[lit-ideas] Fw: Re: hist deT
- From: Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 03:27:00 -0700 (PDT)
The analysis applies to the predominantly capitalist world created in the end
of World War I. It does not apply to Communist China, since it did not exist
yet.
O.K.
On Tuesday, April 15, 2014 12:09 PM, palma <palmaadriano@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
ten ain't chinese, ain't ussr, ain't us, interestingly it is not the us who
hasnot divided the world with anybody (condition n.5, the chian sea is not,
sahara is not, I doubt very much nigeria and siberia... so the analytic terms
applies to nothing, done that way analysis are really good
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Imperialism as Lenin uses it is an analytic term, and it is characterized by
five features:
>
>
>(1) the concentration of production and capital has developed to such a high
>stage
>that it has created monopolies which play a decisive role in economic life;
>(2) the
>merging of bank capital with industrial capital, and the creation on the basis
>of this
>“finance capital”, of a financial oligarchy; (3) the export of capital as
>distinguished
>from the export of commodities acquires exceptional importance; (4) the
>formation
>of international monopolist capitalist associations which share the world
>among
>themselves; and (5) the territorial division of the whole world among the
>biggest
>capitalist powers is completed.
>
>
>If something fits this description, it is imperialism, whatever it calls
>itself. If we are going to wait for a politico-economic system to extend its
>hand and introduce itself as 'imperialism' before we apply the term, we are
>going to have a long wait.
>
>
>O.K.
>On Tuesday, April 15, 2014 10:19 AM, palma <palmaadriano@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>what I find, culturally, perplexing is that while there is more and more
>logical space to doubt determinism in the real sciences, there are people who
>make bizarre claims about determinism about or "on" historical facts, where is
>no way even to identify the so called events (consider, preecisely,
>"imperialism": is it at works between the Han in China & the Tibetans? if so
>is that a phase of which capitalism? dalai Lama's parents'?; or else consider
>Afghanistan, who is imperial over what? the Ussr and the US over the same
>territory as phases of what?
>
>
>
>On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>wrote:
>
>It would be difficult to prove that Capitalism produced the two world wars.
>At the time of the First World War, Monarchies were instrumental. At the time
>of the second Fascism (being a system of National Socialism) was instrumental.
> Liberal Democracy, antithetical to both those systems, has been the last man
>standing, the only viable system remaining after the 20th century conflicts
>and Russian Communism collapsed in 1989.
>>
>>Fukuyama (whom I like to cite) hasn’t changed his mind since writing The End
>>of History and the Last Man. What he did object to was the activism of the
>>Neocons and wrote a book divorcing himself from them. A problem I have with
>>Fukuyama is that in supporting Kojeve and Hegel he too subscribes to a sort
>>of historical determinism, except his subscription is fairly mild and he does
>>seriously consider Nietzsche’s denouncing of the “last man” and the threat of
>>the occasional ubermensch.
>>
>>Lawrence
>>
>>From:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>>On Behalf Of Omar Kusturica
>>Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 3:11 PM
>>To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Comparing Empires and is the U.S. one
>>
>>As first, Lenin provided an excellent analysis of the capitalism of the late
>>19. and the early 20. century. Such a benign capitalism produced two world
>>wars, not mentioning its other merits.
>>
>>The essay does not contain historical predictions, other than the title
>>implies that 'the highest form of capitalism' should also be the last, to
>>Hegelians and Marxists. I'd hardly think that Kojeve's interpretations of
>>Hegel are more reliable than those that Marx and Lenin had.
>>
>>The Fukuyama whom you like to cite has changed his opinions considerably in
>>the meanwhile.
>>
>>Much of Lenin's essay remains relevant, to me.
>>
>>O.K.
>>On Monday, April 14, 2014 11:50 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:
>>
>>________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>>________________________________
>>
>>No virus found in this message.
>>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>Version: 2014.0.4569 / Virus Database: 3882/7344 - Release Date: 04/14/14
>>No virus found in this message.
>>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>Version: 2014.0.4569 / Virus Database: 3882/7344 - Release Date: 04/14/14
>
>
>
>
--
>
>palma, e TheKwini, KZN
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>palma
>
>cell phone is 0762362391
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>*only when in Europe*:
>inst. J. Nicod
>29 rue d'Ulm
>f-75005 paris france
>
>
>
>
--
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:
