[lbo-talk] Harvey

KJ kjinkhoo at gmail.com
Wed Dec 7 10:12:21 PST 2005


On 12/7/05, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote in response to Dwayne Monroe's third point:
> and heavy Third World borrowing were unsustainable, as was an
> import-substitution development strategy.

My memory may be faulty, but was 3rd World borrowing that heavy in the early to mid-1970s when the accumulation regime's crisis became full blown? Didn't the borrowing really balloon in the late 1970s -- in that shuffling around of the petro-dollars -- resulting in the first debt crisis of the early 1980s?

With regards to the failure of import-substitution, I think it's still arguable whether the strategy itself failed, or the practice of it. Isn't it possible to think of, say, the Japanese or S Korean strategy as a variant of import-substitution, conceived of under an infant industry approach, but with a graduation criteria? Of course it's arguable that i-s created constituencies that could capture the state and permanently defer any graduation criteria.

kj



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list