It is really telling to compare the PRC's capitalist development with that of the U.S. from the latter 19th century - early 20th century, a meme often found in the bourgeois press.
On the basis of a relativity high wage structure - an early spur to mechanization - U.S manufacturing was primarily oriented towards development of the internal market: agriculture and mineral extraction via the expansion of the railroads and early mechanization of agriculture, the products of these latter then exported on the world market. It was only later in this period that manufactured goods themselves became significant export items. (One of my concrete tasks is to find exact numbers to confirm this). The major point is that this was overwhelmingly an independent development. There was of course always foreign investment, but this was a secondary and non-determinant component. And when the United States accumulated monetary reserves on these exports, these were in a gold standard currency, not today's Chinese fiat pile. The PRC path could not be more different. It is also telling that leftist or nationalist Chinese observers tend to concur with the dependent development view of China: The neo-Maoist Minqi Li (The Rise of China and the Demise of the Capitalist World Economy - because neither China nor anywhere else will rise as a successor hegemonic center, and I share his long run optimism), Henry Liu (yeah, I know, I know) or the guy I posted from NLR, Ho-fung Hung (China: Americas' Head Servant?). -Matt -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yes, I agree-- it's all historical, but the reference Zizek makes is specifically to China. I agree also that China is not a successor state to the US in the configuration of advanced capitalism. It, China's "new model capitalism," is based on the rather old cheap labor model, more representative of capitalism in the 19th century, before the massive application of machine power to production in the 2nd half of that century. And agriculture is conducted at a level of productivity far below that of capitalism. Doesn't mean every bourgeois doesn't drool over the prospects of having a police state, but it does mean, IMO, China is facing tremendous social upheaval and class struggle. ________________________________________________ YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. Send list submissions to: [email protected] Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
