Vineland revisited

[calbert at tiac.net]

twaddle generator on 11:

> Such treaties as NAFTA, GATT, FTAA protect the free movement of goods
> and capital but continue to prevent the free movement of people. In
> this way they are inherently fascist, codifying the continuing
> availability of essentially prison labor in countries already ravaged
> by capitalist predation. The very opposite of their claim of bringing
> "western" economic vitality and progress to "developing" nations, it
> is in fact a new kind of colonialism.

Gee, and all "enlightened" people find it preferable to leave such 
populations the quarry of local predators. I wonder what informs this 
benevolence? A firm belief that we MUST insulate less developed 
polities from "evolving" lest we be deprived of a global human "zoo"?
 
> Indeed, the anti-globalization movement provides some reason for hope,
> because unlike the economic desperation behind the 1930's and the war
> conscription behind the 1960's it is driven by a long-term and
> principled vision of a democratic world.

Self congratulatory codswallop........Just TRY to elaborate on this 
"vision" - some economic specifics would help.......

love,
cfa
> --
> Diogenes T.
> 
> 
> Phil Wise wrote:
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Doug Millison" <DMillison at ftmg.net>
> > > They are media-savvy, able to turn the media against themselves,
> > > aware of paradigm limitations in a way that not many of the '60s
> > > crew were, and
> > they
> > > have access to the 'net as an organizing tool. I wonder if Pynchon
> > > might rethink Vineland's dismal view of the possibilities for
> > > meaningful protest in light of today's anti-globalization
> > > movement.
> > 
> > Maybe so, or is it an emerging pattern... if the 50s sold out the
> > 30s, and the 80s sold out the 60s movements, and now we have 90s/00s
> > movements, how do we prevent the "mild heard creatures" of our own
> > generation from being turned over like the PR3ers?  How do we
> > prevent the pattern repeating?  And by the time the 2010 generation
> > comes along, will the system all our Governments are busy
> > negotiating - I'm sure even George W doesn't realise what the
> > potential consequences of these negotiatins are - have become a
> > fully fledged totalitarianism?
> > 
> > What they're negotiating seems to me to be pure GR's Cartel.  Each
> > of the previous totalitarian movements - Stalin's USSR, Hitler's
> > Germany, Mao's Revolutionary China - began with widespread popular
> > support because of the advances in quality of life they were
> > supposedly going to achieve.  Each needed huge numbers of people to
> > achieve a genuine state of totalitarianism, and each once they did
> > this, began to devour their own population when an outside enemy
> > wasn't available or sufficient.  In addition, those who helped
> > establish and\or enable these totalitarianisms had no idea what they
> > had wrought.
> > 
> > As the paradigm of the market extends itself more completely into
> > social life (cf Claude Lefort's definition of totalitarianism), and
> > sets all around them into motion (cf Arendt's), will or won't these
> > protesters seem prophetic?  Or will we all be too numbed to know?
>