newman on china

James Heartfield Jim at heartfield.demon.co.uk
Tue Apr 16 00:03:50 PDT 2002


Nathan Newman <nathan at newman.org> writes

"for the Nth time- THE RULING CLASS IN THE US SUPPORTED PNTR. The AFL-CIO was opposing the US ruling class when it opposed PNTR."

But the AFL wouldn't be the first union to argue a version of 'what's best for the nation' that did not find favour with the ruling class. (In Britain unions lobbied hard for import controls throughout the 80s, but were rebuffed.)

Nathan continues

"I've noted that I am anti-protectionism but"

and its the "but" that counts...

"but fighting for trade deals that require labor rights attached to trade is not protectionism".

Well, yes, actually, I think it is. It protects against goods that are not produced under US labour standards. But labour standards are not universal.

In Europe controls are often imposed on goods exported on environmental or health standards. That's because environmental standards tend to be higher in Germany and Scandinavia than elsewhere. So lots of competitive goods are struck down.

Nathan:

"in fact, it was the fight US labor fought in this country in fighting for national labor standards, stopping child labor, and cutting the work day. The rightwing Supreme Court struck down laws both at the state level and nationally that tried to impose those standards on goods shipped into pro-labor states. By your logic, that Supreme Court was the friend of labor and development of the anti-union Jim Crow South."

You'll have to forgive my ignorance of US history, but as far as I can see this is about the establishment of national labour standards, and as such an extension of the right of Congress to rule over all the states. I support that. But I don't support its right to rule over China.

"I am all for economic development in China and it will move faster if workers are full partners in the increasing wealth, rather than having more and more diverted into the hands of the Chinese elite, as is increasingly happening."

I hope I'm not being naive about the Chinese elite - who are no doubt motivated by self-interest not altruism - but I see that in Shanghai, share ownership embraces half the population. Wages are not high by western standards, but a lot higher than they are inland.

I'm all for the rights of Chinese workers to organise, but the proposal to use controls on imports as a policy mechanism to achieve that seems flawed to me. It has a chauvinistic trajectory - 'stop Chinese slave goods!'. Wouldn't a programme of aiding Chinese unions that circumvented government policy be better for the AFL? -- James Heartfield The 'Death of the Subject' Explained is available at GBP11.00, plus GBP1.00 p&p from Publications, audacity.org, 8 College Close, Hackney, London, E9 6ER. Make cheques payable to 'Audacity Ltd'



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list