--- On Fri, 7/17/09, dredmond at efn.org <dredmond at efn.org> wrote:
> From: dredmond at efn.org <dredmond at efn.org>
> Subject: [lbo-talk] Triple Your Lizard
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Date: Friday, July 17, 2009, 4:01 AM
> That screed I promised:
>
> http://www.efn.org/~dredmond/Triplezilla.pdf
> "Asiazilla, Bolivarzilla, and Bearzilla: The Rise of the
> Developmental
> State in the World Semi-periphery 1999-2009"
>
[WS:] So if I read you correctly, your argument boils down to the position that unprecedented accumulation in semi-peripheral countries that have state controlled development-financing institutions forms the economic basis for a multi-polar world, and such a world is fundamentally a good thing.
My question is how is this different from the late 19th and early 20th century development? Back then, the position of the liberal hegemon (England) was challenged by developmental states i.e countries like Germany, France, Japan and later Russia where development was pursued by a mix of government supported cartels - as Gerschenkron argues. However, the outcome of that growing multi-polarity back then was two world wars resulting in the US - USSR hegemony. What makes you think that this time things will be different?
Wojtek