Marxism
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
[Marxism] Imperialists don't pillage their 3rd World partners
Lou Paulsen:
> "Democratic" businessmen aren't natural allies of wealthy Arab
> nobility. "Democratic" businessmen are natural pillagers of
> wealthy Arab nobility.
May I suggest Louis P. has been taken away by the thrust of his
thoughts.
Imperialist bourgeoisies pillage the Third World through a
partnership with the retardatary dominant classes _in_ the Third
World. They are not pillagers of their partners in the Third World,
they pillage through keeping extroverted economies there, which needs
a ruling class that smothers any possibility of local accumulation
(that is, the usual "bourgeois" model).
But what imperialists can do is to attempt some kind of accomodation,
from time to time. This may bring about complex confrontation
(complex because they need each other), so that it is reduced to a
minimum.
And probably this will not take place unless one imperialist
bourgeoisie replaces an older one as the metropolis of the country in
question, which of course does not rule out accomodations due to
pressing need of the imperialist bourgeoisie to reach a new point of
equilibrium. But the only expample I know of belongs to the first
possibility.
During the 1966-73 dictatorship in Argentina you had a proverbially
pro-US military regime which _confronted_ the Argentinean oligarchy
on an important issue. This dictatorship, among other things, meant
complete and full replacement of British hegemony here and substition
of American hegemony for it.
The project behind the dictatorship was more or less as follows;
"Arg domestic market, as well as its industrial base, is now a datum.
What we must do is to take over that market and that industrial
base. What we cannot do without a massacre is to return to the times
before 1945. So that let us develop an economic policy that (a) makes
it easier for American corporations to purchase Arg firms, and (b)
ensures that industry is not elliminated, only reindered into our own
needs."
This was incompatible with the general British project, which had
been to keep Argentina as a vast ranch. The difficulty in developing
industry and keeping Britain as hegemonic power was unsurmountable.
The first "colonial" industrializing project, drafted by Federico
Pinedo (the teacher of Raúl Prebisch) in 1940, tried to turn the
industrial development that had been taking place due to the de facto
protectionism of the Second World War into a semicolonial device that
would keep Arg accumulation into compliance with the necessities of
the global economic scheme, and the kernel of this project was to
turn Arg into an American, not British, semicolony.
By the mid 60s, as well as during the 40s, there was only one source
of funds to capitalize industry in Argentina: was foreign trade
results through agricultural and cattle exports. The pro-US regime,
unlike former pro-British regimes, decided to take the cream of those
exports through heavy taxes on them. This money was used to fund Arg
takeover by American companies.
This led to some degree of conflict. Part of which ended up in an
unexpected (and highly undesired) evolution: some members of the
ruling class, traditionally pro-British rather than pro-US, entering
the "armed formations" of the late 60s/early 70s: among them such
families as the Muniz Barreto, a very old family of oligarchs that
existed since they established in North Eastern Arg during the 17th
Century, coming down from North Eastern Brazil; this was made all the
easier by the "Catholic nationalism" of a fraction of that oligarchy.
When, through popular mobilisation, the first part of that
dictatorship ended with the demission of Juan Carlos Onganía, the
traditional local oligarchy gained power as against its partners, and
the exports tax were heavily reduced (don't remember if they were
elliminated altogether). Thus, the whole model entered a serious
crisis, which led to a general disarray in economic variables.
Only in 1976 did the Arg oligarchy begin to adapt to the new
conditions. But at the same time, they changed their structure,
making finance their main business rather than agricultural exports.
Imperialism operates by _consolidating_ local oligarchies, unless it
finds it convenient, possible and necessary to establish a colonial
regime with their own troops on the ground. This may well be the
case with Saudi Arabia, but this becomes an entirely different
situation. Just think of it: Ho Chi Minh was the son of a family of
mandarins...
Néstor Miguel Gorojovsky
nestorgoro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
"Sí, una sola debe ser la patria de los sudamericanos".
Simón Bolívar al gobierno secesionista y disgregador de
Buenos Aires, 1822
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism
- Thread context:
- [Marxism] 2003 -- NY Times Article on make up of US military..., (continued)
- [Marxism] Defend Free Speech at York U Reinstate Dan Freeman-Maloy,
David Quarter Thu 08 Jul 2004, 07:43 GMT
- [Marxism] On the tendency to convert the causes & effects observed in particular instances into universal axioms:,
DHE Thu 08 Jul 2004, 06:03 GMT
- [Marxism] Saudi Arabia as Washington's Condom,
Yoshie Furuhashi Thu 08 Jul 2004, 03:19 GMT
- [Marxism] Imperialists don't pillage their 3rd World partners,
Nestor Gorojovsky Thu 08 Jul 2004, 03:05 GMT
- [Marxism] Query re. vote structure at the Green Party convention,
lshan Thu 08 Jul 2004, 03:05 GMT
- [Marxism] Re: Compendium of quotations,
David Quarter Thu 08 Jul 2004, 02:52 GMT
- [Marxism] (Spa) [redial_s_bolivar] LA MALDICIÓN DE MALINCHE (a poem),
Nestor Gorojovsky Thu 08 Jul 2004, 02:33 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]