Tom, you know that the US government calls the shots as far as the world economy is concerned. So the only way we can possibly change the world economy in the interests of people other than GE and Citicorp is to apply pressure on the government of the USA. But that pressure has to come from both inside the US -- meaning the Steelworkers, Naderites, etc. And from outside the US -- meaning Brazil, Malaysia, Korea, etc. Otherwise it just won't succeed.
How can we keep up our solidarity with those folks if our message is "keep out foreign steel" while their message is "open the US market"? Shouldn't we start thinking about an agenda that Koreans and Ohioans can both fight for? What would that look like?
Seth
Tom wrote:
> Doug, you would probably be very surprised to know what goes on as far as
> contacts between the Steelworkers and other international unions around
> the
> globe.
>
> It's not in my place to discuss these type of contacts or what they mean.
> Don't
> kid yourself, international relations among labor unions is a dangerous
> game. A
> good friend of mine and our finest expert on international relations and a
> very
> healthy gentleman came down with a mysterious illness after an
> international
> labor meeting in the Middle East a couple of years ago; even at my lowly
> level I
> got questions like,"was he poisoned?"
>
> Or maybe you recall when the four AFL-CIO conventioneers got machine
> gunned in
> Latin America some years ago. Obviously, someone took the four of them
> for
> someone serious. If I remember correctly our government wasn't sure
> whether it
> was the army or the police of the country they were visiting that did the
> shooting.
>
> Also, here's something to think about did you know that posting foreign
> news
> releases is probably illegal under American law; and this has nothing to
> do with
> intellectual property rights.
>
> I know you cosmopolitans, know all about the world and have spent your
> summers
> hiking in Tibet etc.etc.etc.
>
> Tom
>
>
> Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> > Seth Ackerman wrote:
> >
> > >The media have been full of abuse for the Seattle protests. One of
> their
> > >favorite debating points has been to claim that the developing
> countries
> > >adore the WTO, and fear only that perfidious Northern unions will
> impose
> > >labor standards. This of course ignores that the Third World unions and
> > >development groups have fiercely opposed the WTO agenda accross the
> board --
> > >intellectual property rights, investment policy, competition,
> agriculture,
> > >government procurement, etc.
> > >
> > >However... What to make of the fact that nearly half of the 50,000 who
> > >braved the Seattle police department were Steelworkers and others from
> the
> > >AFL-CIO? On the one hand, as Doug points out, they contributed much to
> the
> > >Seattle demos and the success of the protest owes much to them. But
> > >ultimately, their trade agenda is diametrically opposed to the
> developing
> > >world's. They want to keep out cheap Third World imports, while the
> Third
> > >World wants access to the US market. How do we reconcile the needs --
> and
> > >maintain the rebellious enthusiasm -- of both 1st World *and* 3rd world
> > >workers?
> > >
> > >I'd be interested to hear people's thoughts.
> >
> > Steelworkers president George Becker was one of the few people at the
> > AFL-CIO rally last Tuesday to sing the nationalist song, with dire
> > invocations of the "imports inundating our shores." Most of the other
> > U.S. union speakers gave at least rhetorical support to the "we are
> > one" line (and not just across national borders, but across the old
> > labor/environmentalist border too).
> >
> > What do to about it? More contacts, more solidarity. Have American
> > steelworkers meet with Russian & Brazlian steelworkers regularly -
> > not just the leaders meeting in ceremonial rituals, but actual real
> > contacts among workers. That's one idea. Interested to hear more.
> >
> > Yours in rootless cosmopolitanism,
> >
> > Doug