Doug Henwood wrote: > > Devine, James wrote: > > > >I'd say the Empire thesis has some life in it yet.< > > > >in 25 words or less, how would you summarize the "Empire thesis"? > > What's relevant here is that imperial power is far more dispersed and > polycentric than the old-fashioned Washington/Hollywood/Wall Street > rules the world models would have it. A major part of the Bush agenda > in Iraq was to show the world that the U.S. runs the show, and the > messy outcome is showing that it doesn't.
Not really. Empires that are strong enough can take a lot of messy outcomes and go merrily on the way. There are various potential weaknesses in u.s. hegemony but only potential. That hegemony will survive, even flourish, until it is militarily/politically driven from the mid-east and far-east and until a large and militant mass movement at home demands that it _acccept_ that foreign defeat. The USSR used to look favorably on its negative balance of payments. The whole world was sending it wealth. Until there is serious political resistance (backed by reasonable military force) from other nations, the u.s. balance of payments 'problem' should be regarded not as a "problem" but merely as an index of the amount of tribute it is collecting from its empire (and even more from its junior partners in that empire -- Japan & EU). Carrol > > That was more like 50 words, but it's still pretty short. > > Doug
