[Marxism] China's nationalized sector has keyrole incurrentgains

S. Artesian sartesian at earthlink.net
Mon Oct 5 20:53:29 MDT 2009

You may have read a lot, but you understand very little.

If  you've got a problem with identifying China's expansion of capitalism 
based on fixed asset investment, initially in the export sector, but most 
recently under the stimulus program in the "heavy" state/collective industry 
sector,  as overproduction, then you should address your problem to China's 
State Council that issued the rules based on it's, the council's, concerns 
about overproduction and overcapacity, not my concerns about China's 
overproduction.  .

If you think that's Friedmanese, not only are you ignorant of Marx, not only 
are you ignorant of Friedman, but you are also ignorant of the great 
respect, admiration, honor and celebrity status accorded Friedman in China 
by over very same overproducers, and worriers about overproduction, the 
State Council..

Nobody has criticized overproduction of steel in China as "wrong"  because 
the market can't swallow it.  Nobody has criticized overproduction at all. 
It is a fact of capitalism.  It is a fact of China's integration into world 

China is not overproducing steel to flood the world market and drive out its 
Japanese, Korean, Indian, European competitors.  Exports from China , 
Nestor, have plunged, although maybe you haven't heard.

Humankind needs more steel than it has now?  That remains to be determined 
by humankind.  Right now, the steel that is being produced isn't being 
produced for humankind, not in China, not in Korea, not in Vietnam, Japan, 
Argentina, anywher.  It's being produced for VALUE, and as a consequence 
overproduction occurs, increases in the midst of austerity, and expands with 
imposed scarcity.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Nestor Gorojovsky" <nmgoro at gmail.com>
To: "David Schanoes" <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 10:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] China's nationalized sector has keyrole 

I absurdly have read lots of Marx on overproduction. What I have not
absurdly accepted (as Marx didn´t) were capitalist economic categories.
When one criticizes Chinese "overproduction" one is speaking Friedmanese.

I try to speak Marxism, thus I don´t criticize "overproduction" as if it
was wrong that China produces more steel than the world market can swallow.

I want to end with the markets so that all the steel that is necessary
is produced. And humankid needs more steel than what we have now. Of
course, the capitalist mode of production doesn´t.

But I don´t care about that mode of production.

More information about the Marxism mailing list