You are right. I did misunderstand.
On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 09:01:35AM -0800, Jim Devine wrote: > Michael Perelman wrote: > > I do take issue with Jim D. because land reform in Asia seems to have > > helped to lift the extent of equality. > > I think you misunderstood me. I didn't say that land reform is always > a simply a matter of maintaining the _status quo_. Part of protecting > capitalism against the "Red Threat" was providing some of the promised > benefits of going Red, i.e., social democracy in W. Europe (I > understand that during the Cold War, W. Berlin was almost a utopia due > to all the subsidies) and relatively progressive land reform in East > Asia. > > I wrote: >right: if it doesn't come below, land reform is typically a > sop given to peasants to prevent radicalism (in this case, > communism).< > > "sops" aren't always a bad thing. They're often a good thing. In the > real world, working people often need sops desperately. > -- > Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own > way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante. > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu michaelperelman.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
