Capitalist and Maoist economic development

Abstract

While capitalist and Maoist processes of economic development have several elements in common, the differences between the two approaches are never theless many and profound. It is certainly not evident that one approach or the other is always superior, in regard either to means or to ends. What is evident, however, is that most studies by American economists of Chinese economic development are based on the assumption of capitalist superiority, and so China has been dealt with as though it were simply an underdeveloped United States — an economy that “should” develop along capitalist lines and that “should” forget all that damn foolishness about Marxism, Mao's thought, Great Leaps, and Cultural Revolutions and just get on with the job of investing the savings efficiently. This almost complete and unthinking acceptance by American economists of the view that there is no development like capitalist development has resulted in studies of China that lack insight and are generally unsatisfactory. Later on, I shall briefly examine some of these weaknesses and then suggest the types of economic studies that might be undertaken if China's development efforts are to be given serious intellectual consideration. The main portion of this paper, however, is a comparison of capitalist and Maoist development processes.