Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: [Fwd: Position in the World-System and National Emissions of] (fwd)

[Doug Henwood <dhenwood@xxxxxxxxx>]

xxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>  >xxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > > what are you trying to prove with your insults Doug? are you implying
> the
> > > impossibility of a socialist agenda? who is fantasizing here?
>
> > Ok, so you don't have any idea what changes are necessary in the
> > actual structures of production and consumption. All that's required
> > is loyalty to Marx and a critical attitude. That's pretty much what I
> > suspected, but it's good to see my suspicions confirmed.
>
> this is complete BS. We discussed what changes were necessary in the
> "actual structures of production" if you had paid enough attention
> to the subject matter of the posts instead of insulting people. One of
> them being, as it was mentioned, is the abolution  of the distinction
> between town and country side.

You're just phrasemongering here. What does that really mean? We
empty the cities and move people onto farms? Or will there be
proletarian suburbs for all? How much mobility will you allow people?
Will there be a division of labor, or do we all till and weave?

> Socialism should be judged vis a vis historical circumstances by means of
> assesing the resources available to actors. We should learn from history
> and the experiences of actually existing socialisms.I know this is of zero
> interest to you Doug.

It's of much greater than zero interest. The history of actually
existing socialism was hardly an inspiration to greens.

> Regarding population-- the part of your post which does not directly
> concern me, but i will answer. 0 population rate in Europe has nothing to
> do with the sustainability of environment there.

What I said:

"When people are happier they'll have fewer babies. Population growth
is virtually 0 in Western Europe, but Western Europe is only a bit
more ecologically sustainable than the U.S. But is a growth rate of 0
low enough?"

>  Over-population pressures
> are created by capitalism, not by people, among the several reasons being
> HISTORY OF COLONIALISM, IMPERIALISM, POVERTY, PLUNDERING OF NON-WHITES AND
> THEIR RESOURCES, DECLINING LIVING STANDARTS IN THE THIRD WORLD, GLOBAL
> INEQUALITIES, INCREASING ECONOMIC INSECURITY. IN THOSE COUNTRIES
> FACING EXTEREME POVERTY, CHILDREN ARE SEEN AS AN ASSET-- A SOURCE OF
> INCOME AND CHEAP LABOR. THINK ABOUT CHILD SLAVERY, THINK ABOUT CHILD SEX..

Gosh, I didn't know all these things. I'm learning so much from PEN-L
these days.

> okey, my blood pressure is gradually increasing. have a suny day on wall
> street!

Thanks. I'm about to head there to do my radio show in fact.

Doug