>2. Wallerstein like many Marxists (there is always a
>classical influence in the Marxist reasoning) argues
>that the maintenance of a military machine is a net
>cost to the American economy and that therefore Europe
>and Japan will fare better because they don't have to
>pay for such unproductive investment.
> Nonetheless, in the real capitalist world, the
>choice is usually between military stimulus and no
>stimulus or very limited stimulus
Actually, to a large extent, Japan HAS in fact heavily stimulated their economy while NOT investing in military production. And it is more efficient, as the US has noted (and envied, it seems). For some time, the US has pressured Japan to move to military production as a pump primer, but Nippon will have none of it.
However, you're probably right about the "real world" choices. Japan is far from the "real world" elsewhere on the planet. I think the same Japanese cultrual features that lead to outrageous dedication to one's job have also promoted unwavering support for elaborate economic planning.
A friend once told me how in the US for example, the production chain goes MANUFACTURER- WHOLESALER- RETAILER. In japan it goes MANUFACTURER- MIDDLE MAN- MIDDLE MAN- WHOLESALER- MIDDLE MAN- MIDDLE MAN- REATAILER or some such thing- full employment policies ya know. Try telling a North American no t to shop at COSTCO so we can all keep our jobs.
Sincerely
Dave Markland
>