[lbo-talk] Civil Rights in South Asia

[Chris Doss]

Dennis, I'm sort of confused about what you mean by developmental states. When you talk about "Europe," it often seems like you're mainly talking about the "core" countries in the EU (Germany and France mainly). Those countries have been among the richest and most economically developed on the planet for centuries. France, Holland, were colonial powers. What did they have to develop away from (except maybe from the wreckage of WWII, esp. in Germany's case)? Russia did its industrialization mostly in the 30s and urbanization in the 50s and 60s and was the core of a huge, high-tech (by the standards of the day) industrial superpower relatively recently. While India and China are in currently in the process of industrializing and urbanizing, and Brazil is doing -- I actually have no idea what Brazil is doing.
 
By "developmental state" do you really mean "state with heavy state involvement aimed at economic growth that benfits the majority of the population"? Or do you mean something else?

----- Original Message ----
From: "dredmond at efn.org" <dredmond at efn.org>

No party lines here, it's just learning from history. Until 1998, East
Asia and Europe were the only places which had full-fledged developmental
states, so that's what I focused on. Since then, developmental states have
spread like wildfire in places I didn't expect.

More importantly, the developmental state is not a monolithic entity. Like
the 3D videogame culture (and I don't think it's an accident games take
off in the late 1990s, at the exact moment the BRICs take off, there's
some affinity or correspondence there I haven't figured out just yet),
it's a field of tensions and contradictions -- some scary and regressive,
some emancipatory and productive. But the thing itself is a geopolitical
reality.

-- DRR

___________________________________
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk