The issues are whether Bush aims to spend China into the ground, and
whether China is communist.
First, I'd argue that if the Bush's policy goal is to spend China into
the ground, the goal is poorly considered. Let's assume that Reagan's
defense spending partially caused the Soviet Union's demise. A crucial
and corresponding policy was the strict limits in trade relations
between the US and the USSR. The USSR was prevented from reaping the
benefits of trading with much of the industrialized world. The USSR
thus could not acquire capital by exporting oil or manufactured goods.
Unlike Reagan's policy stance toward the USSR, Prince George's stance
toward China is normal trade relations. China runs a surplus in its
current account due in no small part to the export of goods to the US.
Much of the capital raised thereby will likely go to procure nuclear
weapons that will be aimed at US civilian targets. Thus, China will not
be spent into the ground.
Second, I'd argue that China is in fact Communist. This argument is
about how we interpret the meanings of words. Do we insist on always
understanding words in their original meanings? Or do we recognize that
the meanings of words change over time? Few use the word "gay" to mean
happy, anymore. The words "freedom of speech" in the First Amendment
have almost come to mean freedom of communication and expression in any
form. The word "communist" originally spoke to a utopian concept, where
tyranny did not reign. Today, however, the large majority of the
world's population uses the word to describe the political bosses of
the USSR, and all those ideologically connected in some way to them. In
my view, the Soviet regime was on balance much more tyrannical than it
was noble. Thus, I argue that the Left should castigate Communists.
Andrew Hagen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 03 Sep 2001 08:39:46 -0700, Jim Devine wrote:
>I think it's pretty obvious, so I haven't commented on this point before,
>but I want to object to referring to China as "communism" (in the subject
>line).
>
>In Marxian terms, China has never been "communist." It's a country that's
>ruled by a party that calls itself "communist." To my mind, China's an
>example of bureaucratic socialism (known by its initials as BS) in
>transition to authoritarian capitalism (a.k.a. fascism).
>
>China was "communist" only in the Cold War "war of ideologies" ideology
>(Democracy vs. Communism or Totalitarianism, in the eternal Manichaean
>battle of the titans).
>
>Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~JDevine
>
>
