Array-ne This guide manual is an evolving document for The May 18 Memorial Foundation’s international interns on human rights. It was organized by surviving victims of the 1980 Gwangju Democratic Uprising, the victims’ families, and the citizens of Gwangju. Since its establishment, the Foundation has carried out numerous projects in varying fields, including organizing memorial events, establishing scholarships, fostering research, disseminating public information, publishing relevant materials, dispensing charity and welfare benefits, building international solidarity, and awarding the Gwangju Prize for Human Rights. The International Internship Programme The International Internship Programme will strive to contribute to the development of democracy and human rights throughout Asia by recruiting four interns from all over the world, who have been working for human rights and peace organizations in their own countries, and by giving them a chance to learn about and experience the history and process of the development of human rights and democracy in South Korea. Activities of the International Internship Programme 2006The International Internship Program will introduce the interns to Korean history in general and in particular to the movements and struggle for democracy, including the 1980 Gwangju Democratic Uprising. Both theoretical learning and practical experiences such as lectures, seminars, discussions, interviews and fieldtrips to the sites of democratization movements in Korea will be utilized.The International Internship Programme will also require its interns to submit reports concerning the human rights situation in their home countries, as well as on the interns own experiences and work. To receive official permission to enter the Republic of Korea you will need the following documents: (Do not forget to carry all these documents in your hand luggage!) - Your valid international passport, containing your visa (if applicable) - Your Gwangju International Internship Programme invitation letter - Evidence that you intend to leave the Republic of Korea at the end of the program (normally your round air-ticket will suffice) If you did not obtain your visa before your departure from your home country, the immigration officer at the airport may refuse your entry. Before you leave Incheon International Airport for Gwangju, please telephone and inform the May 18 Memorial Foundation of your arrival time and destination in Gwangju. The express bus from Incheon International Airport to Gwangju Bus Terminal is highly recommended for your convenience. In the case that you take a bus to Gwangju from Incheon International Airport, you will need to have on hand approximately 35,000 Korean won (about US5). * For more detailed information on the arrival procedure, please refer to Incheon International Airport website: http://www.airport.or.kr/eng/airport/ You can get information on buses to Gwangju and purchase the bus ticket at the Transportation Information Counter on the arrival floor of the airport passenger terminal. The map of the arrival floor of Incheon International Airport and the bus schedule from Incheon Airport to Gwangju Bus Terminal are below: Domestic Flight. Near the city is a cultural park, home to the Gwangju National Museum with priceless historical and archaeological relics and the Gwangju City Folk Museum, which is the third largest city museum in Korea and is an excellent window into various aspects of Korean culture such as traditional Korean cuisine, time-honored Korean customs, folk games, and shamanistic rituals. For those interested in art, the Gwangju Culture and Art Center, the Gwangju City Art Gallery and the inner-city’s Art Street can be visited. GIC was established by the Gwangju City Government and Gwangju Citizens Solidarity in 1999 as a model of governmental and NGO collaboration. Its mission is to provide foreigners with information and services, promoting an international exchange in the fields of culture and economy and fostering international awareness among Korean youth through active involvement in helping the international community of Gwangju and Jeolla-namdo. The tasks I helped implemented such as Gwangju Asian Human Rights Folk School, Gwangju Forum for Asian Human Rights, Gwangju Prize for Human Rights Award 2006; Contact Persons:Should there be any problems or changes with your planned trip to Gwangju, please contact the May 18 Memorial Foundation through Mr. Chanho Kim Director, International Cooperation Team Mobile: 82 10 4642 6650 (international) 010 4642 6650 (local)E: surnadal@hanmail.net Mr. Sang Seon Kim (Chris)Staff charged for International Solidarity Mobile: 82 10 8000 8052 (international) 010 8000 8052 (local)E-mail : chriskim109@gmail.com Address:The May 18 Memorial Foundation5.18 Memorial Culture HallSeo-Gu Sangmudong 1268 Gwangju City Post Code 502-260 Republic of Korea Phone: 82 62 456 0518 Fax.
link
-ne My friend Paris sent me a great article about Grups, which couldn’t have come at a better time since both Paris and I just increased our age by another year and I know I was feeling pretty sorry for myself. I think it’s great that Sternbergh explored Grups in such depth, because I know that over in Europe, being trendy at any age has been the norm for many years - I remember 10 years ago being in London around my Grup friends, feeling completely at ease with them because they felt like peers despite that they were 10-15 years older than me.
link
Busquei investigar se Ele era real e não consegui.Pois crer não é uma conquista, não é resultado de um esforço.Ninguém pode acreditar na existência de Deus se somente se entregar à leitura de muitos livros, de toda a enciclopédia das religiões e de todas as Escrituras Sagradas.Deus não é conhecimento que se adquire,nem costumes desenvolvidos, nem templo, nem prece, nem veste.Tudo isso é refutável e efêmero, pois podem vir outros conhecimentos, outros costumes, outras preces, outras vestes.A fé em Deus está menos na conquista e mais na experiência.
link
The large-and-in-charge co-host of The View - looking to tighten up after getting a breast lift (with implants) and losing 150 pounds (with gastric bypass surgery) - asked her manager to set up free private lessons at S Factor gym, where owner Sheila Kelley teaches her charges to use a stripper pole. Despite e-mails that show otherwise, a spokesman for Star said it was Kelley who approached her.OK, I am the first to admit that Star Jones is a grasping, freebie-obsessed, staggeringly unlikable person–but large-and-in-charge? If I was Star Jones I would be beyond pissed that I lost 150 pounds and was still described as large-and-in-charge.
link
We send in JoAnna to inquire about a table, as she is wearing black shoes and the rest of us are feeling decidedly underdressed in our Chaco sandals. JoAnna and I arrive at breakfast, where Liz & Ryan are finishing off delicious-looking meals of eggs with sizzled tomatoes and whole mushrooms. I am on my third mouthful when I feel a tell-tale dryness of throat, swollen lips, foul taste on the tongue: I have eaten something I shouldnât have. It may be in my mind, but I can feel the poisoned mouthful spreading through my cheeks and tongue and into my bloodstream. Usually I spit out the offending mouthful, feel sore-stomached and ill-tempered for a few hours, and then back to normal. âWe buy the most expensive granola,â he says apologetically, âbecause it has so many nuts in it!â I am feeling like an idiot, in addition to feeling like puking. As I throw up, I feel something in my mouth, like a long noodle that I canât quite pull out of my throat. âJoAnna, I say, starting to feel alarmed. My empty stomach feels no more pain, and I sense the invader has been removed, but my throat is not right. âI think we should go to emergency,â JoAnna says. âYour husband has epilepsy, and is having a seizure?â She looks at me, and her expression says, He doesnât look like heâs having a seizure… JoAnna looks ready to burst, but she is in her domain now. âLie down here,â JoAnna says, putting me on a table, and pulls the doctor out of his office. I am starting to shiver and feel my heart pound from the epinephrine. I turn weakly to JoAnna and say, âI think maybe youâre right about the epi-pen.â Next: the crusaders come to town…
link
Marx establishes the connection between agriculture and industry as follows:In the period of the stormy growth of capitalist production, productivity in industry develops rapidly as compared with agriculture, although its development presupposes that a significant change as between constant and variable capital has already taken place in agriculture, that is, a large number of people have been driven off the land. A landlord class extracted an absolute rent from tenant fanners and consumed rather than invested this surplus-value as capital (Marx, Capital Vol. This barrier to agricultural investment prevented a cheapening of the elements of constant capital (raw materials) and wage goods (food etc) in industry acting as a brake on the expansion of industrial capital.The consequence was a prolonged period of relative economic stagnation, of small booms punctuated by commercial crises, and accompanied by agricultural labourer’s riots, Chartist demonstrations, overpopulation, pauperism and crime (Hobsbawm, Industry, 56-108).Thus the encumbrance of landed property to the further development of industrial productivity (relative surplus-value) was expressed politically and ideologically as a class struggle between the landlords and the industrial bourgeoisie. of the British social formation comprising economic, political and ideological levels, were grafted onto pre-capitalist formations, producing a hybrid type of colony.3.2 The Penetration of the Capitalist ModeIt follows that the penetration of the CMP into the Maori social formation occurred at all three levels -economic, political and ideological. 33) shows how free land is a hindrance to capital accumulation of a different sort to landed property, since it prevents the formation of a wage-labour class without its means of subsistence. While it is true that in the period up to 1890, a landed squattocracy controlling large landholdings did exist, this was in the nature of extensive capitalist farming of wool and wheat, and did not constitute a barrier to capital investment in increasing agricultural productivity. Following the classical political economy, this view does not recognise exploitative class relations or the capitalist nature of the state. The finance capitalist provided capital for the land, and the banker backed them both and directed customers to them. They accumulated rather than consumed the surplus-value off the land, facilitating the circuit of capital into agricultural production in the form of productive capital, providing money capital for investment in the nascent branches of industrial capital in N.Z., and of course re-circulating money capital into British and other international circuits.While Marx and others have written on the articulation of CMP and Peasant Modes, there is no fully developed theory of what we have call called the PFM in the white-settler states. It seems to us that the potential of this form of articulation has been underestimated in circumstances where it is introduced into a semi-colonial setting characterised by (a) an absence of feudal landed property, (b) the dominance of a capitalist comprador class, and (c) in association with a highly interventionist, modernising local state. Normally under capitalist production relations in agriculture absolute rent is by definition marked up on top of average profit from farming since no capitalist farmer would invest his capital at below average profit and no landlord will let him use the land without paying rent.Now at first glance, there would seem to be little relevance in all this to the N.Z. Our general thesis was that whilst monopoly over landed property (‘modern landed property’) was never established in N.Z., this was replaced by another form of monopoly, that of finance capital, owned by the comprador class. We are referring here to DR1 which Marx defines as the varying yields from land of equal area with equal applications of constant capital, arising out of differences in fertility and location with respect to the market (Capital Vol. The family smallholder ends up with a less than average rate of enterprise profit and turns a monopoly rent over to the merchant comprador in the same way as the English tenants turned over rent to their landlord as the condition of their being permitted to invest capital in his land (Capital Vol. III, 626).In our example, the comprador class, therefore, inserts itself in an intermediary position between the dominant capitalist mode and the dependent PFM forcing prices received by the PFM down low enough so that, even after modification by monopoly margins, the market price was still low enough to be competitive.Unequal exchange, as it operates here, is a form of monopoly rent extracted by a comprador class from the surplus value produced in agriculture as a consequence of that class’s control over the movement of capital into that branch of production. The State’s activities may be summarised as intervention in the PFM to sustain extended reproduction by limiting the monopoly control of the comprador class over the movement of capital. The State operates to redirect some of this transfer of surplus value back into the PFM by means of subsidies paid out of general tax revenues.In addition to this conventional form of unequal exchange, we have added another relating to the monopoly ownership of capital by the comprador class. In terms of the interlocking circuit model, the semi-colonial State, therefore, encourages the reproduction of international capital by transferring value in the form of State subsidies into agriculture, hence countering the tendency for agricultural production to stagnate.To conclude our analysis of unequal exchange in agriculture it follows that the transfer of value out of agriculture, made possible by the combination of 1) a modern progressive form of land tenure in the semi-colony, 2) high differential rent and, 3) State intervention, provided a source of capital which could be used to ‘develop’ from the initial limited interlock of British capital with the PFM, through the establishment of branches of domestic manufacturing, to the present complete penetration of industrial capital into all branches of production accounting for 3 to 4 times as much as agriculture in the statistics on national production (Year Book, 1977).What is quite distinctive about this development is that while it followed a sequence of ‘stages’ from the introduction of the PFM, to simple manufacturing, to later advanced production by international capital, it did so at a much more rapid rate than the original capitalist transition because it occurred in the context of the already established CMP and as the result of a highly interventionist local state. This meant that the pre-conditions for capitalist manufacture, namely 1)- capitalist dominated agriculture, 2)- wage-labour, 3)- industrial capital and 4)- a market, were rapidly realised by means of their displacement from the British social formation and their re-location in the semi-colony by the agency of the local state. We saw that the accumulation of capital from the PFM, whether by the comprador class or the peasant bourgeoisie, was sufficient to increase agricultural production. It also provided the necessary money capital for investment as productive capital in the industrial circuit as soon as the combination of conditions required for domestic manufacturing occurred. This conjunction came about during the Long Depression when the pool of unemployed drove down the value of labour-power to the point where the local cost of production (at low organic composition and high absolute rates of exploitation of men, women and children) together with tariff protection (in 1888) made domestic import substitution of some commodities profitable for the local capitalist class (Sutch, Poverty, 106).Apart from the development of primary processing industries, either cooperatively owned, or owned by capitalists (see (11) above), and their more recent extension into areas such as paper pulp etc., the three main branches of domestic manufacturing established after 1880 were:(1) - Production of Wage-Goods: articles of consumption for the working-class, beginning with clothing, shoes etc., and incorporating a widening range of commodities entering into the value of labour-power E.g. TV’s, domestic appliances, motor cars (see (9) above).(2) - Production of Capital Goods for Agriculture: the local production of previously imported machinery, farm implements, topdressing aircraft etc.(3) - Production of Capital Goods for the Wage-Goods branch: a more recent tendency since as we pointed out in 2.5, the production of capital goods is usually the speciality of the Industrial Circuit in the core capitalist states, e.g. steel for construction, plastics for consumer durables etc.Though these domestic branches of production were established and sustained by means of state protection (tariffs and import controls etc) they nonetheless represented a new source of surplus-value production open to international capital. Arising out of the total circuit of capital therefore, it is possible to determine the form in which the social relation, wage-labour and capital, expresses itself in the contemporary N.Z. But while the PWC produces C’ it is only one part of the total proletariat (defined as being dispossessed of capital) which functions to circulate capital through its various moments of the circuit, all of whom can be defined as reproductive workers. This function is performed by employees of capital, public servants on behalf of private capital (e.g. )(c) Circulation Workers: all those wage and salary earners who are concerned with the circulation of M’ as money capital and its conversion into productive capital (exchange for MP and LP) in new productive circuits. State circulation workers are those involved in all forms of administration of the public revenue, that is the transfer of s (taxes) from gross wages and salaries, and profits, into all types of productive consumption as capital: first, in the state’s own productive enterprises, and second, all kinds of subsidies to the private sector’s productive branches. etc, together with service workers in the production and realisation divisions.( See Graphic 22)(e) Domestic Workers: This Category of worker is usually ignored by bourgeois economists and placed outside the work1ng-class by Marxists on the grounds that the labour performed is not exchanged for variable capital and is therefore not productive, nor is it exchanged for wages or revenue. social formation with the working-class now comprising about 90% of the active working population, and the capitalist class about 10%.(Note: It should be emphasised that the identification of the working-class at the level of production relations deliberately excludes the fashionable concept of the ‘function of capital’ The basic point however, is that the difference between these categories is not one given in the relations of production, those who have some function in supervising labour, are not owners of capital in the sense of controlling both means of production and labour process, so whatever differences exist between the immediate interests of the various categories of wage-labour - productive/unproductive, private sector/state, supervisory/non-supervisory etc. In terms of numbers of individuals, the group is small (about 100) but they can be defined as the ruling class because they control (actually own) the MP and LP that is brought together in capitalist production in the N.Z. But in fact, what was occurring as the result of falling profits, was a redistribution of the surplus-value in favour of the managerial group within the ruling class, who received an average or above average rate of profit on their capital, since their dividends were augmented by payments disguised in other forms. First, they determine the distribution of surplus-value between the various capitalist and other class fractions within the limits imposed on the reproduction of capitalist social relations due to the contradictions within the CMP (see next section). As a result, capitalist social relations were established in agriculture, and in domestic manufacturing, developing into class struggles between peasants and compradors (see 3.4) and between wage-labour and industrial capitalist classes. (Poulantzas, Classes, Intro) .It is clear that the serious challenge to the reproduction of capitalist social relations posed by the rise of union militancy, forced the ruling class to rely much more heavily on the state’s reproductive functions in maintaining social unity and cohesion. In so doing, it was in turn able to finance the rising living standards and social services of the working-class and continue state subsidies to capitalist production by means of the rising productivity of labour-power. Yaffe) assume that state intervention in the economy is a drain on the surplus-value going to the capitalist class thereby lowering the average rate of profit. by creating new surplus-value, and (b) the fact that the state extracts surplus-value from the working class (which would not otherwise have gone to the capitalist) in the form of taxation. Thus over the post-war period increased productivity has created more value, but the state has actively intervened in the class struggle for shares of the newly created value by extracting a portion that would have entered into the historical component of the value of labour-power, and cunningly redistributed it to capital. Wright, Class, Crisis and the State)More recently, however, the costs of maintaining the levels of social welfare spending to sustain the illusion of equal opportunity in education, health and so on, has put a strain on the state’s fiscal resources, leading to the general situation of cuts in state spending, increased taxation, and the redistribution of state revenue from less productive to more productive branches such as export manufacturing. Now that the rate of accumulation has slowed down, the state’s efforts in sustaining accumulation require it to redistribute surplus-value from the working-class to the capitalist class.
link
It has 35 students enrolled, though last class maybe 25 showed up–on the second day of class. I’ve had migrant worker students who picked onions and strawberries next to their parents, and I know that’s back-breaking work with very little remuneration. Worse, we’re in a class with the desks affixed to the ground, so students can’t effectively work in small groups without someone wrenching her back. I can be an engaging lecturer, but writing my notes and finding images and music takes soooo much prep time and energy that I should be investing in my dissertation, and I’m not sure it always pays off in terms of student learning.So I’m thinking about lecturing on Mondays for 45 minutes or so, following up with an hour of small group work (a fun activity–this past Monday it was analyzing the material culture of offices in the 1890s: chairs, desks, dictaphones, and typewriters based on photos and old advertisements) based on lecture and the reading for that day. And then on Wednesdays I’ll have students do exclusively small-group work based on all the reading and lecturing done to date.
link
Read the rest of this entry »