Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky wrote:
> En relación a Re: [L-I] Re: Turkey and Islamic Capitalism (with,
> el 31 Jul 00, a las 16:00, Johannes Schneider dijo:
>
> >
> > "Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky wrote:
> >
> > This "Serbian imperialism", ... which, during the age in which it
> > succeeded in "controlling a colonial backyard" had the queer result
> > that the "colonies" were better off than the center
> >
> >
> > Nestor,
> > you are referring to Croatia and Slovenia, but not to Kosovo?
> >
> > Johannes
> >
>
> I do not have the data available, though I agree in that there were
> poorer areas in Yugoslavia than Serbia (even Serbian subareas, such
> as Kosmet, but not Vojvodina also in Serbia). At any rate, however,
> the question would be posed like this: was there surplus extraction
> >from these areas towards Serbia, or not? I would rather remember that
> one of the reasons adduced by both Croats and Slovenians to secede
> and break up Yugoslavia was that there was a permanent drain of
> resources from "their" own economies to the poorer ones.
>
> Is this "imperialism"? If such, a very strange one. In the same way
> we cannot use the word "fascism" lightly, we must use the word
> "imperialism" with all the precission that the circumstances require.
>
Nestor,
complete agreement. Its nonsense to talk about imperialism in the case of
Yugoslavia.
What is important that we do not mix up the cases of Slovenia and Croatia
with the issue of Kosovo. IMHO the relationship of all of the former
Yugoslavia (mainly Serbia proper, Croatia and Slovenia) with Kosovo had
aspects of a colonial relationship: E.g. capital export to Kosovo,
concentration of the industry in mining, remainders of substitence in
agriculture, export of work force.
Johannes
_______________________________________________
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international
