Marxism
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
[Marxism] Fwd: Re: [PEN-L] Leftforum 2006
- To: "marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [Marxism] Fwd: Re: [PEN-L] Leftforum 2006
- From: Andrew Pollack <acpollack2@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 15:30:09 -0800 (PST)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=P+DMiVadiYJQ2Rbyigl92/MljpRll8kr3amG1lZzyD4oVA6VgqKS0UO4jiFKSRUWFebgP8VD9tT5S2fchyHrRF5tUmHU8M51PtCJfTBi40W3WvHbWSarhkoWi/mzLWUAEO+ZH9bnhYTmGkmwwIjH9I/Fw9FZHY5gbTo+ckLkCg0= ;
First, thanks, Louis, for the summary of the workshops you attended.
Second, the forward from Walt Byars was very useful. I don't know enough
about state intervention in the post-Mao period to know how much of what he
claims it's true, but it merits very serious empirical investigation, because
it's potentially very valuable in cutting across capitalist propaganda about
the sources of China's expansion.
For instance, even when he thinks he's gone off-topic he's raising important
issues:
"...all this stuff about China's interventions is basically written from the
same perspective as an Alice Amsden or Robert Wade."
But that's OK! Even if the measures taken by the post-Mao state resemble
those taken by the "Asian Tigers," they were still state measures. This is
important in countering propaganda that attributes 100% of China's skyrocketing
economic growth to the market. And in a formal sense many state measures taken
in any postcapitalist society, including Lenin's NEP, resemble those of
interventionist capitalist states. So who cares if it was Amsden or Amsden-like
people providing the evidence; we can put our own spin on it.
Now by this point it seems the Chinese state has intervened not just to spur
on growth, but to make a reborn capitalist class the primary beneficiaries of
that growth. But if the state was the primary social force spurring on growth
in the first place that's still an important argument for the potential of
nonmarket growth.
(I would add parenthetically that there is another, equally important,
argument in challenging the propaganda about the role of the market in China's
growth: China, after being consciously, indeed viciously, underdeveloped for a
century and a half by imperialism, was bound to grow as soon as it achieved
genuine independence in 1949. And it took a massively f***-d up bureaucracy
(i.e. Mao's) to restrain that growth for so many decades. It would be pretty
damned hard NOT to grow once the shackles are off, but Mao found a way in his
most idiotic ventures.)
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism
- Thread context:
- [Marxism] Re: Leftforum 2006,
Carrol Cox Mon 13 Mar 2006, 21:17 GMT
- [Marxism] A Nicaraguan day laborer,
Louis Proyect Mon 13 Mar 2006, 21:17 GMT
- [Marxism] The gospel according to Pasolini (Le Monde Diplomatique),
Walter Lippmann Mon 13 Mar 2006, 18:34 GMT
- [Marxism] Fwd: Re: [PEN-L] Leftforum 2006,
Louis Proyect Mon 13 Mar 2006, 18:31 GMT
- [Marxism] good article on spain 1931-39?,
thomas muntzer Mon 13 Mar 2006, 18:09 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]