The majority of Chinese and Indians are indeed exploited as Yoshie
notes. Even in China urban unemployment rates are high, formal sector
job creation is almost non-existent, and wages and working conditions
remain poor for the great majority. But isnt the question what
relationship we want to have with these exploited workers. Should we
encourage their growing resistance or should we tell them that we, on
the left, celebrate the growth models supported by their national elites
and advise them to cool it and not endanger losing the export-oriented
foreign direct investment that is at the heart of the growth strategy.
Marty
Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
On 3/30/07, raghu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/30/07, Yoshie Furuhashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's up to the Chinese and the Indians to decide what their countries
> should be like. But it would be better for them as well as for others
> if their party leaders didn't pursue capitalist development in the
> name of socialism.
> --
> Yoshie
The point is this: if you have to live in a capital-dominated world,
wouldn't you rather be the exploiter than the exploited? That way you
can
change the world from a position of power, from within the capitalist
system. I have to confess there is a certain cynical logic to it.
A majority of the Chinese and of the Indians are exploited and will
remain so. The question is to what extent rising living standards of
some of them will offset expropriation of many and increasing
inequality within their respective nations, in the eyes of the Chinese
and the Indians themselves.
--
Yoshie
