> It's funny how close Brazil was to an eastern bloc country then.
> -Foreign computer designs could be copied, beacause their IP did not apply (Unitron Mac was a notable example - actually better than the original);
Where can I find more information about such Brazilian computer clone designs? (if necessary, I can also read such texts in Portuguese, even though English or German texts are much easier for me)
In the beginning of the 90's our economy opened and our then President cited our slow computers as one the main reasons for doing so (just PR talk, but it is interesting to note this)
The reason the IT policy failed in Brazil, IMHO, is because they did not do enough to spread knowledge and make the machines cheaper.
The UK had a marvelous project that put micros in every school (BBC Computer Literacy Project). You could see people use 8 bit micros in all sorts of applications (I remember a Master Compact kit being sold to handle magazine and newspaper subscriptions).
The Brazilian Sharp MSX (Hotbit) came out in 1985. It cost something like US$400. That same year, the Amiga 1000 came out. It was vastly superior, but it also cost 3 times as much. So I think the real failure was not putting to good use the technology Brazil had.
Unitron made Apple clones (I think the Apple II clones were licenced, but they ran into trouble when they tried to setup a joint venture for the Mac clone and decided to just copy it).
Gradiente and Sharp made MSX clones (they were licenced).
Perhaps, then, we should be paying attention to recent theoretical research on post-capitalist market societies, or even post-capitalist non-market societies. We should learn from our mistakes.
Disclaimer: I'm not well versed in this topic's finer points, but I have some idea of the current and historical trends within it.
I'm mostly talking about exploitation theory, and two main contenders are UE and CECP; by aiming to eliminate a certain kind of exploitation in society, that will form the basis for a future society. Both of these have their origins in classical Marxian exploitation theory and mathematical Marxism. For instance, John Roemer suggests a market economy but one which is heavily redistributionist in terms of the material assets people can have. Along more traditional Marxist lines, Veneziani and Yoshihara are proponents of UE exploitation theory.
There's a good, recent overview of exploitation theory here[0] and some information about this area of research (including but not limited to exploitation theory) published by Veneziani in a book review on the state of Analytical Marxism.[1]
To understand the context of exploitation, labour and value and how these suggest a critique of capitalism (and thus the formation post-capitalist society) I'd look at my comment here[2] and the likes of Peter Hudis and Thomas T. Sekine. Most of the authors are socialists (in the Marxist tradition) but there are a few in anarchism, market anarchism and Communalism, though I'm not aware of their research.
-Foreign computer designs could be copied, beacause their IP did not apply (Unitron Mac was a notable example - actually better than the original);
-Copies of foreign software were sold in stores;
-There wasn't much variety in terms os cars (4 brands and few models) or home appliances;
-Buying foreign currency legally was restricted.