Re: Re: Re: Keeping focus after the WTO

[Carrol Cox <cbcox@xxxxxxxxx>]

"J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." wrote:

> Doug,
>      I have yet to hear out of you a more reasoned
> argument for "scrapping the WTO entirely" than
> the repetition of the charge that it somehow
> embodies the very essence of the "neoliberal
> world order."   I have yet to see you substantively
> respond to any of the questions/criticisms I have
> raised (hate to be such an egomaniac),

I don't see why Doug should give such a "reasonable argument."
We are talking here about the political rationale for mass demonstrations
and for the kind of political organization that might be made to follow
from those demonstrations. Now the '60s were handed the kind of
issues which are needed -- simple ones, and primarily negative ones,
ones that can be summed up in a single message, "Stop it!" Even
the nominally positive demands (such as the ERA) involved (for
their implementation if accepted) only a stopping of certain
activities, not the implementation of complex policies by a
bureaucracy essentially hostile to the policies they nominally
were charged with carrying out.

The kinds of balanced positive suggestions that Barkley is
asking for would cause the movement to collapse in endless
and pointless wrangling. And that is what may well happen
if major elements in the Seattle coalition make the next
goal of the struggle *any kind of reform* of WTO. The
only politically practical demand is ABOLISH WTO. That
is also the route to getting it reformed, if that is possible.
The technique is to demand certain results and refuse to
become embroiled in how they can be achieved. Just
keep raising hell as long as the results aren't there.

This of course is the point at which Max and I yell Utopian
at each other.

Carrol