>At 11:06 AM 9/28/01 -0400, Doug wrote:
>>Yeah, but it's not like you can just choose "finanzkapital." It
>>depends on an entire imperial hierarchy, which produces inequalities
>>and exclusions.
>
>
>Doug, better red than dead - an old saying went. Translation: certian
>political arrangements may be far from ideal, but at least they offer
>something, like minimum security and living standards. I think the same
>applies to finanzkapital - the groups it oppresses are incomparably better
>off than even non-oppressed groups under islamic fundamentalism, and
>goddess have mercy for those whom the fundamentalists oppress.
>
>Moreover, capitalism takes various empirical forms. While the US variety
>is quite virulent, the forms that exist in, say the Scandinavian countries,
>and even much of Western Europe, are argueably better than Soviet- or
>China-style state socialism.
You're missing my point. How can a poor country "choose" its social structure in the same way I might choose my dinner? Did Mexico choose to be located next to the U.S. and incorporated as its sweatshop? Did Africa choose to be colonized and then largely excluded from the post-colonial world economy? Did the people of Afghanistan choose to be ruled by a bunch of oppressive theocrats?
Doug