On 3/30/07, raghu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/30/07, Yoshie Furuhashi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nowadays, though, many Marxists who still insist on Marxist rhetoric
> have in effect embraced capitalist development as good in and of
> itself, as they have practically given up on any transition to a
> socialist future. China and India are good examples of that change.
> --
> Yoshie
China and India are using capitalist development as a pragmatic response -
how else do you improve your own position in a world dominated by capital?
However it seems that there is plenty of awareness both in India and China
about the destructive potential of capital. Rather than "embrace" it, the
elites in these countries are trying to make a compromise. In India at
least, this philosophy goes back to the early post-independence years (a
planned "mixed economy" combining the best of both the capitalist and
communist worlds).
The danger, of course is that you dance with the devil at your own great
peril. Capital does appear to be acquiring a life of its own and the
leadership of China and India, no matter how well-intentioned or
enlightened can only control it to some extent.
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
