Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 16:37:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Louis N Proyect <lnp3-AT-columbia.edu>
Subject: Re: Labor theory of value debate


On Wed, 21 Sep 1994 Steve.Keen-AT-unsw.edu.au wrote:

> I agree that my analysis said nothing about the underdeveloped
> world, and that Minskian style analysis in particular isn't
> particularly relevant to it. Whether the great depression in the 3rd
> world has been a necessary factor in the non-occurrence of such an
> event in the West is a moot point, however. Underdevelopment is a 
> product of imperialism, without a doubt; whether its continued
> existence is a necessary factor in the wealth of the West, I'm not
> so sure.

Is it debatable whether the prosperity of the imperialist countries is 
connected to the poverty of the third world? If so, I'd like to know what 
are some arguments to the contrary. I've always been under the impression 
that profits of American, European and Japanese corporations have been 
keyed to the exploitation of third world labor and natural resources. 
Have I been laboring under a doctrinaire, old-left delusion?  


Louis Proyect

Dept. of Hydrophonetics
Columbia University
lnp3-AT-columbia.edu


     ------------------