|
m Signing comment by 205.74.158.114 - "→Anarchists should not be listed as supporting national autarky: "
|
||
Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
[[Special:Contributions/2001:268:C0C0:64C8:DCD9:1643:DA1F:2|2001:268:C0C0:64C8:DCD9:1643:DA1F:2]] ([[User talk:2001:268:C0C0:64C8:DCD9:1643:DA1F:2|talk]]) 02:06, 27 September 2017 (UTC) |
[[Special:Contributions/2001:268:C0C0:64C8:DCD9:1643:DA1F:2|2001:268:C0C0:64C8:DCD9:1643:DA1F:2]] ([[User talk:2001:268:C0C0:64C8:DCD9:1643:DA1F:2|talk]]) 02:06, 27 September 2017 (UTC) |
||
There really should be a part about the current consensus, virtually no modern economists think Autarky leads to what you would call good outcomes. The only schools of thought that support protectionism are extreme fringe ones. |
There really should be a part about the current consensus, virtually no modern economists think Autarky leads to what you would call good outcomes. The only schools of thought that support protectionism are extreme fringe ones. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/205.74.158.114|205.74.158.114]] ([[User talk:205.74.158.114#top|talk]]) 15:31, 2 October 2017 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
== External links modified == |
== External links modified == |
![]() | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() Archives (Index) |
This page is archived by ClueBot III. |
North Korea receives food aid from Japan, among others. It's not trade but diplomacy, but it would imply a lack of self-sufficiency incompatible with autarchy. --62.58.152.52 (talk) 12:43, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
North Korea trades with China, doesn't it? —Ashley Y 04:31, Dec 2, 2003 (UTC)
Not exactly what you'd call 'autarky' in the Eastern and Soviet bloc, it was more mercantilism. Khrushchev called it the 'specialization of the socialist bloc' I believe, it meant that each country would produce goods they excelled at doing, it was actually quite capitalist and based on comparative advantage, it was adopted after Stalin's death when the USSR was promoting that all countries should become an autarky by themselves.
Funnily enough, it was Khrushchev's demand that Albania become the 'bread basket' of the bloc that led Albania into autarky and away from the Soviet bloc, eventually leaving Comecon and the Warsaw Pact. Enver Hoxha believed that the Soviet plan was capitalist, and was the same as what the Western countries did to the Third World in exploiting it.
This is also very relevant, considering that the concept of autarky goes with the 'international division of labor', which autarkies tried to free their countries from. The basic idea is, you have the rich urban advanced countries with the big industry and processing, and you have the backward rural poor countries, which pull out the raw materials and make the wheat for the rich countries. I suppose you could call it neo-imperialism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.223.175.93 (talk) 12:24, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of Soviet-style economies, didn't Albania try to be an autarky under Enver Hoxha? I thought I read once that their constitution once forbade foreign trade and they had to pass a special act of parliament each time they had to trade anything, but I can't verify this. They had certain strategic minerals such as chrome and oil and I think they were self-sufficient for food production, so, despite being a small country they could have survived in a limited way without trade. Zagubov 17:10, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What would be necessary for a state to be a sustainable autarky? Is not the world as a whole an economic autarky? Is that sustainable? 168.7.251.84 20:21, 24 January 2007 (UTC)David[reply]
I think someone went overboard on the negative epithets to describe North Korea. While we may not agree with them for numerous reasons, I don't thing we need to enumerate these with a whole bunch of adjectives every time we name the country, and it does kind of fly in the face of "Neutrality". Maybe a moderator or impartial editor could look at this: 92.251.200.233 (talk) 10:10, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What about Maoist China as an example (between 1949-76)? According to the page on the History of the People's Republic of China, "These reforms were a reversal of the Maoist policy of autarky and economic self-reliance" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China_(1976%E2%80%9389). Furthermore, according to an article at Yale Global, "Zweig explains that significant differences in prices inside and outside China, created by decades of economic autarky and cheap labor, meant that those who controlled international trade could earn large profits. ... Only they could undermine Maoist justifications for autarky and overcome political resistance to liberalization" (http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/china-joins-global-economy-part-one). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.229.76.147 (talk) 06:45, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have heard somewhere that the Austra-Hungary empire (and before that the Austrian empire) was to large extent (approx 90%) autarky, which seems to me considerable for the economy of that scale. Does anybody more about this and could we get some real data and some analysis of the impact of it, if it is true?
Ceplm (talk) 13:47, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'd argue with putting Fascism, State capitalism, Liberal internationalism under the "Right-wing" banner, and I'm sure there would be disagreement on others. Also, Nationalism & Isolationism aren't any less politically affiliated, but just don't happen to fall neatly on either side of the right/left, one dimensional economic/political model (or Democratic/Republican). I'm writing from a USA perspective; I'm not sure if right/left even carries the same meaning elsewhere. Does Wikipedia have some global ruling on political taxonomy? If not, suggest leaving the left/right terminology as a separate topic and within each subject page, and just list National autarky proponents/opponents. Deepfrieddough (talk) 22:54, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The GDR, as far as I know, confessed both in theory to trade within the Communist bloc (perhaps especially the USSR), and actually participated in it. Also, whether they saw it as a temporary measure not particularly liked or not, they also traded with the West to get the much-needed money in foreign currencies. (A joke from the time has a proud father of a new-born baby ask eagerly whether his baby has a handicap, at least a slight one. When the nurse says no, the baby is completely healthy, he cries: "But oh dear! After all, everything fully functioning goes off into export!")--2001:A61:20A3:4901:85BF:87DE:9777:96CD (talk) 13:47, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Anarchists are opposed to nationalism, so it makes no sense for them to be listed as supporting national autarky. http://www.infoshop.org/AnarchistFAQSectionD6 2001:268:C0C0:64C8:DCD9:1643:DA1F:2 (talk) 02:06, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There really should be a part about the current consensus, virtually no modern economists think Autarky leads to what you would call good outcomes. The only schools of thought that support protectionism are extreme fringe ones. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.74.158.114 (talk) 15:31, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Autarky. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:11, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Autarky. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:28, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]