capitalists' nerve

Jim heartfield Jim at heartfield.demon.co.uk
Wed Aug 5 15:14:16 PDT 1998


In message <19980805205750.8362.qmail at hotmail.com>, alec ramsdell <a_ramsdell at hotmail.com> writes
>James,
>
>I'm a little sketchy with interpreting "Asian growth" and "Western
>parsimony" here. Could you expand a bit on the parameters you use these
>in? Strictly finance-wise? What about prospective commercial ventures
>in Asia? How does commercial colonization, whether in production of
>consumer goods for American companies (like Nike, etc.), or the opening
>of another hungry McDonald's, situate with Western parsimony?

I was thinking of the current financial impositions that have pushed the area into recession, and the political constraints upon industrialisation coming out of the Kyoto summit, the World Bank's pulling the plug on the Narmada Dam, the growing campaign against the Three Gorges Dam in China. Most Western investment in the region has been of a fairly specualtive character, that caused more instability than growth. I think you could have argued that East Asian growth was due to external factors as late as the 1970s, maybe, but at the moment the developments in Shanghai, Singapore, Seoul are largely generated from within. Western reactions to those have been a mix of speculative investment, a desire to restrain through political sanctions, and an attempt to impose financial restraint. One pair of trainers does not investment make. -- Jim heartfield



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list