[DEBATE] : SA: a capitalist view

[Martin Hart-Landsberg]

Hi Doug,

 

Notice I said the so called tiger experience is losing its luster.  
Clearly East Asia remains the most dynamic center of capitalist 
accumulation.  My point is that the costs of that accumulation process 
are growing ever higher even for those that occupy a place in the center. 

 

In other words, it is important that people take a more careful look at 
the nature of the growth process in East Asia---the dynamism of the 
past, that did at one time result in improved living conditions and 
generate growing formal sector employment has changed dramatically.  
Manufacturing employment in China is falling for example and there has 
been an absolute decline in formal sector employment in China's urban 
areas (according to the ILO).  Comparisons with economically less 
successful regions does not make conditions better in East Asia. 

 

All this suggests that we are living through a period of ever more 
ruthless capitalist accumulation.  This is something that you have also 
pointed out.  We certainly do not want to join with those supporters of 
capitalism and legitimate their attempts to paint a false picture of 
what capitalist success means for working people.  Their goal is to 
encourage people to adopt the policies of the East Asian countries (as 
they interpret them, of course) with the implication that they too can 
enjoy similar East Asian gains.  Not only is that not really possible, 
but even the gains that did exist are fast disappearing (for working 
people that is).


You wouldnt disagree with that would you?


Marty

Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> On May 12, 2007, at 11:34 AM, Martin Hart-Landsberg wrote:
>
>> The hope to become an Asian tiger (as highlighted in the editorial 
>> below provided by Doug) deserves at least a short comment.  The Asian 
>> Tiger experience is quickly losing its luster.
>
> Compared to what, Marty? If you put it to a vote, I'll bet an 
> overwhelming majority of South Africans would choose to be more like 
> South Korea. Not, of course, that that would be in any way possible, 
> but let's be clear on the comparisons.
>
> Look at the numbers below:
>
> INDICATORS, % OF US
>
>                             SA                   SK
>                       1980      2005       1980     2005
>
> per capita GDP, PPP   45%        27%       21%       53%
>
> infant mortality     508        917       127        83
>
> life expectancy       78         61        89       100
>
> SA has fallen behind on every measure, and SK has gained. Yeah, sure, 
> SK growth and investment levels aren't what they were pre-crisis, but 
> really, who's doing better these days?
>
> Doug 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> DEBATE mailing list
> DEBATE at lists.kabissa.org
> http://lists.kabissa.org/mailman/listinfo/debate
>