Thanks, Lou. Interesting stuff -- I think Keen is right as regards the West
in the foreseeable future. I thought Daniel Singer was reaching a little in
"Whose Millennium" when he interpreted the French public sector strikes of
1995 as internationalist resistance, rather than the expression of a vested
interest protesting at its impending de-vestment. Nevertheless, if
globalisation really is just the latest form of US imperialism* then is
nationalistic or similar defensive resistance to that process necessarily
_not_ progressive? Folks seem not to have such a hard time designating it
progressive when it occurs in the less developed countries, but many are
quite reluctant to be so generous to the coalitions resisting globalism in
the industrialised countries. The debate on Scottish nationalism on the
Marxism list was a case in point. The state-as-a-contested-terrain is
entering a new era in which former colonial powers are themselves under
increasing subjection which places their welfare provisions in danger. This
threatens to delegitimise the regime of accumulation, given the messy
business of transition (see the European Union and the problems with the
single currency). Defenders of the gains made by welfare capitalism include
those who would not defend capitalism, but they will effectively be
defending those parts of the state from the encroaching suprastate. Part of
that defence will, inevitably, appeal to nationalistic sentiment. Without
some sort of Marxian input we know where that is likely to lead. I agree
with Leo Panitch that the state is far from a spent force -- on the
contrary, it is more integral than ever -- and so concur with Jim O'Connor
that the democratisation of the state is one of the most important, if not
the central, tasks facing all Leftists. It's a campaign of attrition, which
is why I second Jim Devine's regular reminders re grassroots organising. As
for political vehicles, these are going to be far from perfect (e.g.
Scottish Socialist Party). But I reckon any party with either or both 1)
reliance on large corporate donors; and 2) absence of reference to Marx is
not going to be among those vehicles. The best we can do for these is to
force them (or elements of them) leftward by formulating political
programmes and campaigning from the outside.
Sorry for the stream of consciousness,
Michael K.
*The view expressed by James Petras and Henry Veltmeyer in another exciting
new Zed Books title, "Globalization Unmasked: The New Face of Imperialism",
out this June.
