"ISMS" and "ATIONS" (WAS: Re: Forwarded from Jurriaan)
xxxxxxxxxx at xxxxxxxxx.xxx
Sun Jun 3 15:52:27 MDT 2001
> From: Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky <gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar>
> To: marxmail <marxism at lists.panix.com>
> Subject: "ISMS" and "ATIONS" (WAS: Re: Forwarded from Jurriaan)
> Date: Sunday, June 03, 2001 12:51 PM
> En relación a Re: Forwarded from Jurriaan,
> el 3 Jun 01, a las 8:58, Louis Proyect dijo:
> > >The only way to resolve the discussion is to say that globalisation IS
> > >imperialism. But if that is so, why not use the word imperialism ? The
> > > is that "imperialism" still has a radical political connotation, and
> > >"globalisation" has no such connotation at all.
Juriaan, I frankly don't think that we should spend so much time in
engaging in arcane discussions of whether "globalization" or "imperialism"
has different connotations. Such a distinction can be true theoretically,
but it can also obscure power relations if the term, globalization, is not
approached critically . Given the _reality_, what we need to realize is
that globalization (or globalism in Nestor's word) is a phase of
imperialism, and _capitalist globalization_ (in the sense of global
division of labor) is a substitute concept for imperialism.
Another point you have made is that theories of globalization have been
used to justify humanistic interventions in the third world.. Indeed, that
was _exactly_ the point I was making in saying that the usage of
globalization obscures the reality of the modern states system, that is,
imperialism. What we need is a _Marxist_ analysis of globalization that go
beyond _mainstream_ theories of globalization.
Xxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx
Department of Political Science
SUNY at Albany
Nelson A. Rockefeller College
135 Western Ave.; Milne 102
Albany, NY 12222
> Yes, I think this is an important observation.
> If we talked about "globalism" things would be different, since one
> could, a la Lenin, write about "globalism, the final stage of
> imperialism" and establish some distinguishing features of the world
> capitalist system after the late 70s, that is of imperialism once the
> post WWII bonanza waned for ever, and after the Berlin Wall fell _on
> both sides_ of the Cold War.
> But we speak of "globalizATION". While "ISMS" are by definition human
> products, an expression of the will of massive amounts of people in
> concrete social relationships, "ATIONS" are abstract phaenomena,
> natural events imposed on a society that cannot react (short of using
> the natural law in its own benefit: TINA is valid for globalization in
> the same way it is valid for gravity!)
> David Harvey remarked once that the history of that word,
> globalization, began with an ad of American Express, "the GLOBAL
> card". One should be aware of these origins, don't you think so?
> Néstor Miguel Gorojovsky
> gorojovsky at arnet.com.ar
More information about the Marxism