> To take a country that is a major, major agricultural exporter in
> 1913 and eliminate its agricultural surplus?
>
> To be "essentially self-sufficient" is the same as "not making
> anything anyone else would like to have."
> Brad DeLong
Enough! Brad you started this whole thread by maliciously maintaining that Sweezy was not an intellectual and economist and hence no one should lament his passing. You have refused to address the posts that have pointed out (a) that your evidence of Sweezy's accommodation to Stalinism was bogus by blowing it out of the context in which Sweezy's revisions were made, i.e., Sweezy was in fact agreeing with Stalin that socialism had not, as of yet, suspended the law of value (which is by the way something any neoclassically trained economist such as yourself and Sweezy would have agreed with); (b) that to the extent that Sweezy supported Stalin, like many others on the left they did so because they, in good faith, were supporting the Revolution in general not Stalin in particular.
I am sure you support the American Revolution but not slavery or the genocide of indigenous Americans upon which the success of your Revolution-today-is largely built.
So why not recoup some integrity and just admit you were indulging in reactionary red baiting?
Travis