WTO forum

Patrick Bond pbond at wn.apc.org
Fri Nov 19 23:18:55 PST 1999

> From: Brad De Long <delong at econ.Berkeley.EDU>
> The only justification I can see for the WTO line is that those
> countries which have the political capability to successfully carry
> out infant-industry strategies--the developmental states--have
> already developed.

Gong. Uneven development means backsliding over time, too. Korea could stand a bit more developmental-statism, by the looks of it. And now that structural adjustment and free trade have brutally deindustrialised little Zimbabwe (where industry once not long ago accounted for 31% of GDP, third highest in the world, according to the WB) and are doing so to South Africa, we could have another go at ISI if -- allow a fantasy, maybe -- the workers' party gets to run Harare in 2002 and the ANC's left flank (SACP and Cosatu) toughen up in Pretoria. This time, though, let's hold off on the (import-dependent) local production of luxury goods for elites, which represents the real failure of ISI everywhere, as overaccumulation set in and balance of payments crisis emerged, the results of which included policies designed to repress domestic effective demand through WashCon formulae... and thereby limit any possibility for an organic set of production-consumption linkages, etc etc...

More information about the lbo-talk mailing list