austina at uwgb.edu
Sun May 27 11:09:20 MDT 2001
I mean imperialism as it appears under capitalism with surplus flows from
periphery to core. In fact, any sort of imperialism depends on this. In the
socialist world-system, surplus flowed in the other direction.
From: Xxxx Xxxxxx
To: marxism at lists.panix.com
Sent: 5/27/2001 11:01 AM
Subject: Re: dependent socialism?
> From: Austin, Andrew <austina at uwgb.edu>
> To: 'marxism at lists.panix.com'
> Subject: RE: dependent socialism?
> Date: Saturday, May 26, 2001 11:11 PM
> Considering that the Soviet Union's relations with its satellites were
> anti-imperialistic (in the capitalist sense)
Explain this, Andy. Soviet Union's relations with its satellites were
anti-imperialistic in the capitalist sense. It was anti-imperialistic in
the socialist sense. Even Stalin's idea of "socialism in one country"
a pragmatic solution to self protect socialism against capitalism in the
context of Cold War.
>the idea of a "dependent
> socialism" seems a bit silly.
I would not consider Soviet Union dependent socialism either (nor its
satellites), but not for the reasons you mention above. The regime in
Soviet Union was anti-systemic/anti-imperialist/socialist. It attempted
establish a united socialist block against the capitalist West. The only
difficulty with such regimes was that the world system in which they
operating was capitalist, with the number of capitalist countries
the number of socialist countries. This dependency on the world system
complicated the sustainability of socialist regimes, if not made it
impossible. Cuba is still trying to survive, albeit with difficulties.
is not because Cuban socialism failed (or that the socialist model was
inadequate). It was because of an external threat complicating the
of socialism on a national basis (as well as internationally)
> Andrew Austin
> Assistant Professor
> Social Change and Development
> University of Wisconsin-Green Bay
> Green Bay, WI 54311-7001
> (920) 465-2791
> Webpage: http://www.uwgb.edu/austina
Xxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx
Department of Political Science
SUNY at Albany
Nelson A. Rockefeller College
135 Western Ave.; Milne 102
Albany, NY 12222
> -----Original Message-----
> From: George Snedeker [mailto:snedeker at concentric.net]
> Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2001 10:02 PM
> To: marxism at lists.panix.com
> Subject: dependent socialism?
> What is surprising is that Marxists have yet to come out with a theory
> dependent socialism. Its time we did it, so as to have a truly global
> DEPENDENT SOCIALISM? is dependent socialism "socialism"? is it really
> capitalism? i'm not sure I understand the question...
More information about the Marxism