[Marxism] Voting with feet, not commendable in Argentina Re: China's high speed rail plans,

S. Artesian sartesian at earthlink.net
Sat Sep 5 08:46:25 MDT 2009


Nestor,

You felt you were informed enough to agree with LW that China is using its 
export earnings to provide the stimulus to its economy when there is no 
evidence that export earnings have been so directed

You felt you were informed enough to state that "the whole thing" [by which 
I think you mean the entire issue, the entire significance of class 
relations] is whether China is "bowing down" to imperialism or making use of 
imperialism.  And you felt informed enough to state that China was making 
use of imperialism, and thus strengthening itself.

When I state that you and LW think that China's development runs a course, a 
course of necessity, from the SEZs to the accumulation of export earnings to 
its expansion of infrastructure and that this constitutes the strengthening 
of socialism, that interlocked course of development indicates an advance 
for socialism... you say you never said any such thing.

But then right here, in your post below you state:

"I am more interested in a debate over whether socialism is strengthened BY 
China  through its economic development of China, which

 (c) whether under bourgeois rule or proletarian rule, is a challenge to the 
existing imperialist order inasmuch as it is not building an  extrovert 
economy but a self-centered one, > and in this sense, at the very least 
(repeat "at the very least"),

> (d) said economic development makes it harder for the imperialist core  to 
> extract surplus value from the periphery in order to keep their > rusting 
> social machinery in smooth motion. Which, taking into account  that the 
> socialist project is a _global_ proyect and socialist  struggle is a 
> _global_ struggle, may well be

Which when taken with your earlier statements about the "whole thing" 
indicates clearly that you do think that in fact that course of economic 
development has strengthened socialism at least on the "global struggle" 
level.  And clearly by your statement regarding "bourgeois or proletarian 
rule"  China has/can done/do this regardless of the impact on its own social 
relations of production, regardless of which class relations are dominant 
are becoming dominant.

This is what I mean by the Olga Korbut remark.  You engage is such 
incredible contortions, flips, twists, fly-offs that you qualify as a 
gymnast.

Needless to say I disagree with your (c) and (d), just as I disagree with 
your Imperialism 101.  Is the national question a class question?  That 
question means nothing.  The question is WHICH CLASS?  You, by your own 
admission, don't care-- "whether under bourgeois rule or proletarian rule is 
a challenge to the existing imperial order..."  " making it harder...to 
extract surplus value from the periphery."

Tell me Nestor, exactly where and how has China made it more difficult for 
the bourgeoisie to extract surplus value from the periphery?  More than $600 
billion in foreign direct investment, and the bourgeoisie did that why? 
Because it makes it harder to extract surplus value?  Huh?  It's not 
imperialism 101 you need, Nestor, it's Marx, Vol 1, Chapter 1 you need.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Néstor Gorojovsky" <nmgoro at gmail.com>
To: "David Schanoes" <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Saturday, September 05, 2009 10:07 AM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Voting with feet,not commendable in Argentina Re: 
China's high speed rail plans,


> What I think is
>
> (a) that I am not informed enough on the Chinese situation as to
> provide a definitive statement on the consolidation (or not) of
> socialism there, and that
>
> (b) in the end I am not very enthusiastic around the debate over
> whether socialism is stengthened in China or not, since I am more
> interested in a debate over whether socialism is strengthened BY China
> through its economic development of China, which
>
> (c) whether under bourgeois rule or proletarian rule, is a challenge
> to the existing imperialist order inasmuch as it is not building an
> extrovert economy but a self-centered one,
>
> and in this sense, at the very least (repeat "at the very least"),
>
> (d) said economic development makes it harder for the imperialist core
> to extract surplus value from the periphery in order to keep their
> rusting social machinery in smooth motion. Which, taking into account
> that the socialist project is a _global_ proyect and socialist
> struggle is a _global_ struggle, may well be
>
> (e) a strong objective propeller towards a victory of socialist forces
> on the global scale in the very measure it implies a weaker
> imperialist bourgeoisie at the core.





More information about the Marxism mailing list