------ =_NextPart_000_01BC44BC.75C1B220
----------
David,
Your analysis is idealist and seriously flawed logically and =
empirically.=20
=20
=CFdealist" eh? Translated, I am accused of saying that what people =
think is important. Guilty as charged.
The Coastal region of China is heavily capitalized, with transnationals
sinking billions of dollars into the region.=20
=20
Quite right. But doesn't explain why Americans think this is a better =
place to put a chemical plant than, say, Malaya or Kenya. Long-term =
American Christian involvement supplies a plausible answer.
The current power =
struggle
internal to China is over state bureaucrats controlling the central
regions and TNCs controlling the east both seeking to see who will rise
from the shift from state to market capitalism. U.S. policies, and the
policies of the globalizers, are being designed to make sure that the
Eastern market capitalist development triumphs.=20
Anybody who thinks a US or Europe based TNC is running things =
politically or culturally in any part of China is dreaming in =
Technicolor. There are major internal stresses in China, but Austin =
seems to me to be overly impressed with his "coastal" thesis. The gulf =
between the Mandarin-speaking north, where the communists still have =
some influence, and the everything-else-speaking everywhere else, where =
they don't, seems to me more important. The Mandarin mandarins are =
statist, as per down through the centuries, and everybody else isn't, as =
per SOP.
As for your claims that
evangelicals are seeking to enter the fray: first, you have to show
significant linkages between organized Christian groups and U.S. state
*and* transnational orgs and policy practices vis-a-vis China.=20
I didn't say evangelicals, I said evangelists, and I made no reference =
whatsoever to "organized Christian groups," which I take to be Austin's =
code word for his vision of frenzied bubbas with rifles in their pickup =
trucks. The important phenomenon here is not the Pat Robertsons and =
Orval Robertses, powerful though they be with their vast media =
enterprises. I think more of the Elliott Richardsons, and other such =
mandarins, at least seven thousand WASP American families born in China =
in the current generation, and countless tens of thousands of other =
families with missionary branches, Pearl Buck on their bookshelves by =
the Readers Digest novels, and the wistful thought that Mao was really a =
Christian in disguise and one more little try might just bring them all =
around.
Second, you
have to show that those Christian organizations who are deeply involved
and leading the movement have as their primary interests =
Christianization
(we know for a fact that major U.S. evangelical movements are hard core
capitalist and have ties to right wing conservative-nationalist and =
global
neofascist forces).
This "second" is the misquote above -- evangelicals for evangelists -- =
amplified, with background noise added. For the record, the only =
significant piece of decent social legislation in the US lately has been =
the child tax credit -- a progressive boon to the working class forced =
down the Republicans' throats by Ralph Reed.
Third, you have to show that if one and two are
correct that they both outweigh specific market capitalization processes
currently underway in China.=20
No I don't. The question was not what is going on in China -- which is =
simple modernization, made possible by the collapse of communism. The =
question was why is America involved as it is. I propose that a major =
part of the explanation lies in American culture. Austin prefers his =
Marxoid mumbo-jumbo.
And finally, you have to show why any degree
of religious group involvement would weigh more than world-historical
material and economic forces.=20
"World-historical material and economic forces" eh? And Austin accuses =
_me_ of idealism! These completely fictitious forces are ex post facto =
explanatory variables conjured out of thin air by people of the type who =
think that quoting each others' books constitutes research.
=20
The fact that large numbers of influential Americans, including =
thousands of Establishment families, have sentimental and religious =
involvements with China is a steel cable by comparison with these wispy =
imaginings of "historical processes."
Based on fact and theory you cannot meet any
these burdens, particularly the last one which boils down to the
difference between fantasy and reality.=20
=20
The difference is indeed between fantasy and reality -- but who =
Americans are and what they have done over the past three hundred years =
is a reality; Austin's "historical processes" are false concretes, his =
own fantasies.
=20
-dlj.
=20
------ =_NextPart_000_01BC44BC.75C1B220
From: Andrew Wayne Austin <aaustin@utkux.utcc.utk.edu>
To: WORLD SYSTEMS NETWORK <wsn@csf.colorado.edu>
Subject: RE: complete logical refutation (was: China?)
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 1997 07:07:48 -0400
Salvatore,
You are reading things into my post. China is not a victim. The capitalist
forces, both national and transnational, in China are actively seeking
integration into the global system. The transnationals are working to make
sure that the right sort of integration occurs. These trends are objective
and material; elite policy is only seeking to guide the process towards an
array of relatively optimum conclusions. And of course there is business
pushing for protections. The capitalist class is fractional, and there
will always be intra- and international struggles between fractions of the
capitalist class.
Andrew Austin
------ =_NextPart_000_01BC44BC.75C1B220--