[Fwd: On "Globalism"]

[Antid Oto]

REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl

Re: 'nationalistisch' globalisme. SRD vat het samen in de eerste zin
van deze post.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: On "Globalism"
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 11:43:54 -0800 (PST)
From: srd <srdiamond at gmail.com>
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Newsgroups: alt.politics.socialism.trotsky

"Globalism" is the drive of the bourgeoisie to resolve within the
imperialist framework the contradictions in capitalism expressed in
the limits of the nation state. Policies expressing "Globalism"
include the creation of the EU, NAFTA, and international treaties
purported to avert global warming. Globalist policies are as old as
imperialism, as is Leninist opposition: an early Globalist experiment
was the League of Nations. Notice that Lenin's hatred of the League of
Nations had nothing in common with the abstract denunciations of
"world government" featured by fascists and certain peasant-based ex-
Trotskyist tendencies.

Globalism is merely concerted imperialist thievery; some see a new
Globalist era rooted in the ascendancy of transnational corporations,
but the export of capital is a phenomenon distinct from the
international bourgeoisie's reactionary *political* program. The "anti-
Globalists," who, like the fascists, amalgamate the two do so by
imagining that export of capital and import of labor are driven by an
imperialist social vision of a new world order based on transnational
corporations, in denigration of the "nation state." The reality of
*capitalism* is that bourgeois states and large corporations both
pursue policies for their particular profit, rather than effectively
coordinating their efforts to implement a grand, reactionary social
vision. "Anti-Globalism" is ineradicably rooted in conspirativism,
which helps make it acceptable to both fascists and peasant-based
populists.

The imperialist bourgeoisie has always been divided between
"Globalists" and nationalists, going back to the League of Nations.
This division roughly corresponds to that between foreign-policy
liberals and conservatives, with the wrinkle that the neo-Con movement
has been called Globalist, despite being ultra-patriotic and go-it-
alone in international policy. "Globalism" as a tendency embracing
neoCons and Soros liberals both is an amalgam created by their
populist and fascist opponents. While Marxists needn't lose sleep over
clarifying the confusion to Bush/Cheney's or Soros's benefit, they
should avoid sharing the confusion.

Globalism, like all reactionary tendencies of imperialism, increase as
imperialism enters what may be a new period, characterized not
specifically by "Globalism" as by accelerating economic contraction. A
one-sided emphasis on "globalization" is an adaptation to populism or
worse.

srd

**********
Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
Het on-line archief is te vinden op: http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
**********