I think you see renewed imperial pressure to reduce the policy scope of
third world governments by the end of the 70s (that is, Carter's
term)--against tariffs, quantitative restrictions,
their form of subsidies, SOE's and then liberal forms of intellectual
property. After the Asian financial panic, austerity was called for by
Democrats (of course ten years later,
the Republicans would agree to the bail outs, fiscal stimulus,  low interest
rates and subsidies that both parties had worked to prevent third world
governments from trying in the face of panic and crisis).
Yes the stimulus in the Western World has not been as big as it should be,
and monetary policy perhaps should have been more radical (though there are
problems with ultra low rates such as asset bubbles in the third world) and
the banks should have been nationalized. But the fundamental division in the
world is still the room for policy maneuver that the First World reserves
for itself and deprives poor countries from having. Greece is joining the
other side.  Both Democrats and Republicans are part of that system of
imperial control, which  was relaxed only for a short time between about
1950-1975, as Ha-Joon Chang would argue. Talking about this is the best way
to reduce a size of the classroom even of its self-proclaimed radicals. Try
sharing with them some of Milanovic's data on international income
inequality.
Lakshmi
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to