[lbo-talk] Alex Cockburn on India: wrong? (was, U.N. seeks aid...)

[tfast at yorku.ca]

Ulhas, this discussion has degenrated to the point of a irrepairable status.  If
the argument is that India will one day be king/queen of the seas, well fk who
knows, why not and who cares.  The question that Alex raised was simply how
deep the benifits of this resurgent India goes?  The answer he argued was not
as far as the neoliberals would have you believe at this moment in time.  And
if history is anything to go by, with some notable exceptions, India's time may
or may not come to pass.  That is, it is more then a question of time (i.e. in
reaction to your argument it took the US 100 years to come of age why pre-judge
the sub-continent?). And that is the point, 50 years from now maybe the
sub-continent will be the motor of global economic growth and the key
geopolitical power; then again maybe it will not.  The question, however, is
simply this:  To what length is the ruling class (in both its parliamentary and
economic wing) willing to go to pursue the nationalist dream of Indian
restoration? How much will the subordinate classes have to bear the burden of
this naitonalist dream?  Do they have the capacity now and in the forseable
future to ensure that they get a cut of the spoils of a greater India?  These
are the questions that need to be addressed and struggled with.  If all you
want to do is to sit at the table with your western counterparts... well then
ignore the dark-side of the resurgent beauty that is India today.  Although, if
I remember the rhetoric of independence it had something to do with establishing
a system whereby all the citizens of the subcontinent could sit at the table not
just some of you/us.

Travis

Quoting KJ <kjinkhoo at gmail.com>:


> On 8/12/05, Miles Jackson <cqmv at pdx.edu> wrote:
> >
> > > Why it is more difficult than it was for Europe and US? Are the developed
> countries the real barrier to growth in poor countries like China, India and
> Indonesia?
> > >
> > > Ulhas
> > >
> >
> > 2.  No colonies available for exploitation today.
>
> To which might be added: the legacy of colonial rule itself; a point
> which Ulhas seems to implicitly acknowledge by insisting that
> comparison should date from independence, rejecting the Angus Maddison
> series.
>
> kj
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>