Next stop. Alan Ginsberg doing Nike commericals.
Tom Lehman
Max Sawicky wrote:
> >Why your country? Why not solidarity with the people your country was
> >attacking? Why do some geographical borders and a nation-state define
> >a special kind of feeling for you? Doug
>
> This reminds me of David Bacon's excellent letter to the New York Times
> about their editorial which criticized the AFL-CIO's new policy on illegal
> immigration. I wonder if this new policy is in any way connected to their
> campaign to prevent China from joining the WTO. Peter
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
> Nations are required to organize for mutual
> well-being for purposes that families, voluntary
> associations, and local governments cannot fulfill.
> In other words, nations are become real thru the
> states they construct. Nations also provide
> a collective memory that
> serves certain purposes. Obviously these functions
> can be flawed in all sorts of ways, from the
> standpoint of the working class.
>
> But since such needs can go to fundamental values and
> entail high personal sacrifice, naturally the nation
> properly inspires emotional feeling.
>
> Every such situation is ambiguous. Settling the
> U.S. entailed great tragedies and atrocities, but
> also great individual commitment to positive values.
> Rejecting or accepting it wholesale are equivalent
> errors, albeit opposite political postures. This
> ambiguity is the root of the humor in AG's poem.
> He wants to be a part, but he realizes there remain
> considerable inconsistencies in his outlook and
> that of mainline patriotism. It is not a rejectionist
> posture. You'd have to look thru AG's verse for a
> long time to find actual trotskyism, as opposed to
> affection for trotskyists.
>
> Re: the AFL, both the immigration and China policies
> spring from a common interest in defending workers'
> interests in the U.S., which, after all, is its
> job. Lack of amnesty was providing no practical
> benefit, whereas amnesty brings workers into a
> regulated system and reduces the scope of
> non-regulated work; immigrants are also a
> dynamic political force in the context of
> unionization, a point some might remember
> me making some time ago. There is no
> contradiction w/the China position because
> there is no ethnic element in opposing China
> in the WTO. It stems solely from China's
> position as preeminent international cheerleader
> for the absence of labor standards in trade
> agreements.
>
> mbs