> You mean such institutions as the WB & the IMF, multinational
> corporations, etc.? Why not the U.S. government, the preeminent
> institution that keeps The Market going? Why not make it the main
> target?
========
Confronting the BWI institutions link us up with ongoing struggles
around the world and averts the creation of a left version of 'America
first' dissent and a "get the US Gov." could just reproduce our
citizenry's proclivities for thinking more about our own affairs as
more important than the fact that 70% of humanity is living on less
than 5$ a day. Those insitutions are more up for grabs than the US
state and we build solidarity with those who are in greatest need.
"The Market" is still too abstract for many people, as Max S. pointed
out on this list last year.
> Various markets existed independently of one another prior to the
> rise of capitalism, but they have since become radically transformed
> & increasingly integrated into One Big Market aka socialization of
> production. Is your proposal one for de-linking a la Samir Amin?
==========
Integrated markets via ecologically and socially spread out production
and distribution makes *talk* of OBM less abstract for us, but sharing
that insight with lots of people is still too abstract. I don't want
to have the one/many discussion today, I'm too tired right now and it
brings back bad memories of debating with Trots. It's about different
forms of socializing, organizing and governing the linkages that
exist and replacing the ones we don't want. Neo-autarkic arguments are
too problematic given the level of corruption amongst the polities of
the planet. Since other global struggles aginst corrupt governments
have a better chance if the legitimacy of their govs. is challenged in
international fora, it affords the opportunity to link the struggles
and show fellow USer's that they're complaints about the Republicrats
sucking up to the corps. is of a piece with how citizens in other
countries are dealing with the same problems. Whether we can get rid
of corruption in political systems is an open question at this point
in history.
> >======
> >That's why the credit markets are the first markets that have to be
> >retheorized and replaced.
>
> How?
>
> Yoshie
========
Indeed! We should be asking ourselves and each other this question
with the same seriousness that scientists have tried to understand how
the universe works, with the difference being we want to implement our
theory/praxis in new institutions rather than new machines.
Ian