[lit-ideas] Re: Comparing Empires and is the U.S. one
- From: Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 02:01:04 -0700 (PDT)
I thought that Marx made some such argument ?
O.K.
On Tuesday, April 15, 2014 10:31 AM, palma <palmaadriano@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
to my knowledge nobody made the point that "nations" are subject to historical
necessities to become communists or not.
is there an example available?
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 11:49 PM, Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Wikipedia says Carr was a “quasi-Marxist.” Marx preached an historical
determinism which may be where Carr got his, but a lot of the “the
US-is-an-Empire” talk came from that rather than from a showing that the US is
like Rome or the Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch or British Empires. It has become
for the modern Marxist/Leftist a pejorative term rather than a quest to
determine what it is precisely that comprises an Empire and whether the U.S.
fits.
>
>Since Marx we’ve had Francis Fukuyama building on Kojeve arguing that Hegel
>was right after all (and Marx was wrong). The end of history is Capitalism,
>or to use its modern expression, Liberal Democracy, and not Communism. The
>Leninistic “Imperialism is the highest form of Capitalism” argument therefore
>becomes otiose.
>
>Niall Ferguson, no Marxist, thinks the U.S. is an Empire but hasn’t produced a
>definition or an argument to substantiate that idea as far as I know. There
>is a sense in which the U.S. performs like the “World’s policeman” on
>occasion. And there was the handing off of the “world’s policeman’s baton”
>from Churchill to Eisenhower and the U.S. becoming committed in South East
>Asia somewhat as a result, but unfortunately not to attempt to rescue France’s
>chestnuts but to attempt to keep a domino from falling (in the then believed
>theory about the best way to battle Communism).
>
>Wilson, representing a majority view (IMO) supported the “four freedoms” at
>the end of WWI and did not approve of the French, British, and Italians desire
>to split up the after-WWI-pie but was outsmarted by them. The U.S. as the
>last-man-standing in regard to military and economic power after WWII enforced
>its prejudice against empires. The breakup of the British, Dutch and French
>empires after WWII was to some extent due to this U.S. prejudice. So I end up
>shaking my head at Ferguson’s arguments and setting his books aside (although
>I did complete a few).
>
>Someone in regard to India pointed out that Britain made an inconsistent
>empire in that it promoted the idea of “freedom.” Sooner or later a colony,
>as in the case of the 13 & India is going to see that inconsistency and revolt
>in order to become like Britain, free. Colonies, at the very least, seem to
>be one of the things an Empire needs to have in order to be called an Empire –
>at least so it seems to me.
>
>Does the U.S. have troops in Japan and Germany in order to exercise Imperial
>demands? That would be a bit hard to demonstrate because following in
>Britain’s footsteps it advocates freedom and could not get away with
>exercising a force that would counter that. China and others in Asia feared a
>resurgence of Japanese militarism; so the U.S. is saying, “look, we shall keep
>troops there. We shall make sure that doesn’t happen.” The same situation
>exists in Europe. Some still fear a German militaristic resurgence; so the
>U.S. is there to assure other European nations that it will not permit that to
>happen.
>
>If someone wants to argue that the U.S. is currently performing the role of
>“World’s policeman” I would not argue with that. Pat Buchanan and others have
>argued that we can’t afford to keep doing that, and here we may be entering H.
>P. Huntington’s realm. It should be the “core nation” from each
>“civilization” that does that and not just one nation for the whole world.
>
>In short there are some interesting things being written about world power and
>the future. Earlier Marxist-based ideas have for the most part been set aside
>in view of ideas more closely reflecting the modern world. Who today would
>argue that there is a historical-necessity at work that will force the world’s
>nations to become Communistic? And if someone did, who would pay attention to
>him?
>
>Lawrence
>
>From:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
>Behalf Of Omar Kusturica
>Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 11:35 AM
>To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Comparing Empires
>
>An aside to Lawrence, since he was mentioning Lenin's Imperialism as the
>Highest Stage of Capitalism: I have read it and I consider it an excellent
>essay, does that make me a Marxist ? I don't see myself as one. I do believe
>that Lenin was a very intelligent and educated man, whatever his moral and
>political faults were. (The same could not be said about Stalin.)
>
>O.K.
>On , Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>________________________________
>
--
palma, e TheKwini, KZN
palma
cell phone is 0762362391
*only
when in Europe*:
inst.
J. Nicod
29
rue d'Ulm
f-75005
paris france
Other related posts:
