On Jul 21, 12:41=A0pm, nada <dwalters...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "Right centrist"? Kettle, black.
Actually, I had the Cliffites in mind. I'd call you a dead center
centrist. Myself? Theoretically, left-centrist is my best guess.
>
> At any rate, I don't think even the SL claims to *influence* the
> struggle against globalization. Real currents that have *prioritized*
> and actually *initiated* actions against globalization, as opposed to
> just raising idle theoretical ping-pong matches about it, all have
> defense of immigrants in the forefront or central place in their
> campaigns.
And they have no hope of enlisting mass sup****t among U.S. workers, in
the case of NAFTA, because most workers are concerned about losing
jobs to Mexico, and would be concerned about losing jobs to Mexicans,
if they understood NAFTA's affect on migration. Being a parochial
Yank, II know much less about Maastricht.
That's because they know that =A0globalization forces workers
> to immigran
Yes, but they (you) refuse to address the question from the
perspective of workers in the receiving countries, who could be
brought to oppose NAFTA militantly, if they understood that it drives
workers to immigrate. This is, of course, for the obvious reason that
the workers in the receiving countries don't _want_ them to immigrate.
t which has been proven by the onslaught of structural
> adjustment programs everywhere, even internally, like China, which has
> 150 million internal migrants.
>
> These groups are the only ones struggling against Maastricht, etc.
> And, even this is narrowed because many groups want a 'better' NAFTA
> or a 'better' Maastrict as oppose to a real struggle against it.
And because they cripple the struggle by willfully omitting any
slogans opposed to the excessive immigration that NAFTA and Maastricht
spawn.
srd
>
> David
|
