On Mon, 14 Jul 1997 wwagar@binghamton.edu wrote:
........>
> So, to me, as an unregenerate Marxian, Global Apartheid applies
> even more to the segregation of the classes than to the segregation of the
> races. Either way, the house of earth is a house divided against itself,
> and in the long run it will not stand.
>
The five people who have been using the concept of "global apartheid"
are not trying to compete with class analysis; it's just a slightly
different packaging of class analysis. When you talk to the media,
"global apartheid" may be a useful sound-byte to get your point across in
30 seconds or less. Also, it provides a publicly acceptable rationale for
the creation of a global, multi-racial, democratic political alliance for
the purpose of global resistance (my take on "world party"). Like the
concept of "exploitation", "global apartheid" does not only have some
descriptive value; it is also a negative norm. How do you define the goal
of global class struggle? There are many ways of defining that goal. One
possible formulation would be "abolish global apartheid", which is a bit
more specific than, but consistent with, "global resistance".
--GK
(I will be out of town on vacation for a while, hoping to reconnect later.)