Just think about it, red socialism came under extreme capitalism pressure that was forcing it to either adapt or evolve, pressure that led to adapting as new capitalist markets since 1991.....
Those in favor of adaptation in 1991 had the advantage that there was no traditional market paradigm shift knowledge gap as micro and macroeconomic knowledge is a given so they knew what to do and the paradigm flip took place from socially friendly, but economic unfriendly red socialism to socially unfriendly, but economic friendly capitalism.....
Those in favor of evolving had the disadvantage in 1991 as there was a deep red market paradigm shift knowledge gap as red micro and red macroeconomic knowledge did not exist so they did not know what to do and let the paradigm flip go unchallenged.....so the shift needed to keep Karl Marx's dream alive did not take place, the shift from socially friendly, but economy unfriendly red socialism to the socially and economy friendly red socialism or red market model.
The ideas shared above raise the question, Is the red market paradigm shift knowledge gap behind the flip from red socialism to pure capitalism? I think yes, what do you think?
http://econc10.bu.edu/economic_systems/Theory/NonMarx_Socialism/Soc_Contraversy/lange_computer_and_the_market.htm
http://calculemus.org/lect/L-I-MNS/12/ekon-i-modele/lange-comp-market.htm
Yes, marketization was decisive for the economic transition from state capitalism to private capitalism. A Hungarian joke of the 1980s: 'socialism' (state command economy) is the hardest way from capitalism to capitalism. I do think, O.Lange (link above) and J.Kornai http://www.kornai-janos.hu/KornaiJ-home-English.html are important authors, with respect to your question.
http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/dcrawford/verdery.pdf
https://muse.jhu.edu/chapter/771218
The fiat credit system should also be mentioned as essential, but that would now break the size of a comment.
Dear friends, this is a what do you think? question given the background so we can exchange ideas.
There is some good food for thoughts in the not yet published article shared below
Article The Theory and the Practice Behind the Market World that Fol...
Have a good day!
Political rhetoric by politicians talks about pure capitslism and pure socialism. We economists know that the best label is mixed economy.. All modern nations have significant public and significant priate sectors. I lived in China 12 years and I have lived in America much longer. Both hve mixed economies. Due to the military, America has a huge public sector. The percentage of GDP in th public secotr does not vary much from that of China.
Thanks...................I just see it that way and there are other ways economists can see it. I hope all is well with you.
Dear Paul, my intention with my reply was based on curiosity as to how your comment relates to the question of paradigm shift from pure red socialism a la Karl Marx to pure capitalism a la Adam Smith in 1991 and related paradigm shift knowledge gaps. .....
The key is what type of price clears the market, both the red socialist market and the pure capitalist market, whether you look at them as a general model or mixed model.....
My apologies if my reply sounded offensive or challenging, it was not my intention.
I am here simply to share ideas.
Respectfully yours;
Of course you make valid points. I am sorry for not knowing more about your specific question. On the contrary I am sorry if I upset you. I am glad we are civil, true scholars.
Some of you may find the ideas in the following article interesting
An Overview of the 1848 Karl Marx's Capitalism Fix Dilemmas: How a Step by Step Road Towards Economy Friendly Red Socialism May Have Looked Had Marx Stated it?
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334479026_An_Overview_of_the_1848_Karl_Marx's_Capitalism_Fix_Dilemmas_How_a_Step_by_Step_Road_Towards_Economy_Friendly_Red_Socialism_May_Have_Looked_Had_Marx_Stated_it
The economies of major countries now are mixed. Most voters are superficial and so what? Bernie Sanders avocates much of what Elizabeth Warren does. Bernie says he is a socialist and Warren says she is a capitlaist. Warren is getting more support. Some wor you avoi in some countries even if one is pusuing the same goal. I have done paid research for local, state, national governments and the UN. Pragmatic mixed economies are what matter. The mix varies between countries and time periods. I researched and taught in China 12 years. Top economists there agreed. They ejected Marx economics since 1978. They do not like pure capitalism either. "Socialism with Chinese characteristics ," the official slogan, means mixed economy.. The true paadigm shift is recognzing the pragmatism of mixed economies. I know some people philosophize and they enjoy it. To each his own. Take care
Paul, I wish you could have taken the time to read before commenting, SOCIALISM WIH CHINESE CHARATERISTICS OR CAPITALISM A LA RUSSIAN are not part of the dilemmas Karl Marx faced when trying to provide a social fix to pure capitalism in 1848.
But you did.....
I am not a polititian, I am a scientist that thinks outside the box, looking at the same issues from the sustainability angle and seeing what hard core red socialist thinkers and hard core capitalist thinkers may have missed....Why it took those top thinkers from 1848 to 1978 to see THEY WERE ON THE WRONG PATH...
If you were familiar with what is out there...,.you would be able to see that "socialism with chinese characteristics" is a paradigm flip from what Karl Marx wanted(a system with no social sustainability gaps) to what Karl Marx hated...A SYSTEM WITH SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY GAPS.
Thank you for commenting anyway
Wish a nice day to everyone
Party secretaries, who were also economists, , in China , told me, "We can reject Marx on the basis of scientific evidence." In addtion, I helped craft a statement saying the same idea. It was for the economics dean at Remnin Daxue, People's Univ, the most impotant party univ. It went to the PRC Central Commiittee. Europeans are THE experts on History of Economic Thougt. I know that and appeciate that.. I am sure what you say about Marx's witings is true and necessay. I hope this is moe clerar and I regret any misunderstanding, sir. I sure wish we were sharing a meal now. I would learn so much from you.
Dear Paul. my apologies if I sound too rough, I am here just to share ideas, not to impose ideas.
Just as red socialist countries missed the opportuniy to transition from economy unfriendly red socialism to economy friendly red socialism to close the social sustainability gap step by step as Karl Marx wanted ....pure capitalist countries too have not found the way to shift properly to either to socially friendly capitalism or green capitalism.....in both cases the shift came and they did not see it coming just as Thomas Kuhn said it happens....those inside the box do not see it, those outside the box will see it,,,in both cases we are now trying to fix what they left us...both .Adam Smith vrs Karl Marx
But China under this red market knowledge gap made some key moves I call LUCKY MOVES way before the 1991 fall of red socialism that allow it to maintain political control of a dwarf red socialism model left after the fall as they slowly allowed capitalism in....Former soviet bloc countries did not do this and you know the story...
You may find the following article interesting as you are familiar with things on the ground in China....
Nationalization as Privatization in Reverse: Understanding the Nature of the Commons to Identify a Possible Point of Optimal Nationalization.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281244564_Nationalization_as_Privatization_in_Reverse_Understanding_the_Nature_of_the_Commons_to_Identify_a_Possible_Point_of_Optimal_Nationalization
Feel free to comment any time
Respectfully yours;
Lucio
Everyone should read your paper Lucio. I agree with it. China does not want the unstable"boom and bust" mentality curently used in the USA. Sound thinking has kept China more stable than raw capitalism would have. Economists in China do think these matters out. I know from discussions with many of them. One has to understand Mandain to appeciate how great and creative Chinese are. I know you are very infomed .and espectful of Chinese. Yet so many Americans are now prejudiced against China. Plus we have a bufoon in the W hite House right now. Last April, I published an article about teaching and researching in China. A copy is attached. I think you and I are both colleagues and I am happy for that. I want to know more. Yesterday I was just referring to the supperficial atmosphere in American politics. I do not like it. There is no need to apologie for the limited communication ability of Intenet. I am learning a lot from you. I am in America now for family matters. I hope to get back to China. Thanks for the clear infomation.
I am glad to see you have taught in China and had a nice experience. The references you use may come handy in my research as i expand deeper into these ideas in the future.
Having been educated in a developing countries; and then in developed country has giving me the ability to place myself outside those boxes and to advance, what in a sense may be conflictive academic ideas, I used sustainability theory and thinking, which allow you to show the way forward in development terms from a different angle without looking down at the past, both from the marxism and capitalism point of view....
Have a nice day!
I undestand. Living in different countries teaches us so much. Have a nice day, also.
Dear Paul, key to understanding the ideas you are reading and I am sharing is the material in the following article:
Chapter 2 Paradigm Evolution and Sustainability Thinking: Using a Sustainability Inversegram to State Paradigm Death and Shift Expectations Under Win-Win and No Win-Win Situations
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/333866783_Chapter_2_Paradigm_Evolution_and_Sustainability_Thinking_Using_a_Sustainability_Inversegram_to_State_Paradigm_Death_and_Shift_Expectations_Under_Win-Win_and_No_Win-Win_Situations
Take a look a it when you have time
That is, your work and that you cite reads well. I appeciate the information.
Sharing some food for thoughts related to the topic here"
An Overview of the 1848 Karl Marx's Capitalism Fix Dilemmas: How a Step by Step Road Towards Economy Friendly Red Socialism May Have Looked Had Marx Stated it?
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334479026_An_Overview_of_the_1848_Karl_Marx's_Capitalism_Fix_Dilemmas_How_a_Step_by_Step_Road_Towards_Economy_Friendly_Red_Socialism_May_Have_Looked_Had_Marx_Stated_it
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Correction