... they attacked a UN center. It was a bomb shelter. >> They massacred every soul in there - mentally and physically. Hundreds >> of armless, helpless, hungry people were hiding in two tents. The >> Israeli's attacked the base. People started fleeing into the shelters, >> but they did not make it on time. The seen was a giagantic shish kabab >> scene!!!! Bodies were charcoaled.... I actually saw some guts, >> intestines, and other gross things..... it was an open anatomy class, >> for heaven's sake.... my girlfriend burst into tears... so did my >> mom!!! Who is the attacker here? A m**********r behind a tank or a >> child who is just looking for food and shelter???? The folks from the >> south are all packed in schools in Beirut. Things are not sanitary at >> all. Diseases are beginning to spread! For God's sake who is the >> aggressor!?!?!? They showed us how the Israelis take a moment of >> silence for the massacre of the Jews in Germany!!!!!! What is this.... >> some kind of avenge?!?! We have to pay for it??!? Half a million >> people were forced out of their homes because their presence would >> threaten the heavily armed army of Israel..... the tanks are >> vulnerable to an attack from young children!!! Children are >> lethal...... we should abolish them....eh?????? Man... the situation >> is not improving. What is the world after... destroying Lebanon's new >> infrastructure because it could beat Israel's economy in a few >> years???? Is it after taking away the Arab's arsenal and money?? If >> Syria were to move, the American Air Force and the Israeli Air Force >> would take it as an attack and a breach of peace!!!!!!! They take our >> land.... and call us aggressors. They say that if we stop attacking >> them with a few guerilla soldiers, they would leave..... is this >> preposterous or what??? You occupy my house and I ask to leave, but >> you refuse to because I am hitting you?!??!? Well..... leave my house >> and I will not attack you. You just ought to see the brains of 3 day >> old splattered all over the blanket!!! His head lost its top!!!! >> Literally!!!! The 3-day-old had no top to his head.... his brains >> were over the blanker and on the floor. They wiped out 2 families of >> 12 people in one building...... their argument.... Hizbullah fired a >> Katyusha from that area..... b******t!!!! Since the beginning of the >> attacks, the Israeli army has hit nothing.... NOTHING... but civilian >> targets..... An ambulance with 4 children and old folks was hit by a >> rocket from a plane.... their excuse: The driver was Hizbullah..... >> now give me a break!!!!!! WE ARE THE KILLERS....WE OWN THE HI-TECH >> STUFF..... For God's sake, we do not even have an airforce!!!!!!! We >> have one bloody f***** jet.... just one!!!!!!!!! >> >> Tomorrow morning I am taking my car to all the near grocery stores >> to buy as much baby milk as the car can carry and distribute it all to >> the schools that have lactating children or children in need of milk. >> Our academic year has been disrupted because the southerners have been >> placed in schools. >> >> If anyone wants the true scenes, please contact me and I will do >> my best to send a copy. >> >> I have two INTERNET addresses: >> >> ziad-g@beirut.com >> aboudi@bignet.com.lb >> >> >> I am now using the aboudi one. Please send your messages to both. >> >> Take care. >> Aboudi -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 15:04:11 -0400 (EDT) From: samer@acs.bu.edu Subject: no subject (file transmission) To: nemer-l@igc.apc.org (New England activism) Sender: owner-nemer-l@igc.apc.org From dasmith@orion.oac.uci.edu Fri Apr 26 12:22:29 1996 Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 11:22:15 -0700 (PDT) From: David Smith To: TLOYA@socsci.ss.emory.edu Subject: Re: WS videos In-Reply-To: <38360C11A3@ssmain.ss.emory.edu> It's "an oldie but a goodie": THE GLOBAL ASSEMBLY LINE. The film was made by (or at least is distributed by) an outfit called New Day Films in New York. Sociologist Maria Patricia Fernandez Kelly helped produce it. You should be able to get it from some major university film libraries. It came out in the 1980s so some of the stuff in it is starting to get a little dated. But I think it's still the BEST film overview of contemporary global restructuring. It helps undergrads see the HUMAN dimensions of world-system structures. I wish they'd considered doing a version that updates things into the 1990s. The "blurb" from their brochure: "Travelling from Tennessee to Mexico's northern border, from Silicon Valley to the Philippines, THE GLOBAL ASSEMBLY LINE takes viewers inside our new global economy. A vivid portrayal of the lives of working women and men in the "free trade zones" of developing countries and North America, as US industries close their factories to search the globe for lower-wage workforces. We take a rare look at the people whoi are making the clothing we wear and the electronic goods we use -- as well as the business decisions behind manufacturing -- on the global assemblyline." David A. Smith Associate Professor & Acting Chair Department of Sociology University of California Irvine, CA 92717 From TLOYA@socsci.ss.emory.edu Fri Apr 26 12:53:52 1996 From: TLOYA@socsci.ss.emory.edu 26 Apr 96 14:54:07 EST5edt Organization: Emory University To: WSN@csf.colorado.edu Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 14:58:12 EST5EDT Subject: WS videos list In response to Ron Deibert's request for the WS video suggestions I received, here they are: 1. Controlling Interest: The World of the Multinational Corporations. 1 reel, 45 min. : sd., col. with b&w sequences ; 16 mm. 1974 or 1975 Put out by California Newsreel Examines the scale and underlying dynamics of multinational corporate expansion, and shows the deleterious social and economic effects of the multinationals'power in both the U.S. and the Third World. Includes interviews with several corporate executives and with workers in a small New England city (Greenfield, Massachusetts) faced with the threat of a runaway shop. Investigates the role of the multinationals in influencing U.S. government policy in underdeveloped nations. Focusses on Chile and Brazil, and the overthrow of Allende. The CEO interviews are among the best the part. (suggested by Bob Ross) 2. "Hungry For Profit." This one hour film was originally put out over a decade ago by, I believe, PBS. It describes the machinations of multinational corporations in Third World Countries and the subsequent starvation that ensues as they ironically increase food exports to rich, western nations. PBS took a great deal of heat from corporate sponsors, hence it had only a limited showing. But--the good news is that Food First picked it up and shortened it to a half hour VCR tape which they sell for $25. Although the material is somewhat dated, the dynamics and trends are virtually the same today as then. Contact: Institute for Food and Social Development 145 Ninth Street San Francisco, CA 94103 (415) 864-8555 The title is slightly different from the PBS title, but they only have 3 or 4 tapes so it should be no problem identifying it. Hope this helps. (from Denny Braun) 3. "Global Assembly Line" from PBS (?). From New Day Films, New York "It helps undergrads see the HUMAN dimensions of world-system structures. I wish they'd considered doing a version that updates things into the 1990s." "Travelling from Tennessee to Mexico's northern border, from Silicon Valley to the Philippines, THE GLOBAL ASSEMBLY LINE takes viewers inside our new global economy. A vivid portrayal of the lives of working women and men in the "free trade zones" of developing countries and North America, as US industries close their factories to search the globe for lower-wage workforces. We take a rare look at the people whoi are making the clothing we wear and the electronic goods we use -- as well as the business decisions behind manufacturing -- on the global assembly line." (From David Smith and Quee-Young Kim) 4. The"politics of oil" from the PBS series based on a book "The Prize." The last two or three parts of theseries appear quite relevant to the "dynamics of the world system." Hope this short list is useful all around. Thomas A. Loya Department of Sociology 1555 Pierce Drive Emory University Atlanta GA 30033 From chriscd@jhu.edu Fri Apr 26 13:43:13 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-13 #5488) id <01I403HRPO0W8Y501S@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Fri, 26 Apr 1996 15:37:36 -0400 (EDT) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V4.3-13 #5488) id <01I403FUJA7K8Y5A3M@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Fri, 26 Apr 1996 15:31:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 14:17:29 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: Fw: H-ASIA: Travel Alert re: Computer Theft (fwd) Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English ------------------------------ From: "A. Gunder Frank" Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 12:36:03 -0400 To: Paulo Frank Nancy Howell , Barry Wellman , Shree Mulay , Chris Chase-Dunn , Martha Gimenez Subject: H-ASIA: Travel Alert re: Computer Theft (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 25 Apr 1996 08:05:34 +0200 From: Paulo Frank To: "A. Gunder Frank" , Nancy Howell , miguel frank <100412.1015@compuserve.com> Subject: H-ASIA: Travel Alert re: Computer Theft >From: Frank Conlon >Subject: H-ASIA: Travel Alert re: Computer Theft >Status: > > H-ASIA > April 24, 1996 > >Travel Alert: Computer Theft at airports >Ed. note: Not all H-ASIA subscribers have the luxury of laptop computers >to take on research trips, but the following item should provide a >cautionary note, as well as a reminder that the more things you have, the >more things you have to worry about. F.F.C. >************************************************************************** >From: David Hodge > >The busy conference and vacation season will soon be upon us, so I thought >you might be interested in the following alert from the FAA, forwarded to >the Lexington office today: > >The FAA recently learned of a hustle that's being employed at airports all >across the country to steal laptop computers. It involves two persons who >look for a victim carrying a laptop and approaching a metal detector. >They position themselves in front of the unsuspecting passenger. They >stall until the mark puts the laptop computer on the conveyor belt. Then >the first subject moves through the metal detector easily. The second >subject sets off the detector and begins a slow process of emptying >pockets, removing jewelry, etc. While this is happening, the first >subject takes the laptop as soon as it appears on the conveyor belt and >moves away quickly. > >When the passenger finally gets through the metal detector, the laptop is >gone. The subject that picks it up heads into the gate area and disappears >among the crowd. Sometimes a third subject will take a hand-off from the >first subject and the computer is out of the restricted area before the >mark even knows that it is gone. > >This is becoming a widely practiced problem and is happening at airports >everywhere. When traveling with a laptop computer, try to avoid lines >to enter a metal detector when possible. When you can't do that, delay >putting your luggage and laptop on the conveyor belt until you are sure >that you will be the next person through the metal detector. As you >move through the metal detector, keep you eyes on the conveyor belt and >watch for your luggage and laptop to come through as well as watching >for what those in front of you are picking up. > > >SOURCE: >U.S. Federal Aviation Administration > >Captain Terry Bowman >Chief, Technology Integration >Secretary of the Air Force >Office of Public Affairs > >(703) 695-8561 > > > Robert A. Harrell Phone: 404 294-3490 > Director of Media Services FAX: 404 294-3492 > DeKalb College > 555 North Indian Creek Drive Internet: > Clarkston, GA 30021-2396 USA rharrell@DeKalb.dc.PeachNet.EDU >========================================================================= > Paulo Frank 15 Rue Gourgas CH 1205 Geneva Switzerland Tel. 41-22-328 2807 From rkmoore@iol.ie Sat Apr 27 00:24:24 1996 Sat, 27 Apr 1996 07:24:09 +0100 (BST) Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 07:24:09 +0100 (BST) To: PHILOFHI@YORKU.CA, WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK From: rkmoore@iol.ie (Richard K. Moore) Subject: Re: communication or objective circumstances? Dear Jennifer, Enjoyed your comments on the Doublespeak article. You wrote (to PhilOfHi): >It seems that the appropriation of terminology is >always by those in power, or at least those with influence. The trend to >the Right began two decades ago, really, but it was not apparent until >fairly recently just how profound the ideological effects have been. Now >it is apparent that populism, once a leftward strategy of popular power, >has become one of the Right. When people are dissatisfied, these trends >become more apparent than they were in the Reagan years, for example, as >they gain larger followings. Do you think it as a matter more of ideas, >terminology and the appropriation of the means of communication or of >objective circumstances? I'm not sure what you mean by your question, but I'll comment on what it brings up for me. In the two-decade period you refer to, there have been changes in the content of media rhetoric (aka: "public discourse"), and there have been changes in power structures -- in the U.S. and globally. If your question is "Which of these changes is primary?", then the answer is obviously that rhetoric serves power, not the other way around. Clearing up terminology would not by itself change anything. Indeed my article isn't really about terminology, that's only a device which facilitates expressing certain ideas. My view is that we are now in the midst of an historic cusp, comparable to the last few decades of the eighteenth century. "Democracy" arose circa 1789 as an alliance between the People and the Wealthy (to use loose terms), working together to overthrow the Nobility-Royalty-Clerical power structure. Since that time, there's been an ongoing wrestling match for power between these allied forces for political dominance. The People never really had a chance in this little game, because they never really understood what it was about. They saw the establishment of a governmental system which involved their participation to an unparalleled degree, but they didn't realize that their benefit was but a collatoral consequence of the new regime. The primary beneficiary was the capitalist elite, who wanted a system wherein money, and money alone, represented fundamental power. Similarly, as economic development brought unparalleled (albeit uneven) thing-prosperity, People again didn't realize what the game was about. They competed for a share of the goodies, and didn't so much take note of how equity ownership was steadily concentrating. In any case, this nation-state-republic system persisted for these two centuries _because_ nations served as the fortresses of capitalists. German captitalists prospered in proportion to the reach of German arms (to oversimplfiy slightly), and ditto for the other countries. Nationalism was the religion which led the masses into the service of the capitalist elite, and the elite supported nationalism. All around the mulberry bush, the monkey chased the weasel. The monkey thought it was all in fun, Pop! goes the weasel. Left & Right, Tory & Labour, Movements & Absorptions -- these have been the dances around the "modern democracy" mulberry bush. The elites have fared well in the game, but they're tiring of the dance. What Globalization is about is the destruction of the nation-state system, and its replacement by one which no longer includes the People as one of the partners-in-power (albeit a junior partner). Instead of relying on their masterful ability to corrupt the democratic process, the elites prefer now to scrap the process itself, and rule outright. GATT, NAFTA, IMF, NATO et al are the embryonic sproutings of a new world government of, by, and for the corporate elite -- with no pretense or mechanism of popular participation or representation. For much of the third world, national sovereignty is already a thing of the past. The question of Cuba is not "socialism in one country", it is rather "sovereignty in one country". In the first world there remains, briefly, a window of opportunity -- while on-paper democratic institutions still exist -- for People to seize control of "their" governments. Once the privatization- deregulation- devolution- globalization transformation is complete, this window will be gone, and we will ALL have the same control over our destinies as, let's say, Bosnia or El Salvador does today. In some sense what we're seeing is the balkanization of the globe. There are no conditions in the world today that make popular/ democratic empowerment any more likely or possible than at any other time in the past two centuries. This is not comforting. Indeed the sophistication of the propaganda machinery, and the global coordination-capacity of the corporate elite, are so advanced that the conditions are in fact worse than they have ever been. However, this vanishing window (however narrow) is our last chance to avoid a back-to-the-future corporate- feudalistic dark ages, and perhaps the realization of this fact may be the very spark that could crystallize a new kind of popular mobilization. It's a long shot, but it's the only credible hope I can think of. As long as the democratic mechanisms exist, then popular will -- potentially -- is sovereign. In that sense, "ideas, terminology and the appropriation of the means of communication" have the potential to _determine_ "objective circumstances". Currently, a professionally managed propaganda regime serves to confuse and mesmerize the People -- it need not mobilize them because their collective collaboration isn't needed (technology has outgrown mass armies). This historical cusp, this crisis moment for humanity, creates an emergency situation. The responsibility of the intelligensia is to wake up to this emergency and to act accordingly -- to employ every channel at their disposal to educate and arouse the populace to the emergency, and to contribute to the leadership cadre toward effecting a decisive progressive mobilization. There is no middle ground. The corporate elite have decreed that compromise is no longer on offer, and have initiated a full-court press against democracy. As Trotsky observed, people don't initiate revolutions on ideological grounds -- revolutions happen when the people have no other choice. In our case, we in fact have no other choice, but we're having a hard time perceiving the reality of our situation. That's why language is in some sense central. Regards, Richard BTW> If anyone is preparing to respond that the American Revolution was not forced by Britain, but was initiated spontaneously in the colonies -- let me just remind you that no revolution occurred. There was a forced separation from the parent, but an essential continuity of local governance, a smooth evolution into the formal Constitutional system, under pre-existing leadership. From rkmoore@iol.ie Sat Apr 27 00:24:29 1996 Sat, 27 Apr 1996 07:24:17 +0100 (BST) Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 07:24:17 +0100 (BST) To: PHILOFHI@YORKU.CA, WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK From: rkmoore@iol.ie (Richard K. Moore) Subject: Re: confused about the NWO definitions Dear Greg, Your questions are clearly rhetorical, but I'll treat them as genuine questions nonetheless. You wrote (to WSN): >I am a little confused about the NWO definitions that Moore wrote >about in his post yesterday: Specifically, the following: > > The "competitiveness" definition seems to say that 1st world >countries are being forced by the NWO conspiracy to lower their >standard of living to 3d world conditions, but the section following >"globalization" seems to contradict this, saying that "globalization" >leads to a greater disparity between the first and third worlds. > > Which is happening? First-world popular prosperity/ welfare is trending downwards in absoute terms. In many cases third world prosperity is declining even faster, increasing the _relative_ disparity. Of course the third-world picture is a bit more complex than that -- capital redeployment is ueven, and there are pockets of prosperity (eg. elites in Brazil) embedded within overall impoverishment, and there are some countries which will experience general boom conditions for a time. ----- > And I guess I should ask: Which is desirable from the Progressive >point of view? > >After all, isn't the fact that jobs are moving to the third world a >_desirable_ thing? If wages are decreasing in the first world, the >have to be rising in the third world. Not at all. Wages are not a zero-sum game. If a $12/hour job in San Francisco becomes a $1/day job in Haiti, other things being equal, you get $95/worker/day transferred to the corporate bottom line, and $1 transferred to the Haitian worker. The whole Perot emphasis on job transfer as a nationalist issue was misguided -- it's not Mexico vs. U.S., it's corporations vs. people. ----- >Perhaps I am interpreting the >article incorrectly, but it seems the author's ideal situation is that of >preventing third world countries from having producers, (i.e. no jobs, >no producers) but sending aid money to be used for high levels of >consumption (of first world products) in the third world. Eh? This dichotomy is entirely your own, and essentially asks us to choose among versions of imperialism. My "ideal situation" would involve national self-determination (including domestic ownership of natural resources), with economic organization oriented around sound management and development of national resources (as has been _somewhat_ exemplified by post-war Japan), and carried out under genuine democracies (which Japan has not at all exemplified). ----- > I think you hit the right note on the Conservative vs. Liberal swap >of meanings. I was reading an account of the issues that liberals >espoused in the 1870-1920 time frame: Free Trade, Curtailment of >government power, Resisting Leviathan etc...... It seems Liberals are >now conservatives, and conservatives liberals - makes the language >most confusing, don't you think? Context is all important. For example, a progressive might be for devolution, as a means to enhance the responsiveness of an already democratic system. But in the face of corporate hegemony, devolution only weakens representative government vis a vis corporate power, and is hence to be generally eschewed by enlightened progressives. "Liberal" and "Conservative" are both essentially meaningless in today's context -- they're primarily used as rhetorical labels -- for their positive or negative emotional connotative power. ----- > Speaking of which, do you really >think _Thatcher_ and _Reagan_ were plugging for less government >sovereignty? The democracy part maybe I could buy, but you do >remember the dustup over the EU....? Thatcher & Reagan both supported a transfer of sovereignty from representative government to corporations. But while Reagan was a cue-sheet-reading PR puppet, with no principle to be compromised nor will to be challenged, Thatcher was a principled individual of consequence, who happened to believe in the Ayn-Randian/ Friedmanesque/ neo-liberal party line. But she was also a nationalist, and accurately perceived Maastricht to be a sovereignty transfer of a new and different kind. At that point, her usefulness to the corporate elite was at an end, and her dispatch was prompt. ----- >One more nitpick: Who are these long-term strategic deep-thinker >"NWO Strategists? If they are corporate managers, are they the >same guys who are always being castigated as not being able to look >beyond the next quarterly performance review? Is it what we >laughingly call our President? I imagine you know the answer to this as well as I do, and you could possibly be one of those "deep thinkers" yourself. They are not corporate line managers and they are not political figureheads. The useful literature on this topic is immense, one of my favorite being Greider's "Who Will Tell the People?". At the top of my current reading pile happens to be the April 15 issue of The Washinton Spectator, entitled "Washington's Conservative Think Tanks Influence Government Policy", which enumerates: -The Heritage Foundation -The Sara Mellon Scaife Foundation -The Smith Richardson Foundation -The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation -The Adolph Coors Foundation -The David Koch & Charles Koch Foundation -The Noble Foundation -The Howard Pew Freedom Trust -The Bechtel Foundation -The Lilly Endowment The focus of this WS issue is not elite planning per se, but only propaganda generation. There are other think tanks and "study groups" which focus more on corporate-elite strategy. You tell me -- who dreamed up and sponsored GATT? Cheers, Richard From ROZOV@cnit.nsu.ru Sat Apr 27 00:38:19 1996 27 Apr 96 13:30:26 NSK-6 From: "Nikolai S. Rozov" Organization: Center of New Informational Tech. To: PHILOFHI@YORKU.CA Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 13:30:07 -0600 (NSK) Subject: historical responsibility thanks to James Crombie for rising in PHILOFHI the question of historical responsibility in the practical (and economic!) aspect of current national choices. I agree with James concerning relation to slaves descedants but globally the same question should be rised concerning relation of modern most rich and most poor countries (peoples) in the world. I see a paradox between almost globally accepted view of crucial harm of colonialism for the native peoples and cultures of colonies (or wider - periphery in w-system terms) and modern position of mainstream Western establishment concerning aid to 'Third World'. It seems that the West helps f.e. Africa or South America just for neutralizing possible social disasters, mass hunger and epidemies, for restriction probable waves of mass immigration to Western countries, but covering it by demagogical speeches of good will and charity. From my viewpoint it is by no means a question of charity but a question of historical responsibility and moral-historical necessity for each Western country to support its previous colonies (for Europe) or exploited post- colonies (for USA). Russia has its own responsibility to Middle Asia (where local authorities under pression from Moscow used almost full mass slavery in cotton fields, not more than 10 years ago!), North-Caucasian peoples, small peoples of Far North, etc. My point is that philosophy of history must serv for connecting historical knowledge, historical meanings with modern morals, policies and global choices. I maintain that moral responsibility of man, or a generation of nation does not end with their death. Each of us, born and educated in a definite country bears an invisible load of historical responsibility for the sins of our fathers and all ancestors. And nobody besides morally responsible historians, political economists and philosophers of history cannot supply national and global, mass and elitarian, political and macroeconomic consciousness with adequate knowledge and understanding of this historical responsibility. Comments? Nikolai Rozov > Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 17:15:44 -0300 > From: James Crombie > > To the extent that any of us now enjoys any kind of individual or collective > wealth inherited from the past, some of this wealth may be the result of the > exploitation of slaves. Perhaps an appropriate proportion of this wealth > should now be directed back to appropriate causes. What is our choice in > this matter? > James Crombie > Nikolai S. Rozov Professor of Philosophy Moderator of the mailing list PHILOFHI (PHILosophy OF HIstory and theoretical history) http://darwin.clas.virginia.edu/~dew7e/anthronet/subscribe /philofhi.html Dept. of Philosophy Novosibirsk State University Fax.: (3832) 355237 630090, Novosibirsk E-mail: rozov@cnit.nsu.ru Pirogova 2 RUSSIA From gehrig@banyan.doc.gov Sat Apr 27 08:06:40 1996 Date: Sat, 27 Apr 96 10:05:44 EDT From: (Greg Ehrig) To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Subject: Confused NWO Definitions X-Incognito-SN: 234 X-Incognito-Format: VERSION=1.60g ENCRYPTED=NO Richard, > Your questions are clearly rhetorical, but I'll treat them as >genuine questions nonetheless. All right, all right; you found me out: I really don't buy the vision you have laid out of how the international system works. I do appreciate your taking the time and trouble to answer my questions, but I'm afraid I have yet to be won over. Let me go over your rebuttal: >First-world popular prosperity/ welfare is trending downwards in >absolute terms. In many cases third world prosperity is declining >even faster, increasing the _relative_ disparity. I am sorry, but this is not true by any measure that I know of-- unless you have a really creative definition of "popular" :-> According to the Statistical Abstract of the United States* (with no known affiliation to any of the groups you have listed), the average growth rate for the industrialized countries (US, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, UK, Australia, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, Taiwan) all showed consistent upward growth in their international economic indexes from 1984 to 1994. The rate of growth varied from year to year, and occasionally went negative in some countries in some years. Overall, though, growth has continued to be the norm, recession the exception. Average industrialized growth has been around 3-4 percent per year. varying widely by country. GDP per capita also showed consistent gains of around 1-2% per year. What is unmistakable is the fact that there is _no_ evidence for absolute losses for any significant length of time. The third world is more difficult to measure. This is partly because there is a diversity of political, ideological, and economic systems, making it difficult to make very accurate analyses of all "third world" countries as a whole. However it is possible to look at individual countries performance, and while you do find some countries which seem to be doing worse, casual inspection reveals that the vast majority are doing better over time. Again, a semi random sampling of the Statistical Abstract (available in your local library) GDP per capita: (Constant PPP dollars) 1985 1993 Argentina 6,179 7,505 Bangladesh 175 200 Bulgaria 6,030 3,573 China 964 1,738 Cuba 3,830 1,959 Chile 1,889 3,067 El Salvador 1,242 1,342 Morocco 882 939 Philippines 710 791 Sri Lanka 465 578 While the evidence is not as sure, nearly all economists would find the proposition that the world is seeing absolute declines in wealth laughable. Income disparity is another issue, but I cannot agree with you when you say that the third world is becoming _absolutely_ worse off. If absolute wealth is not going down, then what about my original question: >>The "competitiveness" definition seems to say that >>1st world >>countries are being forced by the NWO conspiracy to lower their >>standard of living to 3d world conditions, but the section following >>"globalization" seems to contradict this, saying that "globalization" >>leads to a greater disparity between the first and third worlds. > > Which is happening? I am not going to go into your belief that a job is a job, and a worker is a worker, and it matters little to performance where they are or how much you pay them ( which is not true, by the way) However, I do want to go into your statement to the effect that corporations are the enemy of all mankind. Question: Who owns corporations? Answer: "Investors" Question: Who are "investors"? Answer: they are not, on average, rich jerks like Donald Trump: remember, Donald Trump _borrowed_ money, he did not _lend_ it, which is essentially what you do if you buy stock or have it bought for you. In fact, everyone who has a Pension plan, a 401k plan, or an IRA is an "investor". Pension fund managers, as a matter of fact, have worked a revolution behind the scenes over the last decade. There was some concern that managers - who are only the _employees_ of the investors - had taken too much control away from the owners by the late 70s, and were padding their pay and protecting their mediocrity as typified by what's-his-name who was CEO at Disney before Eisner took over. The development of the huge sums of money into Pension funds changed all of that, as the fund managers were strong enough --had enough "votes"-- the other thing a share of stock is -- to again assert control over the managers of corporations. Pension fund managers - the representatives of working America _Are the largest, most powerful investors in the world_ . The point of this story is that demonizing corporations is really a pointless enterprise, since those most responsible for it are those who are day to day, middle class, working America, (and Britian, and Japan, and just about everywhere else with decent capital markets). > My "ideal situation" would >involve national self-determination (including domestic ownership >of >natural resources), with economic organization oriented around >sound >management and development of national resources (as has been >_somewhat_ >exemplified by post-war Japan), and carried out under genuine >democracies >(which Japan has not at all exemplified). Great! The only problem is, how do you do this? Specifically, who decides? (excuse my Randian past showing here a little, *sigh* ah, for the days of youthful idealism...) If you go into history a bit, this issue was very big in the development theory in the late 50s through the 60s. The theory was called the "import substitution" path to development, where resources were nationalized and administered by the state, in the name of the "people" -- because the only other way to exploit a given resource was through foreign investment. Third world countries by definition don't have a lot of capital to invest, so the idea was that the state was the only one with the size and coercive ability to extract domestic capital and invest it wisely. Imports from the west were heavily taxed, and domestic industries heavily subsidized, with an eye towards developing domestic industries that eventually would be competitive in domestic markets without the need for protection. In every country in which this was tried, the results were an unmitigated disaster. The common factor of the "Asian tigers", on the other hand , was a strategy called "export expansion" where the emphasis was not so much on reducing and replacing exports, but on expanding exports, and transferring wealth from consumers to producers in almost every imaginable way -- which I might point out, does not seem to square with your anti-corporation stand. Consumers in Japan are constantly "exploited" by having their incomes diverted, through direct and indirect ways, into the "bottom line" of corporations. >Liberal" and >"Conservative" are both essentially meaningless in today's context >-- >they're primarily used as rhetorical labels -- for their positive or >negative emotional connotative power. Yes. >I imagine you know the answer to this as well as I do, and you >could possibly be one of those "deep thinkers" yourself. Actually, I have no idea. I replied to your post to get a feel for the argument of the progressive movement, and this aspect of it baffles me. I wonder if you brand every person who disagrees with you to be part of "the conspiracy". Very convenient, if intellectually lazy. I will check the article you recommended, but I suspect it won't be very different from the conservative press's attacks on the influence of the Hudson Institute, the Center for Policy Studies, the Progressive Policy Institute, and the other liberal think tanks. >You tell me -- who dreamed >up and sponsored GATT? Well, I believe that who dreamed it up is a less important factor than why it was dreamed up. It was developed because there was a widespread conviction among policy makers and a significant segment of the public that the Great Depression had been caused or greatly exacerbated by exactly the same forces that you praised in your original post: National Protective Tariffs, and competitive currency devaluation. Best Regards, Greg From ecbm@cc.newcastle.edu.au Sat Apr 27 20:59:45 1996 id <01I42QQ3D7O08X10EI@cc.newcastle.edu.au> for wsn@csf.colorado.edu; Sun, 28 Apr 1996 12:59:03 +1000 Date: Sun, 28 Apr 1996 12:59:03 +1000 From: "Bruce R. McFarling" Subject: Re: Confused NWO Definitions In-reply-to: To: WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK On Sat, 27 Apr 1996, Greg Ehrig wrote: > I am sorry, but this is not true by any measure that I know of-- > unless you have a really creative definition of "popular" :-> > According to the Statistical Abstract of the United States* (with no > known affiliation to any of the groups you have listed), the average > growth rate for the industrialized countries (US, Canada, France, > Germany, Italy, UK, Australia, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, > Taiwan) all showed consistent upward growth in their international > economic indexes from 1984 to 1994. The rate of growth varied > from year to year, and occasionally went negative in some countries > in some years. Overall, though, growth has continued to be the norm, > recession the exception. Average industrialized growth has been > around 3-4 percent per year. varying widely by country. GDP per > capita also showed consistent gains of around 1-2% per year. What > is unmistakable is the fact that there is _no_ evidence for absolute > losses for any significant length of time. Two quick observations. First, both total GDP and per capita GDP measures are biased measures of the experience of the population of a country. Obviously, a 10% increase in the income of an individual in the top quintile of the income distribution has more weight than a 10% increase in the income of an individual in the bottom quintile. Growth in median GDP would be a better measure of the population's experience regarding changing national income. Second, GDP is obviously not designed as a measure of welfare. It is simply the market value of newly produced goods and services. GDP growth does not distinguish between increasing output to fight a war, increasing output so more people can go to Disneyland on their vacation vacation, or increasing output so fewer children go to sleep hungry and go to schools that are dysfunctional. The GPI was developed in an effort to provide a market measure where more 'goods' were added and more 'bads' subtracted, and has per capita GPI in the US stagnant or declining since the ealry seventies. And whether or not it is successful (I haven't settled this to my personal satisfaction yet, so I will offer no arguments for or against the specifics of the index), it is an effort to measure welfare as opposed to total market transactions of a given type. If you wish to claim it gives a false picture, you need a competing welfare measure to support the claim. Virtually, Bruce R. McFarling, Newcastle, NSW ecbm@cc.newcastle.edu.au From elena@jhu.edu Sun Apr 28 09:50:36 1996 id <01I3WH1R7K0G8WVYON@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Wed, 24 Apr 1996 01:17:25 -0400 (EDT) id <01I3WH1MXQ4G8Y500I@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Wed, 24 Apr 1996 01:17:16 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 01:17:05 -0400 From: Elena M Ermolaeva Subject: New acquisition of DAII To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu --Boundary (ID cRAGD/PuX7ZkwW+dsGDpRQ) This is a new acquisition of Data Archive of Interregional Interactions (see the announcement of DAII on April 15, 1996). For more information about accomodation of your data, for obtaining copies of Archive Acquisitions, or on other matters, please contact elena@jhu.edu ********** USED-CLOTHES TRADE (Rick Wicks, Sweden) We have just completed a study for Sida (the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency -- Swedish foreign aid) on the economic effects of commercial and charitable exports of used clothes to less-developed countries, with particular focus on the question whether charitable exports should continue to be subsidized by Sida (and under what circumstances, if so). Here is a summary of the report: The report includes a variety of statistics on the used-clothes trade in general (for instance, the 127 gross used-clothes exporters in 1990, and the 181 gross used-clothes importers, with values, weights, average prices, and weights per capita), as well as some specifics of U.S. and Swedish imports and exports. There is also discussion of images of the used-clothes trade in labor and popular media, trends in national trade policies and practices, NGO attitudes and involvement, as well as a brief exploration of some similar issues with food aid, and some excerpts regarding the used-clothes trade in 18th century Britain. To summarize the report, both theoretical analysis and empirical evidence are unclear as to the actual effects of commercial used clothes imports in developing countries, which generate a lot of employment and income while providing consumers with cheap but usable goods, although they can reduce domestic production, particularly if domestic industry is not exporting, and if factor markets are not functioning well (so that there is significant unemployment, and reallocation of labor and capital are difficult). If there are positive externalities of textile or clothing production in developing economies, such damage could be compounded. On the other hand, there may be distributional advantages in used-clothes trade and consumption, since the poor seem to benefit on both the supply and the demand sides. If there is net damage from used-clothes imports, then subsidies which increased the damage would obviously not be good, and probably constitute illegal dumping besides. However, this problem could be avoided if subsidies targeted those "too poor to enter the market". But such targeting is very difficult to do (NGOs may not be as good at it as they are sometimes thought to be), it's expensive, and it often seems to increase opportunities for corruption and other forms of abuse. Besides, anecdotal evidence suggests that much of the used-clothes so distributed would end up on the market again anyway, thus defeating the point of the targeting. Given all the uncertainties above, we cannot answer whether subsidizing used clothes exports is good or bad based only on the direct effects, but rather we have to look at the alternative costs. The simplest answer is not necessarily the best: Just because we have used clothes and possible subsidy funds, it's not necessarily the best idea to use the funds to send the clothes to poor people. Given that there are thriving used clothes markets worldwide and in most less developed countries, there is no need for subsidies to make them available to the public, and on the other hand, they can readily be converted into cash through the commercial network, so there is no need for subsidies simply to get them used. Poor people who need clothes need many things. The most useful thing for them would be cash, or income-generating projects, so that they can decide for themselves what they want to buy. Used clothes can be sold and the proceeds used, along with erstwhile subsidies, for such projects. Thus, greater benefits are possible for poor people with a more imaginative approach. A possible exception would be if supply has broken down due to some catastrophe, and clothing is simply not available in the market. In that case, relief agencies would have to make a determination whether used clothes were the most available and most effective form of clothing assistance, and if so, subsidized deliveries could be warranted. NGOs seem increasingly skeptical of using used clothes in this manner, however. ==================================================== --Boundary (ID cRAGD/PuX7ZkwW+dsGDpRQ)-- From chriscd@jhu.edu Mon Apr 29 05:05:08 1996 id <01I43SMRS0U88WWBQQ@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 07:04:26 -0500 (EST) id <01I43SMQDZ3K8WWOCY@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu>; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 07:04:24 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 07:04:09 -0400 From: Christoph Chase-Dunn Subject: Re: communication or objective circumstances? In-reply-to: To: "Richard K. Moore" What would richard moore think about adding an international strategy to his national mobilization? it may be the case that global state formation is going to move ahead. if that is so it might make sense to push toward a really democratic global government. national mobilizations have not really changed the system in the past. the international level may be not only desireable but necessary. chris Professor Christopher Chase-Dunn Department of Sociology Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD. 21218 USA 410 516 7633 fax 410 516 7590 email chriscd@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu From gehrig@banyan.doc.gov Mon Apr 29 09:15:39 1996 Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 09:15:36 -0600 (MDT) From: gehrig@banyan.doc.gov To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Subject: re: Confused NWO definitions X-Incognito-SN: 234 X-Incognito-Format: VERSION=1.60g ENCRYPTED=NO Forwarded to: i[wsn@csf.colorado.edu] cc: Comments by: Greg Ehrig@USOTP@TA -------------------------- [Original Message] ------------------------- On Sun, Apr 96 Bruce McFarling wrote: > Two quick observations: > First, both total GDP and per capita GDP measures are biased >measures of the experience of the population of a country. >Obviously, a >10% increase in the income of an individual in the top quintile of the >income distribution has more weight than a 10% increase in the >income of >an individual in the bottom quintile. Growth in median GDP would be >a >better measure of the population's experience regarding changing >national >income. I agree, and I gave myself some weasel room for this by mentioning the issue of income disparity. The reason that I did not go further into the issue is that I did not have those set of figures handy. Does anyone know who publishes median GDP figures? Even then, there are problems with using this measure. The United States, as I am sure everyone is aware, has one of the highest levels of income disparity in the world -- but this is not necessarily a bad thing. Someone we define as being at the "poverty level", for instance, would qualify as a rich ma- er, person in many, if not most, third world countries. So, GDP per capita is a flawed but still useable measure of well-being. There is no one perfect measure of a quantifyable nature when dealing with any subject involving human beings - because tastes differ. But enough - on to the more difficult point raised by Bruce: > Second, GDP is obviously not designed as a measure of welfare. It >is simply the market value of newly produced goods and services. >GDP >growth does not distinguish between increasing output to fight a >war, >increasing output so more people can go to Disneyland on their >vacation, or increasing output so fewer children go to sleep hungry >and go >to schools that are dysfunctional. The GPI was developed in an >effort to >provide a market measure where more 'goods' were added and more >'bads' >subtracted, and has per capita GPI in the US stagnant or declining >since >the ealry seventies. And whether or not it is successful (I haven't >settled this to my personal satisfaction yet, so I will offer no >arguments >for or against the specifics of the index), it is an effort to measure >welfare as opposed to total market transactions of a given type. If >you >wish to claim it gives a false picture, you need a competing welfare >measure to support the claim. I have read about this measure, and in concept I recall it was an interesting idea. However, the problem with using indexes such as this is that the biases of the constructors will heavily influence the outcome. For instance, how do you put a definite quantitiative value on a child dying of malnutrition? I myself would put an infinite value on that if the child were my own, a slightly lower value if the child belonged to a relative, slightly lower if it belonged to a friend, and slightly lower still if it belonged to someone I did not know. One is even temped to formulate a theorem regarding human behavior: the amount the average person cares about his fellow man is equal to the inverse square of the distance to that fellow man. I am not proud of this, but I am human. I defy anyone to claim differently(If you could do so, you would not be reading this -- you would have sold your computer, and all you owned, and given it to the poor) Let me try to bring this ramble to the subject at hand-- the point is, the values I might assign to the various "goods" and "bads" would almost certainly be different from yours, dilbert's, clinton's, dole's, mother terisa's, and the of the team that formulated the study. I suspect the team or organization (could you give me a reference?) conducting the study already knew what answer they _wanted_ the GPI to produce, and by adjusting the values for the constants, found it. Note that this does not mean that they meant to do so or even were conscious of doing so. The history of researcher bias in science is well documented-- even men and women who are pillars of integrity have been shown to succumb to it. This is one of the reasons why GDP per person is a measure I prefer for measuring welfare -- especially internationally. Welfare results when many factors, both good and bad, contribute to many cultural mindsets, each of which in turn are composed of many individual psychologies. Putting a "price tag" on this (i.e. GDP per capita) is similar to putting a price tag on a good in a store -- each compresses an enormous amount of information down to a very manageable, (and more-or-less accurate) number. In short, while neither measure is perfect, I guess I am a conservative in the sense that I prefer the evils of the old GDP per capita system (with caveats for income dispersion&others) to the unknown evils of some of the more "newfangled" systems of measurement. That said, GPI could still give us some insights into the condition of the state of welfare -- if we are aware of the pitfalls of this type of analysis. Certainly there is a popular feeling that things are not as good now as in the old days, but then they never were, no? What does the GPI record for the world as a whole, instead of just the US? Yours, Greg ________ ABSOLUTE, adj. Independent, irresponsible. An absolute monarchy is one in which the sovereign does as he pleases so long as he pleases the assassins. Not many absolute monarchies are left, most of them having been replaced by limited monarchies, where the sovereign's power for evil (and for good) is greatly curtailed, and by republics, which are governed by chance. From gehrig@banyan.doc.gov Mon Apr 29 09:53:18 1996 Date: Mon, 29 Apr 96 11:52:47 EDT From: (Greg Ehrig) To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Subject: historical responsibility X-Incognito-SN: 234 X-Incognito-Format: VERSION=1.60g ENCRYPTED=NO Is there a statute of limitations for historical crimes? For instance, do people of Anglo descent owe restitution to people of Saxon descent for the centuries of slavery and exploitation suffered by the former at the hands of the latter? How do you determine what reparations are "Just"? For a non-Eurocentric example, Do people of Ziaeran descent owe reparations to a) African-Americans of Eithiopian descent, or b)Ethiopians? (Zaire was one of the foremost empires which captured slaves from neighboring countries for trade to the Europeans; Rum being the medium of exchange) From colerche@vub.ac.be Mon Apr 29 10:11:28 1996 From: colerche@vub.ac.be (Lerche Charles Olsen) Subject: Re: Confused NWO definitions To: gehrig@banyan.doc.gov Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 18:10:59 +0200 (DST) From chriscd@jhu.edu Mon Apr 29 12:43:23 1996 by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V5.0-6 #5488) id <01I448IH85EO8WWSB9@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu> for wsn@csf.colorado.edu; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 14:41:59 -0500 (EST) by jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu (PMDF V5.0-6 #5488) id <01I448IK0XA68WWSCX@jhmail.hcf.jhu.edu> for wsn@csf.colorado.edu; Mon, 29 Apr 1996 14:39:16 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 1996 13:25:33 -0600 (CST) From: chris chase-dunn Subject: Fw: Job Posting -- Geneva Centre on Trade and Sustainable Development Sender: chriscd@jhu.edu To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Reply-to: chriscd@jhu.edu X-NUPop-Charset: English ------------------------------ From: Aaron Cosbey Date: Sat, 27 Apr 1996 16:09:32 -0400 To: INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL ECONOMY Subject: Job Posting -- Geneva Centre on Trade and Sustainable Development Please excuse repeated postings -- this message is being sent to a number of lists. Feel free to cross-post to additional lists as appropriate. GENEVA CENTRE ON TRADE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT JOB POSTING - EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR A centre is being established in Geneva to strengthen the links between NGOs interested in trade, environment and development on the one hand, and the principal intergovernmental organizations dealing with trade on the other. The Centre will: * help make relevant WTO documents available and place them in a broader context * give NGOs straight, objective reporting, from a Geneva perspective, on the issues of the day, and flag key developments and issues on the horizon * serve as a trusted point of contact for both the NGO community internationally and the Geneva trade community * help educate NGOs on the function and structure of the WTO, and offer counsel on how best to advocate change within the WTO context * periodically bring together the trade and NGO communities to engage in policy dialogue on specific issues * help the public make sense of how the work of the WTO and others fits into the larger picture of sustainable development globally * provide a central source of information on, and published by, organizations such as UNCTAD and others, as well as a library of relevant NGO research and publications * produce and maintain a database of NGOs interested in trade and sustainable development issues, showing who is doing what * periodically bring together the NGO community to focus on specific issues, both in Geneva and elsewhere Duties and Qualifications: The Executive Director will be responsible for the establishment and the direction of the Centre and for all aspects of its operation, including planning and implementation, fundraising, programmatic and financial needs analysis, and strategy development. The candidate must be a dynamic individual, technically grounded in cutting-edge international development issues; she or he will have been extensively exposed to the international debate on environment and development, the evolution of the concept of sustainable development and of the international trade regime. The candidate shall be able to combine intellectual leadership with systematic thinking and synthesizing skills. She/he shall have also direct experience with consensus-building approaches to resolving policy disputes. Ideally, he or she will come from a developing country, and have demonstratable experience in integration of environment and development concerns. A firm initial commitment of at least three years is required. The candidate should have: * Intimate knowledge of inter-governmental processes, particularly of the functioning of the World Trade Organization and UNCTAD (ie. familiarity with the processes of rulemaking, dispute resolution, policy debate and policy review). * Sound knowledge of multilateral environment-related negotiations, as well as of United Nations structure, programme and procedures. * Good knowledge of institution and capacity-building in developed and developing countries. * An established record of work with the non-governmental community as well as project management and fundraising experience. * Excellent interpersonal and communications skills, allowing for good relations with people from different cultures and outlooks. * A sound understanding of the use of consensus-building approaches to public disputes in domestic and international contexts. * A high degree of initiative and excellent organizational abilities. * Fluency in spoken and written English, working knowledge of Spanish and/or French. * A minimum of five years related work history, with direct international/multilateral negotiations experience is preferred. The candidate should be: * Highly ethical; * Committed to the pursuit of sustainable development; * Able to command the respect of very able and senior people; * Able to command the respect and confidence of the trade, development and environment communities. The position is based in Geneva (Switzerland), and will involve some travel. The salary and benefits are commensurate with the level of responsibilities, and with the experience and skills demanded. CANDIDATES SHOULD APPLY TO: * Mark Halle Chair, Executive Board of the Geneva Centre c/o IUCN- The World Conservation Union 28, rue de Mauverney CH-1196 Gland Fax: ++41 (0)22 999 00 20 Email: mah@hq.iucn.ch 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 rkmoore@iol.ie Mon Apr 29 18:39:55 1996 Tue, 30 Apr 1996 01:39:41 +0100 (BST) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 01:39:41 +0100 (BST) To: WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK From: rkmoore@iol.ie (Richard K. Moore) Subject: Re: Confused NWO Reubuttals 4/27/96, Greg Ehrig wrote: >I am not going to go into your belief that a job is a job, and a worker >is a worker, and it matters little to performance where they are or >how much you pay them ( which is not true, by the way) Obviously. That's why I said "other things being equal". I realize that some companies which moved to Mexico later moved back, because overall real investment-productivty didn't benefit from slave wages and an under-educated workforce. But your simplistic CLAIM that "If wages go down in the first-world, they must go up in the third world" called for an equally simplistic counter OBSERVATION. We can now proceed to consideration of second-order terms if you so desire. --- >However, I >do want to go into your statement to the effect that corporations are >the enemy of all mankind. If you're going to distort my statements, I suppose that's an admission of weakness in your position. Corporations can be very beneficial, and can be an efficient means of economic organization, development, innovation, etc. It's _excessive_ corporate power -- laissez-faire Corporatism -- and corporate corruption of the political process that are of concern to me... I'm also opposed to criminal individuals, but that doesn't mean I think "people are the enemy of all mankind". >Question: Who owns corporations? >Answer: "Investors" >Question: Who are "investors"? >Answer: they are not, on average, rich jerks like Donald Trump... >The point of this story is that demonizing corporations is really a >pointless enterprise, since those most responsible for it are those >who are day to day, middle class, working America, (and Britian, and >Japan, and just about everywhere else with decent capital markets). This is shallow neo-liberal propaganda. On a par with "Corporations are just folks working together". The great "401K Swindle" is simply a way to steal everyone's retirement money and make it available for no-strings-attached corporate use. The thinner stock ownership can be spread, the LESS control any stockholder has over corporate policy. Investment funds dilute control even further. Your benighted pension-fund managers in NO WAY represent the interests of pension-holding workers except (possibly) in their narrow self-avowed value-free mission to increase the monetary quantity of the funds. Further, I anticipate a pirate raid on 401K funds similar to the Bush-managed S&L "scandal". --- >the idea was that the state was the only one with the size and >coercive ability to extract domestic capital and invest it wisely. >Imports from the west were heavily taxed, and domestic industries >heavily subsidized, with an eye towards developing domestic >industries that eventually would be competitive in domestic markets >without the need for protection. In every country in which this was >tried, the results were an unmitigated disaster. Let's take a deeper look at history. Protectionism created the economies of Great Britain, the United States, and modern Japan. "Free trade" becomes a policy only after economic strength is attained, as a way to keep poorer nations from catching up. Cuba managed its resources so well that an illegal blockade by a super power has been necessary to bring it to its knees, to prevent it being a model for third-world development. And please spare us the old saw that only Soviet subsidies permitted Cuba to survive -- that was only a counter-balance to the non-market armed interference in Cuba's natural trade opportunities by the U.S. >Consumers in Japan are constantly >"exploited" by having their incomes diverted, through direct and >indirect ways, into the "bottom line" of corporations. I'm not sure what the point is here. As a national economy, Japan's protectionism seems to have worked very well. If the internal distribution of that wealth is unjust (I'll take your word for it), that's another matter. --- >>I imagine you know the answer to this as well as I do, and you >>could possibly be one of those "deep thinkers" yourself. > >Actually, I have no idea. I replied to your post to get a feel for the >argument of the progressive movement, and this aspect of it baffles >me. I wonder if you brand every person who disagrees with you to be >part of "the conspiracy"... Please don't get paranoid -- I simply meant that it's professional intellectuals who do the "deep thinking" for the corporate elite. In that sense you _could_ be one of them, but it would be silly of me to go beyond "could" with what little information I have. BTW> WHAT progressive movement? I wish there was one that had some ideological coherence and organizational savvy! --- >>You tell me -- who dreamed >>up and sponsored GATT? > > >Well, I believe that who dreamed it up is a less important factor than >why it was dreamed up. Well, you're the one who raised the "who" question re/elite corporate planning. I thought making the question more specific might help answer it. >It was developed because there was a >widespread conviction among policy makers and a significant segment >of the public that the Great Depression had been caused or greatly >exacerbated by exactly the same forces that you praised in your >original post: National Protective Tariffs, and competitive currency >devaluation. That may be the primary cover story, but I've seen so many it's hard to keep track. The actual purpose of GATT, viewed objectively, is to supercede national sovereignty by corporate-controlled technocrat commissions, creating a neo-feudalist/fascist corporate world state. It's simply a matter of fact that protectionism has played an important role in the development of most major economies. It can certainly be over-done or mis-applied, and if abused, can serve to perpetuate inefficient management. I've never said anything about currency devaluations. Cheers, Richard From rkmoore@iol.ie Mon Apr 29 18:40:14 1996 Tue, 30 Apr 1996 01:40:03 +0100 (BST) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 01:40:03 +0100 (BST) To: WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK From: rkmoore@iol.ie (Richard K. Moore) Subject: Re: an international strategy 4/29/96, Christoph Chase-Dunn wrote: >What would richard moore think about adding an international strategy to >his national mobilization? it may be the case that global state formation >is going to move ahead. if that is so it might make sense to push toward >a really democratic global government. national mobilizations have not >really changed the system in the past. the international level may be not >only desireable but necessary. The question of scale is critical. I wrote earlier, regarding smaller-than-nation granularity: >Context is all important. For example, a progressive might be for >devolution, as a means to enhance the responsiveness of an already >democratic system. But in the face of corporate hegemony, devolution only >weakens representative government vis a vis corporate power, and is hence >to be generally eschewed by enlightened progressives. Hence, I would oppose an independent Scotland or California at this time. I also wrote, regarding larger-than-nation granularity: >What Globalization is about is the destruction of the nation-state >system, and its replacement by one which no longer includes the People as >one of the partners-in-power (albeit a junior partner). Instead of relying >on their masterful ability to corrupt the democratic process, the elites >prefer now to scrap the process itself, and rule outright. GATT, NAFTA, >IMF, NATO et al are the embryonic sproutings of a new world government of, >by, and for the corporate elite -- with no pretense or mechanism of popular >participation or representation. --- My view is that we are now engaged in full-scale warfare between Corporatism and Democracy -- although one side in the war doesn't seem to be aware of what's going on, since Corporatism already controls the media. IF "The People" can be woken up to the existence of the war, then the question becomes: Where is the strategically most advantageous ground for "us" to "circle our wagons"? Or put another way: Where are the fortresses that "we" can most advantageously occupy and defend? I believe the answer to these questions is incontrovertably: The Nation State. It is preferable to smaller units, because it carries more weight; it is preferable to larger units, because larger units (the EU for example) are being (and would be) set up under the aegis of corporate hegemony, and would WITHOUT DOUBT be structured to increase that hegemony. "We" have very little say in how the EU, the IMF, or the UN are structured or how they operate. The only hope I see for a "credibly winning strategy" for The People is to dig their heels in re/national sovereignty, and to exercise the democratic mechanisms that still exist at that level of granularity. IF (miracle of miracles) national governments were forced to be democratically responsive, and corporations were brought under responsible control, then it might become sensible to devolve autonomy to smaller, more responsive units, and to build a stronger regime of international law and some kind of global Bill of Rights, that is actually observed. The corporate elite is well aware that nation states pose a threat to them, especially as rampant neo-liberalism erodes welfare universally and anti-corporate populist feeling gains strength world-wide. That is why the elites are pushing aggressively for globalization while their hegemony reigns unchallenged, and they hold temporary sway in the U.S., the UK, Germany, France, and Italy. International solidarity among nation-based popular-democracy movements would be a very good thing, however. An international green-labor-peace alliance would be excellent. -rkm From rkmoore@iol.ie Mon Apr 29 18:40:20 1996 Tue, 30 Apr 1996 01:40:10 +0100 (BST) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 01:40:10 +0100 (BST) To: WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK From: rkmoore@iol.ie (Richard K. Moore) Subject: re: measures of prosperity 4/29/96, Greg wrote: >In short, while neither measure is perfect, I guess I am a >conservative in the sense that I prefer the evils of the old GDP per >capita system (with caveats for income dispersion & others) to the >unknown evils of some of the more "newfangled" systems of >measurement. I think this is an excellent example of where academic methodology serves to obscure truth more than it helps elucidate understanding. Living standards and welfare are OBVIOUSLY deteriorating in many first-world countries. There's higher unemployment, more homelessness, more hours-worked necessary for bare survival, desperation among college graduates, astronomical health-care costs, etc. etc. Indices which fail to reflect reality should be discarded or refined, not defended. True science is grounded in unbiased observation, not rigid methodologies. -rkm From rkmoore@iol.ie Mon Apr 29 18:40:28 1996 Tue, 30 Apr 1996 01:40:18 +0100 (BST) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 01:40:18 +0100 (BST) To: WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK From: rkmoore@iol.ie (Richard K. Moore) Subject: Re: historical responsibility 4/29/96, Greg Ehrig wrote: >Is there a statute of limitations for historical crimes? > >For instance, do people of Anglo descent owe restitution to people of >Saxon descent for the centuries of slavery and exploitation suffered >by the former at the hands of the latter? How do you determine what >reparations are "Just"? As Bob Dylan said: "Show me someone who's not a parasite and I'll go out and say a prayer for him." Or as Joseph Campbell observed: life is AT-ROOT a self-consuming bloody cannibalistic beast. (Big fish eat the little fish, and so ad infinitum.) This is the human condition -- we got where we are partly (or perhaps largely) via warfare, despotism, genocide, and injustice. The miracle of human conciousness is that it is possible to CREATE the concept of justice, to GENERALIZE inborn familial-tribal caring to the brotherhood of man, and to COMPREHEND the ecological interconnection of species, resources, and energy. This is a creative process, not a deductive one. Let's just admit that we ALL share in the guilt of history, if ANYONE is guilty. The useful question is how we can collaborate in creating more just societies, more equitable distribution of wealth, and sustainable economies -- NOT how we should allocate guilt. When a Hindu admitted to Ghandi that he killed a Muslim child, Ghandi's "justice" was for that man to raise another child to be a "good Muslim" -- NOT to go out and hang himself. Some of the worst injustices have been carried out in the name of correcting past injustices. Wasn't The Holocaust itself justified by an alleged ancient crime of Jews? Isn't the present persecution of the Palestinians justifed by ancient land-ownership claims? (bolstered by a misplaced urge to "make up" for the Holocaust?) Let's clear the books and start anew. Our collective debt is unrepayable. -rkm From ecbm@cc.newcastle.edu.au Mon Apr 29 18:48:50 1996 id <01I45ER307S08X1RCY@cc.newcastle.edu.au> for wsn@csf.colorado.edu; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 10:48:38 +1000 Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 10:48:37 +1000 From: "Bruce R. McFarling" Subject: re: Confused NWO definitions To: WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK On Mon, 29 Apr 1996 gehrig@banyan.doc.gov wrote: > I have read about this measure [GPI], and in concept I recall it was an > interesting idea. However, the problem with using indexes such as > this is that the biases of the constructors will heavily influence the > outcome. For instance, how do you put a definite quantitiative value > on a child dying of malnutrition? ... Is there an unbiased index that can be constructed? I don't accept using an index number that we know does not apply because the index numbers that are constructed in an effort to apply are biased. As a welfare measure GDP is biased, deflated GDP is biased twice, both in accepting market values as welfare measures and then by the choice of price index. And we still know that in real terms, middle quintile GDP has grown at a very slow rate in the US since the last middle income growth surge in the later 1970's, bottom quintile incomes have declined, and only the top two quintiles have grown strongly. The philosophy of the GPI is to not attempt to construct a complete 'social welfare' index, but to construct a more narrowly defined 'economic welfare' index that uses market values, but does not add together spending on 'bads' as well as spending on 'goods'. If we don't like the way its constructed, we can construct our own. We don't get away from exercising critical judgement simply by saying 'add all market values of newly produced goods and services': that *is* a critical judgement, and it should be defended as such, not on the grounds that if it is a mistake, at least it is a common mistake. We can see the direction of the GDP bias by the simpler World Bank index that gives consumption and government expenditure less defense spending. That's available in the Penn World tables (check the www server on the CSF site that hosts this list at http://csf.colorado.edu, there is a pointer to the Penn World tables in the PKT archives). Subtract spending on prisons, you get an even greater discrepency between GDP growth trends a MPWI (my personal welfare index) growth trends. Subtract any value from GDP that you think should not be counted as a welfare improvement, and justify the values that you have retained as welfare measures, and if there is a discrepency with what the GPI says, you have a disagreement between your critical judgement and that of the GPI buidlers. But we can no longer use GDP on the excuse that there is nothing else available. And, after all, that was why the GPI was constucted and published, warts and all. Virtually, Bruce R. McFarling, Newcastle, NSW ecbm@cc.newcastle.edu.au From ROZOV@cnit.nsu.ru Tue Apr 30 03:10:23 1996 30 Apr 96 16:03:39 NSK-6 From: "Nikolai S. Rozov" Organization: Center of New Informational Tech. To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 16:03:17 -0600 (NSK) Subject: Re: historical responsibility Thank you Greg for your questions: the results of application of the idea of responsibility to your historical knowledge. If I understand you right the background thought of your message means impossibility to make correct juridical judgement in the field of long-term world history. I agree, but nobody appealed to initiate juridical processes for historical blaming! The specifics of MORAL historical responsibility is that only descendants theirseves can and should make a moral choice, i.e. 1) to accept or to reject responsibility for the historical harm brought by their ancestors to other peoples, 2) if accept it, then how to compensate this harm to contemporaines i.e.to those who still experience this harm or who are descendants of previous victims. From external viewpoint it seems quiet natural to expect such acceptance of responsibility from strongest and richest nations (core, hegemonies of modern world economy), because support and compensation need finances first of all. So it is not a question of 'just reparations' but a question of understanding by new generations their moral historical duty. I give one example. There already were dozens (maybe more, I dont know exactly) of young Germans who went to Izrael and worked for free in kibutses just because they wanted to compensate somehow the harm of their fathers and grandfathers to Jewish people. Sic! Nobody judged them for this 'reparation'. It was just a moral choice, worthy for respect, wasn't it? As for your questions, I am not sure that many living now Anglo-Saxons can strictly recognize, who were their ancestors: Angles or Saxes. But modern Englishmen (also French, etc) as I think, can and should pose a question of responsibility and compensation to at least most miserable parts of their previous colonies. Zaire itself now, as far as I know, has rather hard times. I am not an expert in its history, but general principles allow to suppose that only a very thin elit of Zairian empire had some profit from capture slaves from Ephiopia (and from Zaire itself, I think). The very interprise, most profit and most moral blame for slavery trade and exploitation belong to Europeans and white Americans, am I not right? But if (just imagine) Zaire becomes much more rich and powerful than Ephiopia, it would not be absurd to expect some support from Zaire where historical responsibility for capturing slaves from Ephiopia centuries ago can be one of foundations. But it also cannot be a matter of juridical judgement and reparation. Only free moral choice is possible and needed. In world-systemic and global-progressive perspective this seeming pure ethical-philosophical question of historical responsibility can be transformed into serious factor for new order of relations between core and periphery in XXI century. I would be grateful for directing me to other reasons for necessary support, say, to poorest peoples of Africa, India, or South America. East-Asia and China for US and Japan, maybe later Russia for Europe are becoming quiet economically sufficient semiperipheries (I follow here the prognosis by I.Wallerstein). Who will care of peoples that seem to be thrown off from history? Regards, Nikolai Rozov > From: (Greg Ehrig) > Is there a statute of limitations for historical crimes? > > For instance, do people of Anglo descent owe restitution to people of > Saxon descent for the centuries of slavery and exploitation suffered > by the former at the hands of the latter? How do you determine what > reparations are "Just"? For a non-Eurocentric example, Do people > of Ziaeran descent owe reparations to a) African-Americans of > Eithiopian descent, or b)Ethiopians? (Zaire was one of the foremost > empires which captured slaves from neighboring countries for trade > to the Europeans; Rum being the medium of exchange) > Nikolai S. Rozov Professor of Philosophy Moderator of the mailing list PHILOFHI (PHILosophy OF HIstory and theoretical history) http://darwin.clas.virginia.edu/~dew7e/anthronet/subscribe /philofhi.html Dept. of Philosophy Novosibirsk State University Fax.: (3832) 355237 630090, Novosibirsk E-mail: rozov@cnit.nsu.ru Pirogova 2 RUSSIA From Claudiu@ix.netcom.com Tue Apr 30 05:06:00 1996 Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 04:05:56 -0700 To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu From: Claudiu Secara Subject: New Books - Update New Books from Algora Publishing: They were shown at the London Book fair March 17 - 19 as part of Algora Publishing stand, and also at Paris Salon du Livre, March 22 - 27, as part of the United States collective stand, where actually sold out. TO ORDER: * CALL 800-879-4214, or * Write to Algora Publishing, 222 Riverside Drive, New York, NY 10025. Fax (212) 663-9805. Include $4.00 for SH, or * Logon to Internet: http://www.books.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE NEW COMMONWEALTH. FROM BUREAUCRATIC CORPORATISM TO SOCIALIST CAPITALISM, by Claudiu A. Secara, 1996, $18.95, 316 pp. (096460731X). "We are also in the middle of reforms. In China they call it a socialist market economy with Chinese characteristics. Russia is not building capitalism either - it is building a market economy with its own specific flavor." Boris Yeltsin, April 28, 1996, Shanghai. The attempt at integrating a Free-Market system worldwide is testing all foundations of the industrial societies. The need to redefine the concepts of Business Enterprise, State/Public Capitalism, Corporate Entrepreneurship, Social Market Economy, International Trade/Security Regimes, etc., becomes ever less of an academic reflection as events move faster than their descriptions. In fact, as the book demonstrates, it is the opposite development that is more significant nowadays, which is the American convergence upon the rest of the world in search of the Social Market Capitalism and the implicit message to the newly emerging market economies. It happens that, in the United States itself, the very tools of capitalist economic policy, i.e. capital markets, capital allocation instruments, equity markets, capital formation and dividend distribution, etc., are paying the ticket to the Mutual Funded Social Market: the Employee Pension Funds, the Employee Stock Ownership Plans, the Value-Added Partnership, the Non-Profit Sector, Business Associations, etc. In addition, the undergoing reform of Capital Allocation instruments, Insurance and Health Care systems, Education and Training, Judicial system, Labor vs. Management institutions, International Managed Trade regimes, etc., all indicate a decisive turning point in the workings and the principles of once laissez-faire capitalism. State/Public Leadership, Social Market Economy, International Statutes & Laws - the essentials of the American convergence, upon the rest of the world, to Social Market Capitalism are in place. Its tools are the capitalist economic policies: capital/equity distribution instruments, profits vs. wages guideliness, mutual and pension funds, etc. The authir brings academic logic and common sense reflection to the subject of the philosophy of modern history and leads the reader through the intricate web of the history of high-ground politics and international intrigues with a touch of irony and intellectual impartiality. It is the story of the world of power politics of past/post industrialization, of nations coalescing into regional unions and of their small time rulers further rationalized into the novel structure of the emerging global elites. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. POST-SOVIET, EUROSLAVIA, by Claudiu A. Secara, 1996, $6.00, 60 pp. (0964607301). Out of the roughly 700 million population, the new Eurasian Community has approximately 180 million Russian speaking natives, but it includes about 360 million Slavic speaking population, or, in other, words, the needed simple majority. The paper examines why in such Commonwealth's general election chances are that a continental new representative parliament would muster enough votes to have the red/pink panslavism reign as the popularly elected Sovereign of Euroslavia. Is Panslavism a factor in the making of Euroslavia? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. Coming soon: TIME & EGO. The Judeo-Christian Egotheism and the Anglo-Saxon Industrial Revolution (0964607328). The first question of the abstract reflection that arouses controversy is, indeed, the problem of becoming. Being persists, beings constantly change; they are born and they pass away. How could Being change and be eternal? The journey for the logical and the experimental answer has just taken off. =========================================================================== T H E N E W C O M M O N W E A L T H T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S Introduction Chapter I - The Social Market The Social Market The Accounting Nature of Capitalism Closed vs Open Capitalist Systems Forms of Socialized Capitalism Individualistic vs Communitarian Capitalism The Profit Motive The Social Capitalism The Social Market Commonwealt Chapter II - The Historical Context The International Power Market The German Way The American Way The Russian Way The Interconnected World System The Mediterranean Ecosystem The European In-Land Farming The Affluent Farming Societies The Emergence of the Military-Industrial Corporation The Anglo-Saxons and the Slavs The Batttle over Europe The Balkanization of the World Chapter III - The Economic Models' Question The Interventionist Philosophy The Traditional Centrally Planned Model To Reform or Not to Reform Internal Factors of Decline External Factors of Decline In the Pursuit of Socialism with a Human Face Reforms and Their Results Motivation vs. Management The Ambiguities of "Decentralization" Market Competition under Central Planning International Markets along National Competition Managed Social Markets Chapter IV - Cold War Industries' Life Cycle The American Pursuit of a Military Economy The Aeronautical Industry Air Industry Support Industry Soviet Union's Militarized Economy The Detente Chapter V - The Global Economic Scene The Soviet Union's Deteriorating Economy The United States' Deteriorating Leadership The Question of Labor Shortages Russian Industrialization The Russian Agricultural Revolution More Labor Power Through Service Automation Reinventing the Feudal Work System The Industrial Technocracy The Historical Curve to Global Market Socialism Chapter VI - The Pitfalls of a Market Reform Market Economy and Privatization Markets without Capitalist Support Systems The Trans-Atlantic Market Fault European vs. American Investments The Similarity of Former Comecom Countries' Reform Playing the Market with Socialist Nomeklatura Playing Socialism at the Stock Market The Concept of Managed Markets Chapter VII - The Invisible Revolution The Ownership Distribution in the US The Employee Stock Ownership Program Industrial Policy with a Capitalist Face A Historical Framework The French Auto Industry's Experience The Japanese Semiconductor Industry's Experience The German Steel Industry's Experience The United States' Experience Chapter VIII - The Making of the Eurasia Ideology and Political Convergence within Europe Internal Adjustments vs External Realignments The Post-Soviet, Euroslavia The Bureaucratic Nature of Military Societies The Thaw, Finally Security Matters in the Absence of Military Command Elections - Legitimizing of the Old Guards Events within Regularities - the Cycle History The Aristotelism of Global Politics Soft versus Hard Style Management Hypothesizing on the Future The Intelligentsia in Power The Birth of Eurasia Notes Bibliography Index From TERRENCE.MCDONOUGH@UCG.IE Tue Apr 30 08:22:04 1996 id <01I45OAIMMSG8XD9Y3@bodkin.ucg.ie>; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 15:21:42 GMT 30 Apr 96 15:24:09 GMT Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 15:23:59 +0000 (GMT) From: Terrence Mc Donough Subject: Job Openings To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu Organization: University College Galway We have three job openings here at Galway. Two of the advertised fields are development and political economy. While the posts are junior lectureships (equivalent to ass't professor in US), there are ways in which more experienced people can be accommodated. As the equivalent of tenure is decided more quickly here, giving up tenure is not a problem. In addition to contacting the address at the bottom of the ad, any interested parties can also contact me. I would also appreciate any suggestions as to where else to send the ad, especially UK graduate programs. Terry McDonough Home phone 353-91-85706 Terrence.McDonough@ucg.ie Text of ad follows: University College Galway Lectureships in Economics The Department of Economics wishes to fill three posts at the Junior Lectureship level. Lectureship No. I The Department wishes to strengthen its already strong capacity in Development Economics, in particular with respect to natural resources and the environment. Applicants for this post should have particular qualifications in Development and/or Natural Resource Economics. Lectureships II and III Although no particular specialisation attaches to these posts, the Department is especially interested in strengthening its capacity in the following areas: Applied Microeconomics, Applied Econometrics, and Political Economy. Applicants should have a postgraduate degree in economics (a Ph.D is considered desirable), have good communication skills and demonstrated research capacity. Application forms and particulars can be obtained from the office of the Registrar, University College Galway, Galway, Ireland. Further information on the posts and the department of economics can be obtained from Professor Michael Cuddy: Tel.:353-91-750324; Fax: 353-91-523140; email Michael.Cuddy@ucg.ie Please pass on this information. Terry McDonough From DennyB@vax1.Mankato.msus.edu Tue Apr 30 09:18:56 1996 V4.2-13 #3750) id <01I45DOTH9N4004H7V@MSUS1.MSUS.EDU>; Tue, Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 10:18:40 -0500 From: Denny Braun Subject: Questions on Using GDP as an Indicator of Well-Being To: WSN@csf.colorado.edu Organization: Department of Sociology, Mankato State University The following is new material from my revised edition of THE RICH GET RICHER (which unfortunately for me will not be out until early in 1997). It is germane to our thread about the adequacy of comparing countries on GDP or GNP per person. The footonotes were stripped when I cut-and-pasted, and I am unsure if there is any software that might do this for E-mail. If someone knows of any, I would appreciate the information. -- Denny Braun Department of Sociology Mankato State University Mankato, MN 56002-8400 Voice: (507) 389-5609 FAX: (507) 389-5615 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Income Distribution and Available Data On a general level, such concepts of economic activity as Gross Domestic Product or Gross National Product leave a lot to be desired. To begin with, there is an inherent prejudice in comparing poor countries to wealthy ones. In order for economic activity and goods production to be measured, the service or commodity must have a price tag, i.e., be valuated in a market economy. Goods exchanged by barter or gift, such as in a subsistence economy, are simply not counted. The informal economy of Less Developed Countries can be vibrant and thriving, yet never show up in formal measurements of GDP. If policy makers truely believe that the only real economy is the measured one, there will be increasing bias and distortion in their conclusions. Women's work and work done gratuitously, on a voluntary basis, never get entered into a GNP or GDP compilation. Especially in Third World countries, the domestic products of women (often consumed in the home) are never entered in the ledgers by the World Bank, although the impact of their contribution to societal well-being is massive. Various organizations have enaged in many attempts over the years to broaden the conception of economic activity to meet many of these defects, with varying degrees of success. The first major effort came from international organizations, such as UNESCO. The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) has maintained for quite some time that GNP per capita is an inadequate measure of a country's well-being, and that it fails to capture real development. The United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD) constructed a standard of living index that started out with over 100 indicators. Because of defective or missing data, the number of indicators was eventually reduced to nine--only one of which was GDP per capita. At bottom, many critics emphasize that nations should be judged on how they meet their citizen's basic human needs. This assumption is at odds with the traditional dogma in economics that rising production of goods ultimately translates into a higher standard of living for everyone. Thus, analysts have worked out varying measurements designed to monitor either one of the concepts or a mixture of both. Predictably, the results vary widely. One "Index of Social Progress" based upon forty-four social indicators tapping welfare issues ranks the United Kingdom and the United States lower than some countries in the former East European bloc of nations or Costa Rica. When four different indexes for a large sample of countries are compared: (Start Quote) The two based mainly on economic indicators tend to rank the United States very high (first and second) while the other two, more widely based, classifications rank it lower (sixth and twenty-fourth). This is clearly a very controversial question...Basic needs theorists argue that it is more frutiful to stress results rather than inputs in order to measure the adequacy of development policy. For example, life expectancy is a better measure of health services than numbers of doctors per person, and calorie supply per capita is a better measure of nutrition than total production of food. (End Quote) Further impetus for questioning and redefining the basic philsophy behind the GDP measurement comes from the directors of a non-profit public-policy organization called Redefining Progress. The impetus for change from their direction stems from the failure of the continuously rising U.S. GDP to reflect the deterioration in the lives of the great majority of Americans. Specifically, the Gross Domestic Product tallies the value of all money transactions, whether for good or ill. It does not distinguish between costs and benefits, or between productive and destructive activities. A terminal cancer patient going through a costly divorce adds to the GDP, as does the cost to repair the devastation of earthquakes and hurricanes. This group proposes some subtractions from the GDP tally that most people would see as costs and as undesirable: the costs of crime ($65 billion per year in prevention alone), divorce (lawyers fees, new household costs, counselling expenses), resource depletion and degradation of the habitat, loss of leisure, and the jump in income inequality. In addition, it adds in the value of household and volunteer work, which is not now counted in the official GDP. This group's new barometer of economic and social well-being is called the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI): (Start Quote) The GDP would tell us that life has gotten progressively better since the early 1950s--that young adults today are entering a better economic world than their parents did. GDP per American has more than doubled over that time. The GPI shows a very different picture: an upward curve from the early fifties until about 1970, but a gradual decline of roughly 45 percent since then. This strongly suggests that the costs of increased economic activity--at least the kind we are locked into now--have begun to outweigh the benefits, resulting in growth that is actually uneconomic. Specifically, the GPI reveals that much of what we now call growth or GDP is really just one of three things in disguise: fixing blunders and social decay from the past, borrowing resources from the future, or shifting functions from the traditional realm of household and community to the realm of the monetized economy. (End Quote) There is even a greater need to be cautious when comparing countries on GDP. In 1989, then-president of the World Bank Barber Conable admitted GDP did not adequately reflect the importance of environmental issues. There are also profound and hidden dimensions to the change from GNP to GDP by the United States in 1991. While the amounts are not greatly different in our own country, using GDP paints a false, rosy picture of life in the Third World. Output from Japanese, American, British and other multinational corporations located in poor Third World countries is now counted in the country where it occurs, despite the fact that profits, tax breaks, loan development costs, etc.all return to rich, core countries. The Redefining Progress group terms this an accounting shift that creates statistical boomtowns out of many struggling nations. While aiding the push for a global economy, it hides the basic fact that nations of the North are skimming off the South's resources. Instead, focusing only upon GDP figures labels this operation as progress, as a gain to Third World countries. There is some indication that the World Bank may finally be confronting at least some of these criticisms. It has lately constructed a new economic yardstick that is in the experimental stage. The measurement breaks down national wealth into three major attributes. "Produced capital" is the economic value of machinery, factories, roads, and the rest of the nation's infrastructure. "Natural capital" consists of the value of natural resources, such as timber, oil, mineral deposits and the like. The third element is "human resources," such as the education level and nutritional standing of a population. "Produced assets" most closely parallel the traditional concept of GDP, but under the new system it accounts for only 20 percent of a nation's real wealth. The major wealth of nations appears to be on the social, human resources side of the ledger. Richer countries stay that way by providing adequate nutrition, health care, and education to their populations. The point is driven home by noting that Madagascar and the United States are dead even, deriving about 16 percent of their wealth from produced assets. The major point is that in evaluating the economic well-being of countries, other indicators in addition to GNP or GDP are needed. A high GDP or GNP per person, as we have seen, is often falsely viewed as a high level of wealth. Yet it is also possible for a country to have a high level of GNP and a very extreme degree of internal income inequality. It is not enough to ask what level of average wealth exists without also asking how a country's economic pie is itself divided up within its borders. How a nation's wealth is distributed among its people is of paramount interest. We can ask whether income is shared relatively equally, so that all may reasonably benefit--or whether rewards are apportioned unjustly, so that only a few benefit while many suffer in poverty. The answer tells us much about the internal dynamics of any country. For example, Brazil is often held up as a model of economic development. Its GNP per person in 1992 was $2770--enviable by Third World standards. Just over one-half of this income, however, was being captured by the highest 10 percent of all households. Only 2.0 percent of all income went to the poorest fifth of all households. Hungary is an equally successful LDC nation with a GNP per person ($2970) roughly equivalent to Brazil's. Yet Hungary shows only 21 percent of its income going to the top 10 percent of all households, while 11 percent of all income ends up in the poorest fifth of all households. In essence, economic development is very questionable if only a small minority of the population benefits. Much of the concern for income inequality must be looked at in terms of how it is spread out within countries. Without this, average GNP or GDP is very misleading. From hk1@axe.humboldt.edu Tue Apr 30 14:03:24 1996 id <0DQOYDI0100DR3@axe.humboldt.edu>; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 13:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 13:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Harutiun Kassakhian Subject: Re: Confused NWO Reubuttals In-reply-to: To: "Richard K. Moore" One more point to Mr.Ehrig, In the past 2 decades policymakers in the first world have given strong support towards free trade and laissez faire economic reform. The engineering of the WTO and other international accords to insur global free trade have been the work of policy-makers both in the private and public sectors dilligently working to (in their view) optimize trade conditions and maximize comparitive advantage. Meanwhile, US corporate leadership has pursued a strategy of extreme short term investment due to the reliance US companies have on speculation-driven stock market which greatly shapes corporate decisions. Japanese and European companies that are partially owned by large banks provide the stability necessary for long-term corporate planning. The two tendencies: long term-planning by policy makers in national governments, international financial institutions, etc, and short-term planning in US corporate borad-rooms are fundamentally unrelated.