Re: Conclusions

Dear Paul,

Thanks for your ongoing rational discussion.

1/3/2001, you wrote:
     > There are many declarations from insiders and
    decisionmakers from both the industrialized and developing
    countries...    
      > "farewell speech" of Michel Camdessus, Managing Director
    of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). On Feb. 13, 2000,
    the day before he was to leave office after 13 years (the
    longest term of any Managing Director), Camdessus addressed
    the Tenth United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
    in Bangkok. He said some very radical things.

There is a long history of people who revealed their own
personal views AFTER they were no longer in a position of
power.  Perhaps the most famous was Eisenhower's farewell
speech about the military-undustrial complex.  And then
there's former Attorney General Ramsey Clark who has become
quite a campaigner and who made an important documentary
about Desert Storm.   And there's Jimmy Carter, with his
Habitat for Humanity.

Unfortunately, such statements are NOT evidence of any shift
in regime policy.  On the contrary, they indicate that it is
impossible for someone to allow their conscience to
interfere during their tenure in power.

I honestly think the evidence is OVERWHELMING that the
neoliberal agenda is going ahead undeterred by all existing
efforts to change it.  And I've yet to see any counter-evidence.
    
    
    > I agree that arguments alone have no chance. What I
    suggest is channeling the efforts of protestors from all
    over the world into slowly taking over existing parties and
    institutions FROM THE GROUND UP. Strategies for such actions
    is what ought to be discussed.

Suppose we do take over everything from the ground up...
would we then continue the current capitalist system?  If
so, what's the point?  If not, then we've overthrown
capitalism.  Where do you see a difference in our
approaches?

rkm