Keith,
Great to hear your voice. I don't agree with every point but the points are as
always, well made. How is the chorus? Are you still singing?
Your point about the lack of balance between the internal and external forces was
helpful to me. I think we can make the same points, as I said in an earlier
post today, about the fragmented opposite of Crony Capitalism. The Fragment
and Conquer Capitalism must always try to do away with it's enemy, the
government, while Crony Capitalism tends to work through the government. I
think of Tor Forde's referrel to Braudel who, according to my limited reading,
was advocating a kind of state capitalism. Of course Braudel was French.
Also you said:
>What happened in S-E Asia is that, in their precipitate rush to get into
>the glamorous exporting industries (rather than, say, the domestic retail
>sector), cronyism sunsequently needed to stretch into non-national
>businesspeople in the West. However, if the latter were prevented from
>investing in the glamour industries of Asian countries, or if their
>investments produced too low a return, or if private backhanders were
>likely to be exposed by the Western media, then the network could not
>extend further.
I find the takeover of the Canadian Garth Drabinski's empire by the
"stockholders" led by the likes of Michael Ovits is a similar situation. What do
you think? REH
