From: michael a. lebowitz (mlebowit@SFU.CA)
Date: Thu Jan 01 2004 - 16:36:09 EST
At 16:27 01/01/2004, Paul Bullock wrote:
> > This is simply untrue. The unions in general have not been
> > enthusiastic about Chavez; the steel workers were on the fence, from
> > what I can make out.( THE ISSUE HERE THEN IS 'WHAT YOU CAN MAKE OUT'... IF
>MICHAEL HAS THE ENERGY HE MIGHT TELL YOU ABOUT THE CORRUPTION IN THE
>LEADERSHIP OF THESE UNIONS, THEIRASSOCIATION WITH THE OLIGARCHY THAT
>PRECEEDED THE CHAVEZ GOVERNMENT ETC, QUITE APART FROM THEIR RELATIVELY SMALL
>SIZE FROM AN ELECTORAL STANDPOINT)
As much as I appreciate the invitation, I'll pass--- but not because I lack
the energy. Instead, let me come back to an earlier question in this thread
(on 22 December) that Rakesh didn't answer:
>Rakesh,
> Let's agree that 'workers' revolutions in the so called North or
>West' would solve a lot of problems (although not all). Let's also agree
>that these don't seem to be on the horizon (unless I'm badly out-of-touch).
>The question then becomes what those in the 'South' who want to put an end
>to the barbarism of capitalism should do. E.g., what should be done in
>India? You appear to agree with Paresh (and, I would guess, Rosenberg) that
>attempts at exploding the existing societies of the South under the current
>conditions would be quixotic, but you haven't answered my questions.
Really, Rakesh, what is to be done?
michael
---------------------
Michael A. Lebowitz
Professor Emeritus
Economics Department
Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5A 1S6
Office Fax: (604) 291-5944
Home: Phone (604) 689-9510
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jan 03 2004 - 00:00:01 EST