|
|
Post by dangeresque on Jul 25, 2007 22:14:30 GMT
What do you think the dominant trend in the world is? Here's two options I've come up with, please add your own or contribute your thoughts...
The US empire is in a decline. That's undeniable, even the Economist (a conservative brit journal that slavishly worships the USA) devoted a cover story to this subject, and admitted that the USA's ability to "extend it's influence" (or some such euphemism for imperialism) is in serious decline. It cannot contain or crush the growing left in Latin America, though it's tried. Its enemies such as Syria and Cuba are far less isolated, it has failed to curb Iran, now no one can deny that Iraq is out of control. Domestically there is more polarisation than there has been since the Depression, with a large and militant workers movement and a popular far rightist movement each taking lumps out of the ruling class and weakening it. The foremost advocates of imperialism, the neocons, are now openly despised by much of the media.
Is this decline the result of:
An Empire losing steam / facing too many enemies at the same time?
or
A symptom of capitalism approaching it's late stage and a terminal crisis?
So is it a crisis of one empire, or the economic system that gave rise to it?
|
|
|
|
Post by RedFlag32 on Jul 25, 2007 22:50:25 GMT
What do you think the dominant trend in the world is? Here's two options I've come up with, please add your own or contribute your thoughts... The US empire is in a decline. That's undeniable, even the Economist (a conservative brit journal that slavishly worships the USA) devoted a cover story to this subject, and admitted that the USA's ability to "extend it's influence" (or some such euphemism for imperialism) is in serious decline. It cannot contain or crush the growing left in Latin America, though it's tried. Its enemies such as Syria and Cuba are far less isolated, it has failed to curb Iran, now no one can deny that Iraq is out of control. Domestically there is more polarisation than there has been since the Depression, with a large and militant workers movement and a popular far rightist movement each taking lumps out of the ruling class and weakening it. The foremost advocates of imperialism, the neocons, are now openly despised by much of the media. Is this decline the result of: An Empire losing steam / facing too many enemies at the same time? or A symptom of capitalism approaching it's late stage and a terminal crisis? So is it a crisis of one empire, or the economic system that gave rise to it? Ive always considered neo-imperialism to be the next stage in capitalism, imperialism was capitalistisms way of advancing out to other markets so a new phaze in imperialism has to be an extention of capitalism. I see neo-imperialism and globalism as the same thing, its companies who are the invaders now not soldiers. I can definitely see a "next stage" situation occuring, and do believe we are living right in a very important time in history that will be documented. How excited we should get about this is up for debate. The American empire has always had its vietnams and always will, the vietnam war was deeply unpopular but it didnt stop the spread of war, we will inevitably go into Iran aswell so i dont know how thats going to pan out. I think the anti-war movement needs to be revolutionaised, no amount of picketing will change the world. The anti-war folk have to have an alternative where war wont occur, no point in banging on about no war if your willing to live in a system that needs countries and companies to invade others. I suppose you could say its the end of the american empire because after Iran who's left to fight? In saying that, the countries it did invade it failed miserably,so they might just keep going round in circles. Capitalism has to find new markets,and i can see it happeneing which is encouraging,globalis is the next phaze of capitalism,i think we can judge the state of capitalism by judging te state of globalism and neo-colonialism! Im not that up on the markets,maybe someone else has more of a clueon global companies and where they are heading next? |
|
|
|
Post by Stallit 2 de Halfo on Jul 25, 2007 22:54:21 GMT
Im not totally sure about what you mean, but I think the economic system comes firts.
The US engages in imperialist wars and interventions to suite the economy - so I think both would come hand in hand wouldnt they? - the economy requires greater imperialism while the resistance grows to match and defend itself against it.
The economy triggers greater imperialist actions while those at the recieving end grow, weakening the "empire"? - so they are inseperable?
|
|
|
|
Post by dangeresque on Jul 25, 2007 22:56:20 GMT
Redflag32: Next will be Iran, most likely. Not appease corporations I think but to attempt to maintain the ascendancy of the most powerful capitalist state, the USA. I think interimperalist rivalry will also be a likely cause of war - soemthing that hasn't been seen in decades. So you believe a defeat of the USA's imperalism could shock the global system into a potentially revolutionary situation? I would tend to agree strongly, what was that quote from Che? something like 'two, three, many vietnams!'  |
|
|
|
Post by dangeresque on Jul 25, 2007 22:57:39 GMT
Im not totally sure about what you mean, but I think the economic system comes firts. The US engages in imperialist wars and interventions to suite the economy - so I think both would come hand in hand wouldnt they? - the economy requires greater imperialism while the resistance grows to match and defend itself against it. The economy triggers greater imperialist actions while those at the recieving end grow, weakening the "empire"? - so they are inseperable? sorry if I wasn't clear - I'm asking if the decline of the USA is a result of declines in capitalism as a system, or issues specific to the USA (such as facing more rivals, ie the EU, a growing China). There's compelling evidence for both arguments... |
|
|
|
Post by RedFlag32 on Jul 25, 2007 22:58:56 GMT
[quote author=dangeresque board=general thread=1185401670 post=1185404180So you believe a defeat of the USA's imperalism could shock the global system into a potentially revolutionary situation? I would tend to agree strongly, what was that quote from Che? something like 'two, three, many vietnams!' [/quote] Well i believe a defeat for imperialism is a defeat for capitalism so yes id agree strongly. I think it would be good for us to define what exactly is imperialism in the 21st century? Ill set up a thread dedicated to that alone i think! |
|
|
|
Post by RedFlag32 on Jul 25, 2007 23:01:47 GMT
Im not totally sure about what you mean, but I think the economic system comes firts. The US engages in imperialist wars and interventions to suite the economy - so I think both would come hand in hand wouldnt they? - the economy requires greater imperialism while the resistance grows to match and defend itself against it. The economy triggers greater imperialist actions while those at the recieving end grow, weakening the "empire"? - so they are inseperable? sorry if I wasn't clear - I'm asking if the decline of the USA is a result of declines in capitalism as a system, or issues specific to the USA (such as facing more rivals, ie the EU, a growing China). There's compelling evidence for both arguments... I believe the rivalry coming from the EU and China is the interimperialist issue you were talking about,how do you see interimperialist wars being good for revolution? I always thought that during the two big wars that the class consciousness was wiped out untill they were over. In Ireland many joined the war effort an left its social and class alignments behind. |
|
|
|
Post by dangeresque on Jul 25, 2007 23:05:47 GMT
sorry if I wasn't clear - I'm asking if the decline of the USA is a result of declines in capitalism as a system, or issues specific to the USA (such as facing more rivals, ie the EU, a growing China). There's compelling evidence for both arguments... I believe the rivalry coming from the EU and China is the interimperialist issue you were talking about,how do you see interimperialist wars being good for revolution? I always thought that during the two big wars that the class consciousness was wiped out untill they were over. In Ireland many joined the war effort an left its social and class alignments behind. An interimperialist conflict is a possibility. Politically it already exists, for example Russia and the EU lost investments due to the invasion of Iraq, which is the basis for their opposition to that war. But that's just one possibility... |
|
|
|
Post by RedFlag32 on Jul 29, 2007 12:27:02 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by dangeresque on Jul 30, 2007 18:35:24 GMT
That entry's much better than the usual wikipedia page, riddled as they are with "wikialities" (such as "truth by consensus"  ). Indeed, that's an excellent response to the people that think Marxism is now outdated. According to Howard Zinn, Marx actually predicted the rise of a profit system that wouldn't be tied to the industrial methods of production, and it would be essentially limitless. |
|
|
|
Post by No One on Aug 1, 2007 23:27:50 GMT
i think its more so that the world has seen the US isnt as strong as it pretends to be, or maybe once was... and especially with the EU and China entering the scene on a new scale of competition, its obviously going to aid in the decline of the control of the market the US so desperately tries to hold on to... eventually the US will lose all control and china will surpass the US in strength and influence, (if they havent already.....)for better or for worse. once that happens i think the rest of the world will finally stand against the US when its obvious that they can no longer threaten or blackmail them into being subserviant to american wishes. this is one of the biggest reasons the US hasnt attacked iran yet, russia and china already said they would stand up against us if it happens, and that ALONE is a risk the US doesnt want, they know that the rest of the world will say "were sick of you running around like you own everthing for the past 60 plus years" and we will be completely isolated...
there is a big Far-Right movement in the states, and its quite sickening.. thats another topic completely tho...
as far as the large and militant workers movement........ there IS some, but i wouldnt say large, when you look at the scale of the american workers organizations... as a member of a great union i can say that there are definately alot of people that think like that, but the militant mentality isnt really talked about, its somthing that is known but never said really... maybe between comrades on the job or somthing, but not at union meetings or being advocated by the leadership in a somewhat public setting.. even if it was an extremely LARGE movement, my thoughts are that it couldnt be big enough. ;D its desperately needed.
if unions ran everything in the states things would be a million times better, but for all of modern us history, every administration has tried to break all organized labor. and succeeded in breaking ALL unions in certain industries. to brainwashed capitalist america, unions are a VERY BAD THING that pose a threat to their way of life, and they are all bastard commies!
|
|
).