OK. Here are the classifications from Rosser and Rosser. One looks at systems of decisionmaking (market versus plan, with variations), systems of ownership (capitalism versus socialism, with variations such as workers' ownership), along with some other characteristics such as attitudes towards social welfare or traditional rules on decisionmaking.
Thus we have: free market capitalist (equivalent to DeLong's free market) example: the US indicatively planned market capitalist (not in DeLong) example: Japan social market capitalist (equivalent to DeLong's social market) example: Sweden command capitalist (not in DeLong) example: Nazi Germany (probably no current example around) market socialist (maybe DeLong's B) example: former Yugoslavia, probably China today command socialist (DeLong's A) example: North Korea New Traditional (not in DeLong) example: Iran Barkley Rosser -----Original Message----- From: Alexandre Fenelon <afenelon at zaz.com.br> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Date: Tuesday, February 20, 2001 7:15 PM Subject: RES: marxism on wgn-fm
>
>
>-----Mensagem original-----
>De
>Well, if we want to compare apples with apples, I would suggest the
>following taxonomy of economies:
>
>A. Centrally-Planned Economies
>B. Plan-Heavy Economies with Some Worker Control
>C. Social-Market Economies
>D. Free-Market Economies
>
>And the following taxonomy of polities:
>
>1. Pure Totalitarian Terror
>2. Authoritarian Dictatorship
>3. Oligarchic Politics
>4. Party-Centered Mass Politics
>5. Media-Centered Mass Politics
>6. A Free Society of Associated Producers
>
>
>We have lots of examples of A1 and A3. We have one example
>(Yugoslavia) of B2. I will defer to others as to whether pre-1989
>Hungary counts as B3 and whether China today is B3 or C3. We
>certainly have examples of C1 and lots of examples of C2, D2, C3, and
>D3. And we have some examples of C4, C5, D4, and D5.
>
>But damned if I can think of an example of A4, B4, A5, or B5 (with
>the caveat that Nicaragua or Chile *might* have been able to develop
>into one if left alone).
>
>And I see no examples of 6.
>
>All in all, I think--following Roberto M. Unger--that the links
>between economic systems and political possibilities are not as
>strong as we usually imagine. But I don't doubt that the links are
>there, and that I don't understand them.
>
>Brad DeLong
>
>
>-I really liked your taxonomy model. Althought it doesn´t classifies
>-capitalist economies with heavy state intervention, as South Korea
>and Taiwan from 1960´s to 80´s or Brazil from 1965 to 1990. It seems
>to be black hole in your classification
>-But there is another aspect: You mentioned Chile and Nicaragua as
>-countries who could have developed into democratic socialist countries.
>-However, both countries had their experiences aborted by US imperialism,
>-right? And countries who developed into dictatorships were much more
>-able to counter US agression (Cuba, for instance). So, we leftists have
>-no hopes, if we try to build democracy and socialism, the the US
>-imperialism will crush us. Otherwise, we will end in dictatorships in
>-which the ruling class eventually restores capitalism (like USSR and
>-China). There are really hard choices....Maybe the imperalism is an
>-important obstacle to development of AB 4-6 regimens, since it will
>-do anything to abort those experiments, right?
>
> Alexandre
>
>
>
>