anarchism

Charles Brown CharlesB at CNCL.ci.detroit.mi.us
Mon Dec 13 15:26:24 PST 1999


Yes, I was thinking since I responded to your post that I was focussing on the bourgeois standpoint too much.

Capital is controlling the flows of labor, as the "v"of variable and constant capital. Yet, that won't always be.

At this point the bourgeoisie are more mobile and transportationally transing than the People, the working classes of the world in general. But I agree that proletarian internationalism/transnationalism was represented as more mobile in Seattle, so I think you are correct. I take your point.

Transnational global non-monopoly working classes and strata begin to catch up with transnational bourgeoisie, a little.

Taking your standpoint, one might say that the people's vanguard was pretty mobile to get to Seattle. So, the people and the working classes, labor as subject , are they catching up to captial's mobility. Capitalists can run but can't hide so much anymore. Soon runaway shops will be caught by the Peoples' Deputies. Then comes the rev.

Comradely,

CB


>>> "rc-am" <rcollins at netlink.com.au> 12/07/99 07:40PM >>>


>the people's anti-transnational monopoly<

that's 'global resistance to global capital' to you, comrade.

((((((((((((

Chas.: But don't you think that "trans" represents more accurately the material and labor migrations, and transmigrations, the ceaseless movement and play of forces and power struggles that underlie these phrases ?

..

in you original sentence, 'the people' were opposing the 'transnational monopolies'. what has been significant about N30 and J18 is the extent of global, or transnational if you will, co-operation by, and figuration of, 'the people'. that is to say, 'transnationality' is not simply an attribute of capital. i prefer your more recent formulation.

Angela _________



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list