One more thing. My remarks reflect a special feeling for Pound. A
feeling that one poet has for another when the younger poet owes so much
to the older one for his own imaginative and creative life. This I fear
can never be felt or even understood by anyone who simply studies Pound.
Its more akin to acknowledging the bond between you and an older
colleague who has supported you in your endeavors. Some might say this
clouds my judgement. But in the past I did a lot of fieldwork on Pound
and I don't harbor any illusions about the man either. Carlo Parcelli

En Lin Wei wrote:
>
> Permit me to make a few remarks regarding labor, progressive economic
> theories, China trade, and Poundian economics.
>
> Carrol Cox wrote:
>
> >  And the
> >ransacking of the Seattle movement by AFL-CIO conservatives generated
> >the virulent chauvinism and racism of an ostensibly "progressive" campaign
> >to keep China out of WTO. (The campaign generated a mealy-mouth
> >argument that -- profesing great concern for Chinese workers -- in effect
> >argued that "we" needed to destroy the village to save it.)
> >
>
> This is an extremely complex issue, and it touches quite directly on our
> interpretation of Pound's work, and most especially on the Chinese dimension
> of his work.
>
> The AFL-CIO  is only one constituency fighting against so-called "normal
> trade relations."  Environmentalists, Chinese dissidents (including Wei
> Jingsheng of Democracy Wall fame), human rights groups, religious
> organizations, Free Tibet campaigners, students from the anti-sweatshop
> movement, and many others oppose PNTR.   (Of course, there are Republicans,
> Reform party activists, Buchananites, and many who oppose NTR for racist and
> chauvinist reasons, and because they are searching for a new enemy to serve
> as an excuse for a massive arms buildup).
>
> The main issue which concerns me is the welfare of Chinese and US workers,
> who are having PNTR foisted on them.  The primary effect of normal trade
> relations will be the same as NAFTA:  more factories will move from the US
> to where they can pay lower wages (namely China, in this case), more workers
> in the US will lose their jobs and be laid off, and Chinese who are being
> thrown out of the state run industries will be compelled to work for lower
> wages, with no benefits (no health insurance, no overtime pay, no vacations,
> longer hours, etc.)
>
> The Western media, for the most part, does not report the views of Chinese
> workers.  However C-Span recently broadcast in Chinese (and in English via
> translation) an interview with Qiang Li, who worked in a US owned Farberware
> plant in China.  The conditions were atrocious, far worse than those in most
> state run industries.
>
> If you want more details about the exploitation of Chinese workers in China
> by foreign (mostly US) multinationals visit the web site of the National
> Labor Committee, and read their report:  Made in China
>
> www.nlcnet.org
>
> Workers at "Kathy Lee" handbag plants, producing for Walmart, slaved away
> seven days a week, 12-14 hours a day, with one day off per month, for the
> sum of THREE CENTS  PER HOUR.
>
> As for keeping China out of the WTO, that is virtually impossible now, and
> was so before the House debate, which was really only a "debate about
> whether to have a debate" each year on the status of US - China trade.
>
> Bill wrote:
>
> >It's interesting to hear the AFL-CIO accused of  "ransacking" the Seattle
> movement, whatever that "movement" is.  The AFL-CIO has been working to hold
> China
> accountable for human rights for the past decade.  The AFL-CIO policy for
> many decades has been
> to raise other labor standards, wages, etc.in other nations to US levels,
> not to close down US factories and put US workers out of well-paid jobs to
> set up
> low-wage, substandard jobs in other nations.
> >
>
> I agree with this last statement completely.  The Big Business lobbyists
> have massively outspent labor on this issue, in advertising and in sending
> their three-piece suited representatives to bribe and twist the  arms of key
> members of Congress.  In terms of money and personell deployed, this has
> been the biggest Corporate blitzkrieg in US history.
>
> However, the AFL-CIO, does not want to get to the root of the problem.  They
> don't want to call for political strikes or organize for the sake of
> fundamental change.  They do not oppose the existence of mega-corporations,
> or of wage slavery; and they do not call for the democratic control of
> industry.  To that extent, they have become fully "bourgeoisified."
>
> Bill says,
> >
> >The AFL-CIO and other labor organizations
> planted the seeds and laid the foundations for the "Seattle movement" and
> many other
> workers rights/envoronmental standards/ fair trade >groups.
> >
>
> Not quite true.  The AFL-CIO dragged its feet at Seattle, and did not
> participate in the non-violent civil resistance.  Instead, they had a
> seperate march far away from the main events.  They only endorsed the
> Mobilization for Corporate Justice Rally in DC at the last moment.  I am
> glad they did.  They have a role to play.  However, the students movements,
> the anti-sweatshop groups, and independent labor groups were more
> influential in DC.  (and in Seattle)
>
> How does this relate Pound?  Pound's view of the worker, of the laborer, in
> Chinese history needs further elaboration.  His economic theories, I would
> argue, owe far more to his idealization of the Chinese feudal system ( and
> to Italian fascist economic theorists, such as Odon Por) than they do to
> liberal economists, like Douglas.  Douglas is only mentioned four or five
> times in the entire Cantos, while the economic "achievements" of Chinese
> emperors are pointed out countless times.
>
> If you want to read more on this subject, you can look at an article
> entitled "Ideograms and Economics."  I just posted this one the day before
> yesterday.
>
> www.geocities.com/weienlin/econ.html
>
> Regards,
>
> Wei
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com