> I'm really not sure what you mean by East Asia
Defined as an integrated trading region: Japan, the two Koreas, the three Chinas, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, and Vietnam all trade more with each other than with the EU or the US.
> The class relations that gave rise to the
> 'developmental state' just don't exist outside of Japan
Sure they do. China and Vietnam are growing hothouse developmental states; Singapore and Taiwan continue to refine theirs. The South Korean government still owns the majority of the country's banking system; Malaysia has heavy state intervention in the economy; Thailand is doing some interesting things in the housing sector; Eastern Europe is about to get trainloads of euros from the EU.
> I also really don't understand how you can admire Adorno and yet be
> fascinated by the most 'rational' and 'efficient' form of rapacious, brutal
> and ecologically toxic growth that we know of
I never said East Asia was the *most* rapacious or brutal or ecologically toxic regime ever. The core East Asian economies produce far fewer CO2 emissions and junk per capita, spend more on education and less on the military, and are far more egalitarian than the US. That's not a reason to fawn on Lee Kuan Yew, but it is a reason to carefully analyze East Asian capitalism for what it is, rather than for what US neoliberals would like it to be.
-- DRR