Another righteous post from Rakesh on LBO-Talk

Louis Proyect lnp3 at SPAMpanix.com
Sat Dec 18 14:49:16 MST 1999



 Doug  wrote:

> The governing body of the WTO is extremely unlikely to sanction
> anyone for labor rights violations.

You are absolutely right. Let me rephrase.

The US is threatening to invoke non application against China on the
ostensible grounds of labor violations (right?), though it is clear that
the US ruling class is fighting for various other liberalisations. So the
AFL-CIO, the EPI and other liberal left organizations are just providing a
progressive imprimatur to power politics. I emphatically agree that there
will be no bans by the WTO body against the imports of any country as long
as the interests of  US imperialism are being met. Even if those
interests are not met, then super 301 will be invoked, not sanctions by
the WTO governing body on the ostensible grounds of labor standards.

So what the liberal left is doing in holding up the WTO is putting
pressure on the Chinese govt to kow tow to the US ruling class regarding
services, telecom, low local equity participation and supply content or
whatever--no matter the horrific effects such policies have on
unemployement.  The US labor leadership hopes to get some of the spoils
from opening China up or 'lowering other countries' barriers', as the
AFL-CIO euphemistically puts the reconquest of the semicolonial world.
This is clearly not a labor movement prepared for class struggle against
its own bourgeoisie--which remains the most difficult and only honorable
task of any labor movement.  Rather it is simply a junior partner is a new
social imperialism. That's what Seattle marked the birth of, not a victory
in any sense.   I don't see why anyone would expect anything less from the
likes of Sweeney, Hoffa and EPI friends who rally to the support of US
imperialism even when it is bombing Serbia, provoking trajedy and
reinvigorating militarism in Russia (Skidelsky had a wonderful editorial
in the FT last week). The American left is in pathetic shape. Indeed it's
becoming more American than ever. No wonder the shallow criticism of the
Paglia's against the Said's, the Eagleton's against the Spivak's--it's
just a reflection in the cultural realm of the new popular US imperialism.

Wouldn't Peter Gowan agree?

yours, rakesh

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/









More information about the Marxism mailing list