More on Hardt & Negri from Brennan

Ulhas Joglekar uvj at vsnl.com
Sat Jan 11 19:37:49 PST 2003


Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:


> The problems of what may be called "socialist dependency" became
> obvious, especially after the USSR dissolved, in severe difficulties
> that Cuba and North Korea underwent. The problems of uneven
> development became manifest in, for instance, Kosovo vs. the rest of
> Yugoslavia (later mainly Serbia) and Chechnya vs. the rest of the
> USSR (later mainly Russsia). '

How China became a US ally from early 1970s?


>It is certainly possible, no even
> advisable, to employ historical materialist theory to analyze the
> above and other problems. What are the appropriate political
> conclusions to be drawn from such analyses is not very clear, though.

Marxist theory has been frequently subordinated to the need to defend the actually existing socialism. This has had adverse impact on the theory.


> That depends. The "national bourgeoisie" aren't homogeneous. Some
> factions of them may be more interested in local, national, and
> regional economic development than others; some may be so situated
> that their prosperity hardly depends upon the development of the home
> market. Besides, in some nations, there is no "national bourgeoisie"
> -- e.g., Afghanistan.

Industrial capital is generally integrated with the globally through technology, finance and markets.


> That said, your remarks imply that it is more desirable that India is
> among the less indebted nations and its natural resources and
> infrastructure are not owned by foreign capital, both of which entail
> more relative autonomy for India than for many other former colonies.

Yes, it is desirable. It is also feasible as far as large countries like China, India and perhaps Brazil are concerned. I am not sure the options available to these nations are available to small nations like Sri Lanka or Singapore.


> In a way, you answered your question yourself: it matters whether
> resources and infrastructure are owned by local or national
> bourgeoisie; local or national governments; or foreign capital.

The question is what is the role and function of a bourgeois state, and what are preconditions for their realisation?

Ulhas



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list