< < <
Date Index > > > |
Re: Still "The Rise of China and WST" by Threehegemons 05 March 2001 22:41 UTC |
< < <
Thread Index > > > |
Regardless of how many neoliberal policies China has adopted, its leaders have reserved the right to persecute voices they disagree with, trample on the rights of foreign capital (most capital invested in China is from the Chinese diaspora--the NYTimes business page regularly warns Americans of the risk of investing there, and of course, despite the obvious precedent of identical policy in the 19th century, complaints continue about violations of 'intellectual property rights') and have not adopted an elections system that would clearly strengthen the hand of those highly integrated into multinational capital (perhaps also strengthening the hand of feminists, greens, independent unions, etc). In this sense, it remains very much on its own terms--quite unlike the governments of latin America and Eastern Europe (the European Union also remains somewhat out of the consensus, although it allows much more room for multinational neoliberalism to make its case). Socio-economic performance is a complicated thing--does a particular society offer a scheme that can be plausibly imitated by other countries/classes seems at least as relevant as whether it is leading in terms of per capita income. And size matters--China is presently the third largest economy in the world, and may move up in this ranking. Being poor in Mississippi or some Indian reservations isn't all that unlike poverty in peripheral countries (perhaps more like poverty in Semi-peripheral countries). Small towns and cities outside of the major growth poles are what I would consider the 'semi-periphery' of the US. Some of the terms regularly used on this list--'the modern world system', as if it had a clear beginning, middle and end (something Wallerstein absolutely insists on, but which I've never found entirely convincing), 'capitalism' , may obscure more than they reveal about both the present and the period we are moving into. Not believing in free will is not the same as believing in natural laws or predictability. One may believe that everything is the product of what came before, but that causes interact in such a complex manner that it is unimaginable that one could actually predict them with any confidence. Steven Sherman
< < <
Date Index > > > |
World Systems Network List Archives at CSF | Subscribe to World Systems Network |
< < <
Thread Index > > > |