China, India, and Global Capitalism | The New School
Economy | Information | History | Online | Facts | World | Global | Money
Accumulation, Development, and Exclusion: China, India, and Global Capitalism INDIA CHINA INSTITUTE | http://www.newschool.edu/ici The experiences of the global south have revealed that the growth-driven modernization projects have left in their wake a trail of marginalization, dispossession, disempowerment, and the displacement of segments of the population. How is a growth process that leads to exclusion legitimized and how are the citizen/subjects governed through organized practices? How do the excluded population reproduce the economic and social conditions of their existence? How can the process of development through accumulation-oriented growth be critically evaluated? And, what are the prospects, if any, of alternative forms of development beyond accumulation? A panel discussion examines these issues in the context of two of the fastest growing economies in the world—China and India. The panel is part of a project to examine the theme development beyond accumulation from a Third World perspective. Participants: Partha Chatterjee, professor of political science at the Centre for Studies in Social Sciences, Calcutta, and professor of anthropology at Columbia University, New York. His works include Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World (1986), The Nation and its Fragments (1993), A Princely Impostor? The Strange and Universal History of the Kumar of Bhawal (2003), and The Politics of the Governed (2004). Duncan Foley, Leo Model Professor of Economics, New School for Social Research. His works include Understanding Capital: Marx's Economic Theory (1986), Unholy Trinity: Labor, Capital, and Land in the New Economy (2002), and Adams Fallacy: A Guide to Economic Theology (2006). David Harvey, distinguished professor of Anthropology at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York (CUNY). Among his many books are The Limits to Capital (1982; new edition 2007), The Condition of Postmodernity (1989), The New Imperialism (2003), A Brief History of Neoliberalism (2005), Spaces of Global Capitalism (2006), and Cosmopolitanism and the Geographies of Freedom (2009). William Milberg, professor of Economics, New School for Social Research, will chair the session. He has authored The Crisis of Vision in Modern Economic Thought (1996, with Robert Heilbroner), The Making of Economic Society (2006, with Robert Heilbroner), and edited The Megacorp and Macrodynamics (1992), and Labor and the Globalization of Production (2004). This event is hosted jointly by the Department of Economics, The New School for Social Research, and the India China Institute (ICI) of The New School, and is organized under the broad rubric of the theme of Prosperity and Inequality of the India China Institute. New School faculty member and ICI Fellow Lopamudra Banerjee is organizing the event. MILANO THE NEW SCHOOL FOR MANAGEMENT AND URBAN POLICY | http://www.newschool.edu/milano THE NEW SCHOOL FOR SOCIAL RESEARCH | http://www.newschool.edu/nssr This panel is part of a larger initiative by a working group of economists to examine the theme Development Beyond Accumulation from a Third World perspective. The theoretical and empirical studies carried out by the group are informed by the contemporary development experiences in China and India. THE NEW SCHOOL | http://www.newschool.edu * Location: Wollman Hall, Eugene Lang Building. 11/02/2009 6:00 p.m. - 8:30 p.m.
Comments
-
Check it out new learning to make you rich!!!
http://payripo.com/?share=46521 -
Prussia in those days was part of the larger German empire.
-
Prussian.
-
O so Marx, a German, controls China. That's brilliant
-
We'll work to be more aware... most of our content is well produced, often there are some technical challenges. We are always working to produce the best content in the interest of sharing knowledge. Appreciate your feedback.
-
All of those microphones in front of the panelists. And yet we are left with the audio from the in-camera microphone, tinny and distant. Look, if you're going to record and publish a lecture, you need to do more than just a point a camcorder at it and let it go. We're not watching because we want to see 5 people sit behind a table for an hour, we want to listen to their words. But if I have to strain to understand what's being said, I'm just as likely to go do something better with my time.
-
lots of hot air nothing more nothing to see here folks
-
Also, the reason capitalism is working in China is because it's failing in the US. Business has to go somewhere, does it not? CEO's and corporations are not loyal to any single country. They follow cheap labor, high importation, and the heart of the US manufacturing is a testament to just that.
-
My point is that organizations like JP Morgan and Goldmann-Sachs don't PRODUCE anything, yet the private CEO's are given billions in personal remunerations. What you described is exactly my point: Capitalism works wonders if you live in an autocratic society but terrible if you live in a democratic one, as politicians are bought and sold, and corporations with the power to simply overturn any regulations put upon them.
-
every economy needs a finance sector, every developed country has their own 'wall street'. corporations are usually owned by multiple people, shareholders, the public, etc.. there's no legal barrier stopping 100 workers from starting their own company and doing that right now... democracy isn't really relevant to capitalism, capitalism is doing fine in china and they aren't exactly democratic :)
-
Why don't we just do away with Wall Street? Instead of businesses being run by one man, why not if there are 100 workers, each man gets 1/100 power of what goes on within that business. That would solve the problem of pollution, and stripping forests bare, and sending business to China because the labor is cheaper. What we need is a system that has not seriously been considered in a very long time. If we are to live in a truly democratic society, capitalism must also conform to democracy.
-
it's not that they "should" its just how it has been, and it seems it will continue to be that way. How can the weak rule the strong? Whatever your system of organization is it will have strong, rich, powerful people in it, if they don't control it overtly they will do it behind the scenes. Why? Because the strong have the means and desire to dominate and enact rules that serve their purposes. Are u advocating anarchism: no gov, no leaders? It still faces the problem of corrupt-strong vs weak.
-
Correction: There has always BEEN a ruling class. In what way is that grounds to suppose that there will always BE a ruling elite? Or always should have been for that matter? Have you lived in some alternate reality the rest of us have not? Top-down democracy is just the trendy way of saying 'bureaucratic'... and you are below yourself as a human being if you truly believe you deserve to be led. That your children deserve to be led. I think you miss the purpose of this modern movement.
-
We actually had to learn those kind of things from high school through college and graduate school when I was in China back then but everything was in Chinese. When I said you sound like Max just bz your words were so 'high class' that reminded me what I was told before in Chinese. I was praising you. You sounded like a professor.
-
@arzoyan u sound like Karl Max.
-
like what policies
-
@arzoyan profit is motivation, the strong and lucky will dominate the weak and unlucky, that is how nature works, no matter what system you make, be it communistic or capitalistic, there will always be an elite group of experts that dominate the masses. The answer isn't to take away the motivation, but to have rules that balance the system and make it fair and non-violent...
-
@Scientisticsoviet China adopted Market policies since the late 70's toward the end of the Maoisy Era of "scientific central planning" which lead to the deaths of tens of millions of Chinese peasant farmers. Under the market reforms of Chairman Deng Xioping, China moved towards privatization of farm land back to the peasants, known as "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics". Since the Chinese Economic reforms and a turn to market policies, China became who it is today.
-
@SunBeamsan Utopian free-market? That's funny, Capitalism isn't about Utopia, unlike the dated economic dogmas Socialism and central planning. If you look at the historical facts, those countries which have embraced a "market" policy have advanced by leaps and bounds compared to the more backwards centrally planned command economies. Look at China,10 years ago no one expected it to become the economic and financial power house it is today with some f the most rapidly increasing living standards.
-
@SunBeamsan The utopian free market capitalism has never existed, and will never existed. It can never e realised within the systemic structures and internal logic of the capitalist system.. The whole freemarketism is an ideological construct originally designed to persuade developing countries to underdevelop and specialize in supplying raw materials to the capitalist core countries.
0m 0sLenght
82Rating