Greetings Economists,
On Feb 21, 2009, at 5:51 AM, Carl Dassbach wrote:
Nonetheless, I can predict (with some certainty) that this crisis
will be weathered and while there may be changes in the world
economy, perhaps a growing competition for hegemony over the next 50
years and the rise of a new hegemon, there will not be any
fundamental transformation in the nature of the world economy.
Doyle;
I'm not defending Wallerstein's vision of the present crisis in the
system. What I find premature is to say things have settled out
enough to know much of what is likely to happen. Broadly speaking
capitalism went through WWII without dying out. So we know it can go
through crisis nicely. What I would rather see is some sort of
intelligent analysis of the present situation beyond waving a towel
like one were at a sporting event.
The hegemon seems wounded to me and draining of economic power. I see
no particular plan that could preserve the hegemon's position as
number one. And the crisis depth still remains an unknown therefore
how much unrest it will generate. Hence the day's of 'hegemon' seem
numbered. Nor is it clear another hegemon would arise like for
example China.
In particular the dollar it seems to me is likely to be contested. I
don't see how anyone can say definitely what will be true of the
dollar five years from now.
In light of these rather mundane observations on the U.S. why is it
particularly useful to claim capitalism is persistent? Why not better
analysis of the present conditions than go over giant size claims that
are not clear right now?
thanks,
Doyle Saylor
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
