This is true. But it is also, as it were, the designated Cop. Wood's argument (crudely condensed) is that (a) capitalism needs a state
^^^^ CB: Always has needed state_s_. The capitalist ruling class has needed a state from its beginning. This is not a new feature of capitalism, no ? ^^^^^^^ (b) a world state (or direct colonial rule) simply isn't possible ^^^^^ CB: Why not ? (smile) ^^^^ (c) hence each nation has the "responsibility" to maintain a state policy friendly to capitalism but ^^^^ CB: Afterall, we see what the Great Powers Nation-states did to the break out of socialist states in the 20th Century. More precisely, each nation is obligated under penalty of "endless war" waged against them if it doesn't maintain a state policy enforcing capitalism in its territory. ^^^^^ (d) nations are apt in one way or another not to fulfill this responsibility, or even to set themselves against it, ^^^^ CB: Apt due to capitalism's inherent oppression and exploitation of the working classes of the world, as the class struggle from the working class side breaks through in various nations in various time periods, and policies of resistance to capital can prevail to some degree in one nation, even without full world revolution (smile) ^^^^^^^ so (e) such a nation needs to be punished, bringing it back inside the global capitalist order, thus constituting a warning to other states tempted tos stray, and ^^^^^ CB: Pretty much ^^^^ (f) the United States is in effect the designated cop for such purposes. ^^^^ CB: Since WWII ^^^^^ The result she labels "endless war." ^^^^^ CB: The latest version ^^^^^ I think her analysis makes better sense of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as well as recent events in Haiti and Honduras than do traditional accounts of empire, however adequate such accounts were in their own periods. ^^^^ CB: The basics are largely the same. Main unique characteristic of this period is we are post the first efforts to build socialism, the biggest breakout by nation states from imperialist/Empire world dominance and colonialism. The current "emergences" from hegemony and dominance is not centered on and bulwarked by the Russian Revolution /Soviet Union. Bush the Father named it: The New World Order. ^^^^^ There was a symposium on her book several yars ago in Historical Materialism, with critiques by a number of authors, including David Harvey, and Wood's response to the crtiics. I think it important. Carrol ^^^^^^^ CB: No doubt _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
