>Exactly what argument are you arguing against? I post one NYT
> article on China and India, and then you'll talk about Jim Blaut,
> cell phones in Malaysia, famine and malnutrition in North Korea, and
> red baiting, and the next we know, we'll be onto Aijaz Ahmad vs. Bill
> Warren, if their books are in print. Neither China surging ahead of
> India nor the other way around makes or breaks dependency theory or
> world systems theory or modernization theory or classical Marxist
> theory or any other take on capitalism in former colonies. You are
> making a mountain out of a molehill, so to speak.
That was a response to Michael Puglieses' question. It is not a response to your post.
Ulhas