That's right, India was never socialist. On the other hand, if state ownership
of the means of production is any indicator then there was a time when
industrial assets and banks were heavily owned by the state.
anthony
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Anthony P. D'Costa, Professor Senior Visiting Researcher
Comparative International Development Center for Technology, Innovation
University of Washington and Culture, University of Oslo
1900 Commerce Street
Tacoma, WA 98402, USA
Phone: (253) 692-4462
Fax : (253) 692-5718
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Sun, 17 Sep 2006, Jim Devine wrote:
me
> the goal of import-substituting industrialization was NEVER to avoid
> capitalist development. Rather, it was to promote a nation-centered
> capitalist development.
Yoshie:
If import-substituting industrialization is pursued by a capitalist
state, yes, but presumably a socialist state promoting socialist
development would also want to (and have to) do import-substituting
industrialization in a number of industries.
that's right. I was thinking of Latin America. Anyway, India has never
been socialist, though some politicians in power have called themelves
that.
--
Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own
way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante.
