At 19:48 28/06/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >Whatever ecological reservations progressive people may have about this, it
> >is entirely understandable that a country like China needs to make a major
> >push to gain relative advantage in the world. This would release vast
> >amounts of labour power and purchasing power for economic transformation of
> >the east Asian region.
> >
> >Chris Burford
>
>Economic transformation? You are referring to capitalism in rather neutral
>terms, it seems.
>
>Louis Proyect
Yes, I think I was using neutral terms. Many people have strong views
already about whether China is fully capitalist. The Chinese Party appears
determined to try to keep some control of the state and the economy and
would no doubt continue to argue that its acceptance of greater economic
flexibility is in the ultimate interests of socialism. They argue with more
conviction that it is in the ultimate interests of China.
What I was referring to in neutral terms was the likelihood of an enormous
increase in the technological means of production of agricultural goods in
China, the expansion of the market and the release of labour power. This
will have enormous geopolitical significance for a multi-polar economic world.
Many will see this as increased exploitation of the land and the labour force.
However in the struggle against global unequal exchange it is very
difficult for any developing country, whether capitalist, socialist or
social democrat, to retain a higher proportion of its surplus product for
reinvesting locally.
I am far from enthusiastic about these reports from China, but they look
very significant and something we should watch.
Chris Burford
London
