In the oppressed nations, is it possible for economic development to occur within the confines of the capitalist system in the imperialist epoch? This is an important question for Trotskyists because, according to PR, the bourgeoisie is not able to carry out its historic tasks, which therefore fall to the proletariat, in alliance with the peasantry, which combines democratic tasks with socialist revolution. Does the idea of "historic tasks" include industrial development? How do we explain the rapid industrialization of countries such as Taiwan (which are known as the "Asian Tigers" in popular discourse) even though most other countries remain underdeveloped and dependent on primary goods? How have these countries been able to break free from the fetters imposed by Imperialism? These countries have industrialized under the command of the bourgeoisie, often through a state capitalist system (government control of infrastructure etc) and could be seen to contradict PR, if we take "historic tasks" to include industrial development. In general, with regard to economic development, what is our position towards the developing world? What kind of economic model do we support in place of the market system which currently exists?
Well the idea that imperialism always under develops is clearly wrong. It is just a natural tendency as far as i understand it, and permanent revolution is key to understanding it. As when a national bourgeoisie in an oppressed country generate capital they have the option of reinvesting their wealth in their own country, or they can reinvest in other countries, some being more underdeveloped, others being invested in the imperialist north. Essentially diverting capital back into the imperialist north, where you can buy property etc, which can accrue massive wealth very quickly. Just look at the way Latin American bourgeoisie invest in north America. Also, in China, huge amounts of the industry is owned and operated by companies from outside china, and as such, they look to produce light industry commodities like clothing and computer stuff, where unskilled labour is very cheap. So, the CCP has failed, in that the industry that has developed, is not really the industry that is of much benefit to the Chinese working class, as a result the only benefits are jobs and taxes. Taiwan was basically a different country (to now) prior to the revolution in china. My grandparents lived and worked there after moving from china prior to the revolution. but, the Taiwanese bourgeoisie must have invested in Taiwan and used aid packages at home. It always comes down to the policy chosen, and if you receive aid for being in a geographically significant place, it is much easier to take care of your industry and help it develop through being protectionist. Why it is so significant is, that South Korea (again strategic location in the context of the cold war) Hong Kong (ditto) and Taiwan (ditto again) are all dominated by the domestic companies. And in the context of the cold war, allowing the natural development of countries is a good way of making sure they don't go communist. For PR, it is that, the national bourgeoisie in an oppressed country, effectively sell out and dont develop the economy in a way that is of benefit to the working class as they export capital to get the best returns. So, even in the imperialist north, we will need to redevelop our economies just as the oppressed countries will have to.
