Ian
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> [mailto:owner-lbo-talk at lists.panix.com]On Behalf Of J. Barkley Rosser,
> Jr.
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 8:15 AM
> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> Subject: Re: marxism on wgn-fm
>
>
> 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
>