Re: [Marxism] and how ourepigones react...

["sartesian" <sartesian@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I think it might help, hell I know it would help if Walter (or anybody)
would define exactly whaqt Latin American continental integration is,
how we, or him, or comrade Alarcon measures continental integration.

There are real economic forces at work, and a realistic understanding of
economic determinants is not economism.

Is Latin American integration evident in terms of trade?  Nature and
origin of products traded?  Destinations of trade?  GDP/capita growth
(that's a laugh since GDP/capita growth  1980-2005 is lower than the
1955-1980 rate)?

How do we measure continental integration to get a realistic grasp on
its meaning and direction?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Walter Lippmann" <walterlx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Activists and scholars in Marxist tradition'"
<marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2006 1:28 PM
Subject: RE: [Marxism] and how ourepigones react...



RICARDO ALARCON explained:
let's take Brazil. If the FTAA was not implemented before, when not
even Chávez was around, it is because there was an obstacle called
Brazil. We don't include Fernando Henrique [Cardoso, former president
of Brazil] in the list of "progressive" governments, to use your own
words, but Brazil has always tried to defend its best interests
against free trade as promoted by the United States. To say the
least, there are sectors within the Brazilian bourgeoisie willing to
protect its interests from the most powerful market forces, as it
happened perhaps in Mexico in the past, if not even longer under the
free trade agreement.



________________________________________________
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