[lbo-talk] Discussing the Crisis/Bailout

[shag]

At 12:49 PM 10/6/2008, Carrol Cox wrote:
>What would it mean for radicals to discuss the Bailout?
>
>I would presume their focus (unless they were merely interested in
>parroting one of the sides represented in WSJ/BusinessWeek/NYT/etc)
>would be (a) on the causes of the bailout and (b) on how mass movements
>might come into existence through response to the Bailout.
>
>We can read very good arguments for and against it in the major media.
>So obviously reciting those arguments is merely posting news as easily
>acquired elsewhere. Hence such arguments (whether pro or con) do not
>constitute discussion of the bailout among leftists.
>
>This will have to be redrafted later, but I think it points a direction.
>
>Carrol

i rely on lbo to filter the news i could get elsewhere, so to me this 
doesn't cut it. i come here so i don't have to read everything else that's 
out, just the stuff that people i know and trust will point me to decent 
sources and analyses.

i also don't necessarily want to read muckety mucks, but would rather read 
doug or michael pollak on the bailout. or maybe chuck grimes on the 
neocons. etc. etc.

i guess i want a left analysis of what is to be done following the passage 
i've frequently posted here, from Marx's letter to arnold ruge. I don't 
want banners and slogans which we wave and expect people to get on their 
knees before the injunction of the banner. i want a left that takes sides 
in the debate as it currently exists, a left that picks among the existing 
choices and advances that one -- as marx describes in his letter to ruge.

google it. i'm too lazy to do it for the upteenth time in 10 years.


>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

http://cleandraws.com
Wear Clean Draws
('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)