Die ganze Linke (nicht nur, aber auch die Partei) muss sich demnach radikalisieren - anstatt sich teilweise von der CDU "links" (natürlich nur scheinbar links, tatsächlich geht es hier um einen "Sozialismus" für die Reichen auf Kosten der Armen und Ausgebeuteten) überholen zu lassen - sowie an den derzeitigen Verhältnissen anknüpfen, wie z.B. mit den selbstorganisierten Massenblockaden beim G8-Gipfel 2007, aber auch im Alltag, um wirkungsmächtig zu werden und schliesslich Kräfteverhältnisse, die momentan eindeutig zugunsten des Kapitals stehen, zu verschieben. Viel Spass beim Lesen!
9. März 2009
Die Linke muss sich radikalisieren
Die ganze Linke (nicht nur, aber auch die Partei) muss sich demnach radikalisieren - anstatt sich teilweise von der CDU "links" (natürlich nur scheinbar links, tatsächlich geht es hier um einen "Sozialismus" für die Reichen auf Kosten der Armen und Ausgebeuteten) überholen zu lassen - sowie an den derzeitigen Verhältnissen anknüpfen, wie z.B. mit den selbstorganisierten Massenblockaden beim G8-Gipfel 2007, aber auch im Alltag, um wirkungsmächtig zu werden und schliesslich Kräfteverhältnisse, die momentan eindeutig zugunsten des Kapitals stehen, zu verschieben. Viel Spass beim Lesen!
8. März 2009
Impressionen vom Kapitalismuskongress
Als Kurzübersicht hier ein Clip der Tagesthemen vom 7. März:
7. März 2009
Capitalism and Its Discontents
Capitalism and Its Discontents, a 5 part series, delves into the roots of the crisis gripping the economies of the Global North and South -- and the political upheaval it has spawned, from Iceland to Brazil.
Doug Henwood talks about the US economic stimulus package. Ian Bone talks about how the crisis is affecting the UK, where wildcat strikes have erupted in recent weeks. And political economist David McNally talks about the roots of the slump.
A look at the state of welfare in the US in the midst of recession with Frances Fox Piven. Salvatore Engel-DiMauro speaks about the International Monetary Fund's massive bailout of the Hungarian economy. And Patrick Bond talks about how the economic crisis has affected South Africa and the Global South.
A look at social ferment in France, in the wake of a general strike. Andrej Grubacic talks about the World Social Forum in Belem, Brazil. And radical geographer Richard Walker speaks about getting a handle on finance capital in the midst of the crisis. With host Sasha Lilley.
Hauker Mar Helgason talks about the protests which brought down the government of Iceland. A look at the boom and bust in global food prices with Eric Holt Gimenez. George Katsiaficas talks about how South Korea and East Asia are weathering the current slump. And Canadian political economist Leo Panitch speaks about the role of the state under economic liberalization and whether the global crisis will strengthen the US as an imperial power.
Capitalism and Its Discontents: A 5 part series on the global financial meltdown - February 13, 2009
Labor scholar Janice Fine talks about the prospects for union organization in this country in the midst of recession. A look at activist efforts to prevent owners and tenants from being evicted from foreclosed homes with Gifford Hartmann and Gerard Jamin. Economist Matias Vernengo speaks about how the economies of Latin America are faring. Joel Kovel talks about the dangers of rightwing resurgence during times of economic ferment, while Barbara Epstein discusses what ingredients tend to generate social movements of the Left in such times.
via Scott Neigh
5. März 2009
The Neoliberalism of Barack Obama
Why? Because it is exploitation, not discrimination, that is the primary producer of inequality today. It is neoliberalism, not racism or sexism (or homophobia or ageism) that creates the inequalities that matter most in American society; racism and sexism are just sorting devices. In fact, one of the great discoveries of neoliberalism is that they are not very efficient sorting devices, economically speaking. (...) even though some capitalists may be racist, sexist and homophobic, capitalism itself is not. This is also why the real (albeit very partial) victories over racism and sexism represented by the Clinton and Obama campaigns are not victories over neoliberalism but victories for neoliberalism: victories for a commitment to justice that has no argument with inequality as long as its beneficiaries are as racially and sexually diverse as its victims. (...) It is the increasing gap between rich and poor that constitutes the inequality, and rearranging the race and gender of those who succeed leaves that gap untouched. In actually existing neoliberalism, blacks and women are still disproportionately represented both in the bottom quintile—too many—and in the top quintile—too few—of American incomes. In the neoliberal utopia that the Obama campaign embodies, blacks would be 13.2 per cent of the (numerous) poor and 13.2 per cent of the (far fewer) rich; women would be 50.3 per cent of both. For neoliberals, what makes this a utopia is that discrimination would play no role in administering the inequality; what makes the utopia neoliberal is that the inequality would remain intact. Worse: it is not just that the inequality remains intact but also—since it is no longer produced by discrimination—that it gets legitimated. (...) Americans still love to talk about the American Dream—as, in fact, do Europeans. But the Dream has never been less of a reality than it is today. Not just because inequality is so high, but also because social mobility is so low (...) But it is not discrimination that has produced the almost unprecedented levels of inequality Americans face today; it is capitalism. (...) the answer to the question, ‘Why do American liberals carry on about racism and sexism when they should be carrying on about capitalism?’, is pretty obvious: they carry on about racism and sexism in order to avoid doing so about capitalism. Either because they genuinely do think that inequality is fine as long as it is not a function of discrimination (in which case, they are neoliberals of the right). Or because they think that fighting against racial and sexual inequality is at least a step in the direction of real equality (in which case, they are neoliberals of the left). Given these options, perhaps the neoliberals of the right are in a stronger position—the economic history of the last thirty years suggests that diversified elites do even better than undiversified ones. But of course, these are not the only possible choices.
via American Leftist
