This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
1 EMPIRE K
EMPIRE K INDEX
EMPIRE K INDEX....................................................................................................................... 1 SHELL ........................................................................................................................................... 3 SHELL ......................................................................................................................................... 3 SHELL ......................................................................................................................................... 5 SHELL ......................................................................................................................................... 7 UNIQUENESS OF THE EMPIRE ............................................................................................. 9 U – IMPERIALISM IS ADAPTED TO CAPITALISM ............................................................. 9 U – EMPIRE FRAGILE NOW ................................................................................................. 11 LINKS .......................................................................................................................................... 13 LINK - GENERIC ..................................................................................................................... 13 LINK – GENERIC/ECONOMY ............................................................................................... 14 LINK – THE STATE ................................................................................................................ 15 LINK – THE STATE ................................................................................................................ 17 LINK – BENIGN INTENTIONS .............................................................................................. 18 LINK – DEMOCRACY/HUMAN RIGHTS ............................................................................ 19 LINK - DEMOCRACY ............................................................................................................. 20 LINK – REDUCE PRESENCE ................................................................................................. 21 LINK – REDUCE TROOPS ..................................................................................................... 22 LINK – REDUCE TROOPS ..................................................................................................... 23 LINK – REDUCE TROOPS ..................................................................................................... 24 LINK – REDUCE TROOPS ..................................................................................................... 25 LINK - EXTINCTION .............................................................................................................. 26 LINK - EXTINCTION .............................................................................................................. 27 LINK – HEGEMONY ............................................................................................................... 28 LINK – HEGEMONY ............................................................................................................... 29 LINK - AFGHANISTAN .......................................................................................................... 30 Link – iran ................................................................................................................................. 31 Link - Japan ............................................................................................................................... 32 LINK - TERRORISM ............................................................................................................... 33 LINK - TERRORISM ............................................................................................................... 34 Link - Soft Power ...................................................................................................................... 35 LINK - OIL............................................................................................................................... 36 IMPACTS .................................................................................................................................... 37 IMPACT - BLOWBACK .......................................................................................................... 37 IMPACT - DEMOCRACY ....................................................................................................... 38 IMPACT - DEMOCRACY ....................................................................................................... 38 IMPACT – MILLIONS OF DEATHS ...................................................................................... 39 IMPACT - GENOCIDE ............................................................................................................ 40 IMPACT – NORTH/SOUTH GAP ........................................................................................... 41 IMPACT TO TERRORISM – NO V2L .................................................................................... 42 A2: EXISTENCE PRECEDES VALUE TO LIFE ................................................................... 43 COMPARATIVE IMPACT – VALUE TO LIFE O/W SURVIVAL ....................................... 44
J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa
2 EMPIRE K
ALTERNATIVES ....................................................................................................................... 45 Ontology Key ............................................................................................................................ 45 ALTERNATIVE - RESISTANCE ............................................................................................ 46 REJECTION SOLVES .............................................................................................................. 46 QUESTIONING SOLVES ........................................................................................................ 47 A2: INEVITABILITY ............................................................................................................... 48 2NC DISSENT - ROLE OF THE BALLOT OVERVIEW ...................................................... 49 2NC A2:........................................................................................................................................ 50 A2: INEVITABILITY ............................................................................................................... 50 A2: EMPIRE INEVITABLE ..................................................................................................... 51 A2: FRAMEWORK ................................................................................................................ 52 A2: FRAMEWORK .................................................................................................................. 53 A2: PERMUTATION................................................................................................................ 54 A2: permutation ......................................................................................................................... 55 A2: LINK TURNS – ―WE REDUCE TROOPS‖ ..................................................................... 56 A2: LINK TURN – ‗WE REDUCE TROOPS‘......................................................................... 57 A2: PREDICTIONS GOOD ...................................................................................................... 58 A2: PREDICTIONS - KURESAWA ........................................................................................ 59 A2: REALISM ........................................................................................................................... 60 A2: UTIL/COST BENEFIT RATIONALITY .......................................................................... 61 A2: OBAMA ISN‘T IMPERIALIST ........................................................................................ 62 A2: CAP GOOD IMPACT TURNS .......................................................................................... 63 A2: ONTOLOGY BAD............................................................................................................. 64 A2: PERKINs/HUMANISM GOOD ........................................................................................ 65 AFF ANSWERS .......................................................................................................................... 66 WESTERN IMPERIALISM GOOD ......................................................................................... 66 WESTERN IMPERIALISM GOOD ......................................................................................... 67 WESTERN IMPERIALISM GOOD ......................................................................................... 68 2AC PERMUTATION/DISAD TO ALT.................................................................................. 69 ANTI-IMPERIALISM FAILS .................................................................................................. 70 ANTI-IMPERIALISM FAILS .................................................................................................. 71 ALT FAILS – MCLEAN .......................................................................................................... 72 Cap Good - Prevents War .......................................................................................................... 74 Realism Good – SOLVES WAR / ALT FAILS ........................................................................ 75 A2: Spanos ................................................................................................................................ 76 A2: ONTOLOGY FIRST .......................................................................................................... 77 A2: ONTOLOGY FIRST .......................................................................................................... 78
J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa
3 EMPIRE K
We have entered the stage of the Pax Americana facilitated by an expanding militarism that assaults the environment and constantly creates new threats to intervene against. This infinite quest for good will inevitably destroy itself and possibly the globe along the way BOGGS 2005 [Carl, Professor of Social Sciences at National University in Los Angeles, Adjunct Professor at Antioch University in Los Angeles, Imperial Delusions: American Militarism and Endless War, isbn: 0742527727, p __ix-xi___]-AC
This book explores the resurgence of United States militarism in its multiple dimensions--historical, economic, political, cultural, globalas the imperial ethos becomes ever more deeply embedded in the very fabric of American life .
At the start of the twentyfirst century it seems appropriate to refer to the militarization of both U.S. foreign policy and American society as a whole. Whether or not the nation has become "addicted" to war (and preparation for war), there can be little doubt that warfare motifs, discourses, and priorities increasingly shape all phases of social life, impacting everything from language, media representations, and popular culture to the workplace, forms of consumption, and politics. War is the most
profitable area of corporate investment, marketed by public-relations firms, lobbies, political action committees (PACs), think tanks, and foundations, and glorified on TV, in video games, and in film .
The impulse toward militarism is embellished by the gun culture, local militias, gangs, and parts of the sports establishment. As an ideology, the contemporary merging of flag-waving patriotism, militarism, and imperial hubris furnishes American citizens with a powerful (if no doubt fleeting) sense of national unity and global purpose. Above all, militarism stands as an enabling mechanism of US. Empire, of an expanded Pax Americana-an awesome instrument at the disposal of American elites in their drive toward unchallenged world domination. There is nothing fundamentally novel about any of this, even as altered historical circumstances create new openings for US. global power; the
impetus toward colonial exploits through military force goes back to the earliest days of the republic. Since the turn of the last century the us. worldwide armed presence-on the seas and land, in the air, and now in outer space-can be said to have no historical parallels, a reality quite at odds with the torrents of propaganda affirming a benevolent, peaceful, democratic US. foreign policy. A guiding theme of this book is that US. history up to the present contains a peculiarly militaristic strand, a phenomenon increasingly visible since the end of World War II.
To speak of a "new militarism" thus hardly suggests a radical departure from long-standing patterns but rather an extension and deepening of those patterns, so that we arrive today at a more aggressive, globalizing definition of "Empire." As explored in the following pages, a revitalized US. imperialism and militarism flows from several interrelated factors: a growing mood of American exceptionalism in international affairs, the primacy of military force in U.S. policy, arrogation of the right to intervene around the world, the spread of xenophobic patriotism, further consolidation of the permanent war system. With the end of the cold war, and more dramatically since the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the result is an increasingly militant and arrogant US. foreign behavior marked by outright rejection of important global treaties, repeated violations of international law, disregard for the United Nations, elevated assaults on the natural environment, militarization of space, and flagrant acts of military intervention-all giving Pax Americana a refurbished mission. Beneath everything has congealed an ideological fundamentalism grounded in superpatriotism and a rigid neoliberalism in the service of corporate power. As the United States moves to reshape the geopolitical terrain of the world, with hundreds of military
bases in 130 countries added to hundreds of installations stretched across its own territorial confines, the vast majority of Americans refuse to admit their nation possesses anything resembling an Empire. Yet U.S. global expansion is far more ambitious than anything pursued or even
the "new militarism" is rooted in a "new imperialism" that aspires to nothing short of world domination, a project earlier outlined by its exuberant
imagined by previous imperial powers. It might be argued that proponents and given new life by the Bush II presidency, which has set out to remove all vestiges of ideological and material impediments to worldwide corporate power-by every means at its disposal.
It is hard to resist the conclusion that the United States, its strong fusion of national exceptionalism, patriotic chauvinism, and neoliberal
leaders see themselves as uniquely entitled to carry out warfare and imperial agendas simply owing to the country's status as the world's lone superpower and its preponderance of military force. and collapse of legitimacy. militarism encounters fewer limits in time and space as it becomes amorphous and endless.s. galvanized by the threat of far-flung enemies.s. We seem to have reached a point where u. brandishing technologically awesome military power and threatening planetary survival in the process. and conquest long associated with warfare ineVitably take its architects and practitioners into the dark side of human experience. and double standards . any more than could a To the extent the United States is determined to set itself above the rest of the world. has evolved into something of an outlaw. As at the height of the cold war. the trajectory of U. and finally social disintegration. the degradation OF those who embrace it. for an increase in both domestic and global power-a quest destined to bring the superpower to work against even its own interests. poverty. accelerated by global overreach.ety or harmony we desire. internal decay. it winds up subverting its own requirements for international stability and hegemony. While a feverish nationalism might sustain elite domestic legitimacy temporarily.s. As Chris Hedges writes in Mlar Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning: "War never creates the soci. imperial domination can possibly be worth any of the goals or ideals invoked as their political justification. its apparent need. rogue state--the kind of fearsome entity conjured up by its Own incessant propaganda. u. Celebrations of power. . duplicity. and inequality. United States-managed world economy that sows its own dysfunctions in the form of mounting chaos. civilized versus primitive-are locked in a battle to the death.ing costs and consequences of u.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 4 EMPIRE K fundamentalism fully in place. Militarism as a tool of global power ultimately leads to a jettisoning of fixed universal values. into a zone marked by unbridled fanaticism and destructive ventures requiring a culture of lies. the power structure embellishes an image of the globe where two apocalyptic forcesgood versus evil.s. it cannot secure the same kind of popular support internationally. and there is little reason to think that Pax Americana will be able to avoid the same fate. expansionism is thereby justified through its quest. the corruption of human purpose. violence. In the wake of 9/11 and the onset of Bush's war against terrorism. especially the harmony we briefly attain during wartime. Empires across history have disintegrated on the shoals of their boundless elite hubris."! Here the critical observer is entitled to ask whether the stagger.
the very idea of U. acceptable. repressed. human rights violations." indifference to the suffering of others. . forgotten-more easily yet where such acts are carried out by proxies.S. THE ACT OF WITHDRAWING TROOPS IS PART OF A PLOY OF NEW IMPERIALISM TO EXTEND ITS CONTROL AROUND THE GLOBE Mann 2003 [Michael. This condition is exacerbated by the phenomenon of technowar. Professor of Social Sciences at National University in Los Angeles. misshapen monster stumbling clumsily across the world. This can be understood as the result partly of civic ignorance. including war crimes. The result is a disturbed. which. once having completed military training. since World War II. The United States has become such a dominant world superpower that its crimes are more or less invisible. It expects they will be too divided to do this anyway. coerces and even sometimes invades foreign states. there is little question about the degree to which the horrible costs and consequences of American Empire have become largely routinized within both elite and popular consciousness. academia. This was the purpose of Donald Rumsfeld's division between the "old" and the "new" Europe when European opposition did surface in late 2002. They want only an indirect and informal Empire. Nor do they threaten the whole world. Given the postwar historical record. nor collective resistance. from the massive British to the tiny Belgian Empire. though one that threatens. The prosperous North of the world contains neither disorder. and especially acts of mass murder. has increasingly removed any sense of immediate personal involvement in warfare. partly of what Gilbert Achcar refers to as "narcissistic compassion. meaning that feelings of guilt. but instead it creates more disorder and violence. partly of collective denial. culpability for terrible atrocities. they appear as an integral. and I make comparisons with the Roman and with recent European Empires. Within their conquered terrains they were all far more powerful than the United States can be. is generally regarded as too far off the normal spectrum of discourse to be taken seriously. It means well. The American Empire will tum out to be a military giant. Imperial Delusions: American Militarism and Endless War. a Back-seat economic driver. It intends to spread order and benevolence. indeed predictable element of imperial power. All that the us requires is that the Northern states stick to their own affairs and not interfere in American imperial projects elsewhere. Long experience tells us that ordinary people. a political schizophrenic and an ideological phantom. and moral outrage that might be expected to accompany killing. improves them and then leaves. THE IMPERIALISM OF THE STATUS QUO HAS FACILITATED A COMPLETE NUMBNESS TO VIOLENCE THAT HAS CREATED A ROUTINZATION OF MASS MURDER BOGGS 2005 [Carl. Adjunct Professor at Antioch University in Los Angeles. that is. nor military rivals. are more easily sidestepped. Rarely a loser in war. and believes it can divide and rule among them. war crimes legacy has been its almost total absence from the public discourse: mass media. p ____1314_____ ]-AC My argument can be illustrated with a rather ghastly metaphor. p __187-188___]-AC One of the more tragic parts of the U. But the new imperialists do not want to rule permanently over foreign lands. British-born professor of Sociology at the UCLA and Visiting Research Professor at Queen's University Belfast Incoherent Empire. mtellectual life. isbn: 0742527727. politics. and crimes against humanity. the United States has never had to confront the grievances of those who have been wronged. 64 However understood . we are dealing here with nothing less than large-scale insensitivity to mass murder. shame. I further argue that the us has more uneven imperial powers than any of its historic predecessors. isbn: 1859845827.S. ADDITIONALLY.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 5 EMPIRE K SHELL THE AFFIRMATIVE PLAN SUSTAINS A CORRUPT MILITARISTIC GIANT THAT RECREATES ITS OWN VIOLENCE.
imperialism. jettisoned. erb. dropping bombs from thirty thousand feet. insofar as all initiative vanishes within the organizational apparatus and the culture supporting it. faceless. whether by firing missiles. logical. basically devoid of moral criteria.S. Koreans. clinical. Iraqi. take on the character of the ordinary." the regrettable problem of "collateral Words like "incursion" substitute for real armed attacks. technique. all human conduct becomes managerial. As on the frontier. chemical warfare.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 6 EMPIRE K can all too often calmly plan and implement the killing of vast numbers of unknown.P Actions viewed from outside this culture as heinous and criminal appear rather normal. Surveying U. mass killing may be understood as necessary. relocations. the torture and killing of prisoners-all sanctioned through an unwritten code of regular military operations. forces giving expression to racial supremacy. distant." and "self-inflicted" casualties. one can see that taken-for-granted barbari m takes many forms: the saturation bombing of civilian populations. part of the day-to-day routi~e~ of s. damage. and those who kill are merely following orders-and they too are usually shielded from psychological immediacy by the mechanism of technowar. between war criminals and the crimes they commit. defenseless human beings. Once the enemy is portrayed as a sinister beast and monster. Guatemalan peasants. part of a taken-for-granted world. free-fire zones. Ethical discourses are roundly silenced. fitting all acnvities . "civilian militias" for death squads. disappear from view.Into a bureaucratic structure ." Viewed accordingly. dehumanized as a worthless other. Within the culture of militarism. even praiseworthy within it. acceptable."66 Here bureaucratic jargon conveniently serves to obscure militarism and its victims with familiar references to the primacy of "national security. where guilt and culpability are routinely evaded. including the pain and suffering of victims. "body counts" for mass slaughter. War managers' ideology contains specialized military/technical discourses with their own epistemology. rendering the carnage technologically rational. large-scale massacres. and xenophobia converge with a cult of violence (like that discussed in chapter 4) to form an ideological cauldron where crimes of war may come to seem natural. Filipinos. or engaging in traditional ground combat (increasingly rare for the U. war crimes. shooting off long-distance artillery shells. innocent." the need for "surgical strikes. As Gibson writes in the context of Vietnam: "Technowar as a regime of mechanical power and knowledge posits the high-level command positions of the political and military bureaucracies as the legitimate sites of knowledge. subhuman. deserving of their fate and possibly even complicit in it: Native Americans. Within this universe the human targets of military action are regularly defined as barbaric. In technowar especially.S. individual emotional responses. impersonal. The very structure of language helps to establish a moral and political gulf between perpetrators and victims.imply obeying commands. In general those who plan do not kill. authorized and legitimated by political and military commands. a moral imperative to ensure human survival and save "civilization. Vietnamese. carrying out assigned tasks. military ). and planning. search-and-destroy massacres. Japanese. . then the assault becomes a matter of organization. Even the most ruthless. bloody actions have no villains.
" Instead. indeed. the migrants." These are the possibilities of e-mergence precipitated on a global scale by the thinning out or occasional breaking of the lines of force that. we are also compelled to appropriate the "eccentric" Vietnamese strategy of "unanswerability" that defeated America as a directive for thinking the positive emancipatory possibilities of the post. OUR STRATEGY FRUSTRATES THE LOGIC OF IMPERIALISM BY REFUSING TO BE ANSWERABLE TO AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM. as it were — that reversed the see-er/seen binary of Western imperialism and in so doing demolecuralized the more formidable invading army and reduced its otherwise invincible war machine to utter ineffectiveness . In so doing. exist "between domains. Symptomatically. the military strategy of the Vietnamese insurgents — its meaning undergoes a productive estrangement. And it was in some sense the recognition of this arrogant American intolerance of undecidability that the Vietnamese Other exploited to abort the goals of the cultural and political armies of a much more powerful United States. if only in a tentative way. In recognizing the indissoluble relationship between these two hitherto disparate Others . SPANOS 2000 [William. more specifically. domestication. between forms. and exilic energies.tan center/homeland. are paradoxically inherent in the unhomed. This effort to theorize an "eccentric" adversarial political strategy of unanswerability from the global demographic shifts incumbent on the fulfillment of the imperial project has. Lyotard. This disclosure of the Achilles' heel of the Western imperial project constitutes the second directive of the Vietnam War for the task of rethinking thinking in the American age of the world picture. THIS PRAXIS ENABLES US TO PLACE ONTOLOGICAL QUESTIONS ABOUT THE WORLD AS A PRIOR CONCERN TO THE AFF‘S DEMANDS THUS MAKING A RETHINKING OF IMPERIALISM POSSIBLE.colonial occasion. was produced by. by way of cultural familiarization. and the historyless Others of the imperial Occident who. in the postcolonial era. if not fully. has now shifted from the settled. like Salman Rushdie in his fiction. Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari (Thousand Plateaus). that is. and between languages. estranging. between homes. I have quoted a passage from Said's all-too-brief summation of his oppositional postcolonial project in chapter 2. of the vast and various population of people unhomed by the depredations of Western imperialism. is fact. we not only discover the hitherto overlooked connection between the spectral ontological Other precipitated by the fulfillment of the logical economy of Western metaphysics in the "Americanization" of the planet and the multitude of displaced political Others — the "nonexistent" beings — precipitated by the fulfillment (the coming to its "end") of the project of Western imperialism at large. however. if symptomatic. I am referring to the possibilities not only for refuge but for political resistance and emancipation that. among others. In reconstellating the Vietnamese strategy into the postcolonial context. according to Said. That strategy. energies . these Vietnamese insurgents resorted to a "barbarian" strategy. but the resonant suggestiveness precipitated by the reconstellation of the estranged political perspective he overdetermines into the ontological context I have inferred from the decentering and disarticulating guerrilla strategy of the nomadic Vietnamese insurgents warrants its retrieval at this culminating point of my argument:It is no exaggeration to say that liberation as an intellectual mission. which has been aptly called "guerrilla warfare" in the annals of Western military history.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 7 EMPIRE K SHELL OUR ALTERNATIVE IS TO DO NOTHING IN THE FACE OF THE AFFIRMATIVE‘S IMPERIAL STRATEGY. as it were — of the displaced persons. the colonizing (at-homing) imperatives of Occidental imperialism. for example) who overdetermined the decentering of the Occidental logos. America‘s Shadow. takes his point of departure in this theoretical initiative from his exilic experience as émigré — as an irreversibly "unhoused" Other whose difference is indissolubly related to. but by an invisible nomadic mobility — a "spectral" tactics. conscious of the implications of the interregnum for thinking. it will be recalled. established. decentered. refused to accommodate itself—to be "answerable"—to the European concept of warfare: the binary "frontal engagement" of opposing visible armies whose story would end in a "decisive victory. we forcibly dislocate the pervasive. Said. and domesticated dynamics of culture to its unhoused. and Theodor Adorno (Minima Moralia). Derrida. have historically bound the periphery to the metropoli. born in the resistance and opposition to the confinements and ravages of imperialism. They resisted invasion of their Asian homeland not by direct confrontation. already been inaugurated by Edward Said at the close of Culture and Imperialism. he invokes a theoretical motif that was fundamental to but inadequately thought by the early postmodernists (Heidegger. and dereifying mobility — the spectral political being. The genocidal violence perpetrated by the United States against the Vietnamese people and their land in the name of the "free world" not only exposed the European origins of the myth of American exceptionalism. for the articulation of a theory of resistance against the Pax Metaphysica that is simultaneously a practice of political resistance against the Pax Americana. p 197-202]-AC If. It also exposed the metaphysical principle of decidability informing this grand imperial narrative. disclosure of the specter out of the ontological matrix where it has been embedded in the discourse of poststructuralism and reconstellate it into the specific political history of the 1960s — particularly. and pacification. a motif that Said finds thought in some degree by Paul Virilio (L'Insecurite du territoire).
But if. this effort to think positively the nothing that the in the case of exceptionalist global discourse of America will have nothing to do with — this effort to get "a voice out of silence"18 — constitutes the supreme theme of this unhomed American writer's fiction. And it was this transformation of the debilitating. They are — and here Said announces the post-postmodern and -postcolonial project of the inter-regnum — "worth exploring. is the resonantly silent imperative of the interregnum.""Admittedly." "Adorno's general pattern. that is." as it were) — utterly confounds. as Pierre. as it does so many "progressive" postmodern or postcolonial thinkers. in its emphasis on survival. imprisonment. to invoke Adorno's language. And it no doubt will be criticized by those nation-oriented American intellectuals to whom it is addressed as "traveling theory. especially for American intellectuals of the Left. strange. Ishmael's errant narrative — its endlessly differentiating and deferring language — comes to be understood not simply as an alternative to the "unerring" discourse of the dominant American culture. a stridently vocal Ahabian saying that reifies the unnameable whiteness of being in order to make it "practically assailable. for example.13 This appeal to contemporary American intellectuals to think the nomadic political émigré who haunts the post–Cold War the world. passivizing and silencing. describing it in a language unavailable to those it has already subdued. The Confidence-Man. and whose consciousness is that of the intellectual and artist in exile. For this American writer's testimony not only anticipates in a fundamental way the essence of the American intervention in Vietnam — the essentially imperial ontological/cultural origins and character of its Adamic errand in the Vietnamese wilderness. to underscore its spectral ec-centricity. original. annulled. From this perspective then all things are indeed counter. 'the consciousness industry. let me finally invoke the testimony of an American writer — one to whom Said often refers. of what. it is possible. Thus also in Moby-Dick. as we know. above all. Why? 'Because anything that is not reified. population transfer. and between languages. I am referring to the radically exilic witness of Herman Melville. has more in common with Heidegger's and the European poststructuralists' than it has with that of the American intellectuals who are "against theory" because it is foreign to American culture.. insofar as the irresistible dominants in the culture are concerned.Having thematized the estrangement latent in the exilic condition of the emigre — the uncanny ability to see what from the point of view of the imperial discourse of the dominant culture is otherwise invisible — Said goes on to invoke the exemplary migrant discourse of the exiled German intellectual Theodor Adorno: " 'The past life of emigres is. subtitled Reflections from a Damaged Life. and. to regard the intellectual as first distilling then articulating the predicaments that disfigure modernity — mass deportation." is decisively pertinent to the occasion of the Vietnam War and its aftermath. in fact. to consign its spectral Otherness to "mere background" in its metanarrative — which is to say. is consigned to mere 'background. derails. to reiterate ." his maximalist "white" or "unnaming" saying also comes to be understood as the most effective means of rendering impotent the positive globally oriented power that proceeds from a totalizing "monomaniacal" naming. effects of reification that enabled this "damaged" Third World country— precisely by way of its spectral invisibility — to disable the otherwise irrefragable operations of reification and thus to defeat the most powerful nation in the history of To think the spectral as the menacing precipitate of the indissoluble relationship between the Pax Metaphysica and the Pax Americana: this. Israel Potter. and forced immigration. ceases to exist' or.. as he says later." But it does not blind him.' There is then not just the negative advantage of refuge in the emigre's eccentricity. like Adorno's. one need not.' says Adorno in Minima Moralia. Melville's American project.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 8 EMPIRE K whose incarnation today is the migrant. not the "reformist" initiative of those liberals like Sacvan Bercovitch and Richard Rorty whose oppositional discourse continues to be answerable to the imperial language informed by the idea of America. "is what in another place he calls the 'administered world' or. of the adversarial strategy of "refusal" — of spectral "unanswerability" — that. be quite as pessimistic as Adorno and Said about the role of the intellectual in the global post–Cold War period I have called the interregnum.' " In the Heideggerian/Derridian rhetoric I have emphasized in my effort to think the implications of ontological imperialism. the terms of his global elaboration of these postcolonial possibilities are reconstellated into the occasion of the struggle of the Vietnamese people against American imperialism in the 1960s.. and neutralizes its "unerring" and vaunted practical efficacy. to "the virtues or possibilities" of this spectral marginalization. cannot be counted and measured." he writes. I think. as I have shown elsewhere. at least on this count. as the resonant doubleness of the language I have italicized amply warrants." a negational or antinarrative strategy that was deliberately intended to call the metaphysically ordained uni-directionality of America's exceptionalist imperial project into question. his alternative lacks the force of a truly positive hope. the political figure between domains. to silent invisibility before the panoptic imperial gaze—into a powerful polyvalent de-structive and e-mancipatory (projective) weapon. 19 . collective dispossession. disintegrated both the cultural narrative and the decisive end-oriented imperial practice this narrative was designed to enable. I have called his "errant art. spare. the émigré becomes the spectral Abgeschiedene in the "realm of the Between" who haunts the Being of the imperial culture that has reduced him/her to nonbeing. between forms. it was precisely the Vietnamese's exploitation of the very ontological conditions of their enforced confinement by a formidable imperial culture that estranged that colonized space and." For. the Scrivener. the possibilities for this "freedom from exchange" — this "last refuge" from the globalization of late capitalism — that Said proffers as an alternative to the existing oppositional discourses are. as all these postmetaphysical European theorists as well as Said imply. but only in passing — whose work at large."17 Indeed. is more than any other adequate to the task of "deterring" the global pretensions of "America" in the post–Cold War era. and Billy Budd make manifest. It also constitutes a prolepsis of the essence of the Vietnamese resistance and.12 New World Order simultaneously with the ontological specter that postmetaphysical European theorists" have thematized as the paradoxical consequence of the fulfillment of the logical economy of Western philosophy is an appeal to think America globally. in so doing. Said rightly acknowledges "the disabling aspects of this fate. without at the same time succumbing to "the rankest Panglossian dishonesty. From this perspective also. there is also the positive benefit of challenging the system." the importation of a foreign interpretive discourse into a historically specifically American context's Lest this vestigial American exceptionalist conclusion be drawn." this ghostly preterite's resonant silence — his refusal to respond in kind to the reifying and reified "premises" of American Wall Street logic (to be "counted and measured" by "the administered world. Thus. the minima moralia of a damaged political life. As Bartleby's minimalist "I prefer not to. And while it would be the rankest Panglossian dishonesty to say that the bravura performances of the intellectual exile and the miseries of the displaced person or refugee are the same. between homes. The powerless Vietnamese masterfully transformed the United States's arrogant and clamorous strategy to reduce the unaccountable and immeasurable Other to nonexistent status or. one can see "the common consort dancing together" contrapuntally. in "Bartleby.
S. these rejections appear to achieve a clever sleight-of-hand and reveal Harvey's wariness of an either/or logic. and Spaces of Capital (2001). global affairs. Consequently." The basic assertion is that if the United States is the new imperialism.S. The New Imperialism. TO UNDERSTAND NEW IMPERIALISM WE MUST ADDRESS THE ONTOLOGICAL QUESTION OF BOTH Borst 2006 Allan G. ]-AC The book's identity takes its shape and its major contributions are made once Harvey establishes his concept of "capitalist imperialism. Review of: David Harvey. Initially. "Capitalist imperialism" is not about capitalism or the state setting the imperial agenda. or the Economic Logic of Late Postmodernism 2006 PMC 16. Oxford: Oxford UP. But Harvey overtly rejects claims found in other globalization scholarship that suggest that capitalism is the mere handmaiden of U. Harvey considers the neo-liberal U. That Harvey identifies the United States as the centrifuge of globalization is not surprising. especially The Limits to Capital (1982). 2003. Harvey claims that most discussions of capitalism and state hegemony perform oversimplified misreadings of the global order. and military ends) and "the molecular processes of capital accumulation in space and time" (imperialism as a diffuse politicaleconomic process in space and time in which command over and use of capital takes primacy). Employing the mix of geography and Marxist criticism that he calls "historical-geographical materialism" (1). These often contradictory.. Harvey's book suggests that what the United States has been doing around the globe should be subordinated to how these military. then this imperialism is in turn a specifically capitalist one.S. usually through military intervention and then capitalism follows with a stabilizing marketplace as the supposed seed of a . THE QUESTION OF THE STATE OR CAPITALISM IS NOT SPECIFIC ENOUGH TO ADDRESS THIS DETAILED LOGIC. the new imperialism epitomizes Harvey's long-developing thesis that adjoins a capitalist state apparatus with the ideological and geographical construction of space and time.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 9 EMPIRE K UNIQUENESS OF THE EMPIRE U – IMPERIALISM IS ADAPTED TO CAPITALISM IMPERIALISM IS NOW ADAPTED TO A SPECIFIC CAPITALIST LOGIC. nor is the association of the United States with an empire or imperial power. Some popular versions of the happy alliance claim argue that the state makes an initial foray into a new region. and economic maneuvers have been and continue to be made if we are to understand the "new imperialism. economic. Instead. political. (26) This complex definition clearly echoes the claims of Harvey's earlier books. Department of English University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign The New Imperialism. The Condition of Postmodernity. empire to be a product of capitalism and the state simultaneously vying for control. state power or vice versa." While Harvey acknowledges the widely reported examples of Halliburton and other corporations directly interacting with and profiting from U. always dialectical impulses and motivations that push the state or the capitalist market toward one agenda or another are as crucial to Harvey's argument as they are problematic for global stability. he asserts that a happy and cooperative alliance between power-hungry politicians and profiteering capitalists does not exist as it appears. this new imperialism marks a contradictory fusion of "the politics of state and empire" (imperialism as a distinctively political project on the part of actors whose power is based in command of a territory and a capacity to mobilize its human and natural resources towards political. According to Harvey's diagnosis of current global trends.
Yet it is also undeniable that the two logics intertwine in complex and sometimes contradictory ways. . The literature on imperialism and empire too often assumes an easy accord between them: that the political-economic processes are guided by the strategies of state and empire and that states and empires always operate out of capitalistic motivations.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 10 EMPIRE K nascent democracy. While these scenarios dominate much of the thinking about globalization and empire. treaties. Harvey argues that they also overlook the "outright antagonism" (29) between the state and capitalism: The fundamental point is to see the territorial and the capitalist logics of power as distinct from each other. and other mechanisms such as the World Bank or WTO. thus preserving the profitable new market. (29) In short. This inherent instability always threatens to transform the state and capitalism into their own gravediggers. Harvey highlights the overlooked fact that the alliance between politicians and capitalists manages a balance of state power and capitalism that is always already unstable. A widely accepted alternative happy alliance theory contends that capitalism opens new markets first and then opens a door for the state through trade agreements.
As for climate change. when things go wrong in a complex system. of complex systems. A small input to such a system can produce huge. Oxford University. MA. Will there be a small fire or a huge one? It is nearly impossible to predict.at times almost stationary but also capable of accelerating suddenly. the Soviet imperium in central and Eastern Europe . soldiers to Afghanistan. in which the unit of account is months. As such. high-impact historical moments. not years. it is helpful to examine how natural scientists use the concept.The most recent and familiar example of precipitous decline is the collapse of the Soviet Union.either a hereditary emperor or an elected president -. and sometimes the complete breakdowns.Any large-scale political unit is a complex system.S. but the size of the breakdown is unknown. which allows them to construct complex hills and nests. revolutions. But there comes a moment when complex systems "go critical. made up of a very large number of interacting components that are asymmetrically organized. William Ziegler Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School. a forest before a fire is in a state of "selforganized criticality": It is teetering on the verge of a breakdown. These threats seem very remote compared with the time frame for the deployment of U. http://articles. or the fractal geometry of water molecules as they form intricate snowflakes. often dating back decades. Stanford University. stockpile.latimes. it was only the high oil prices of the 1970s that "averted Armageddon. Such systems can appear to operate quite stably for some time.. constantly adapting. the challenges that face the United States are often represented as slowburning."In reality. they seem to be in equilibrium but are. financial crashes and imperial collapses. like a sports car? What if collapse does not arrive over a number of centuries but comes suddenly. But historians often misunderstand complexity in decoding these events. they represent perturbations.but in practice the power of any individual ruler is a function of the network of economic.Laurence A." A very small trigger can set off a "phase transition" from a benign equilibrium to a crisis -. a relatively minor shock can cause a disproportionate disruption." But this did not seem to be the case at the time.which is driving up the ratio of retirees to workers -. had been tilting in the Soviets' favor for most of the previous 20 years.To understand complexity. They are trained to explain calamity in terms of long-term causes. which means that traditional methods of generalizing through observation are of little use. Tisch Professor of History at Harvard University. S. They operate somewhere between order and disorder.such as wars.including the tendency to move from stability to instability quite suddenly. the day of reckoning could be as much as a century away. Empire is fragile now and the Affirmative plan solves for NONE of the reasons why Ferguson ‘10 (Niall Ferguson.Yet. less than five years after Mikhail Gorbachev took power. The Soviet nuclear arsenal was larger than the U. To use the jargon of modern physics. the fragile empire. D. as the historian and political scientist Stephen Kotkin has argued. Human intelligence itself is a complex system. Thus. And governments in what was then called the Third World. not American stagnation that will make the gross domestic product of the People's Republic larger than that of the United States by 2027. It is the inexorable growth of China's economy. Perhaps. They are the scholars who specialize in the study of "fat tail" events -. ―America.‖ Los Angeles Times.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 11 EMPIRE K U – EMPIRE FRAGILE NOW U. for example. most of the fat-tail phenomena that historians study are not the climaxes of prolonged and deterministic story lines. historians have traced all kinds of rot within the Soviet system back to the Brezhnev era and beyond. The key point is that in such systems.Phil. which means their construction more resembles a termite hill than an Egyptian pyramid. instead. in fact.Not long after such crises happen.what scientists call "the amplifier effect. like a thief in the night? Great powers are complex systems. and a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution. Senior Research Fellow at Jesus College. empires exhibit many of the characteristics of other complex adaptive systems -.the low-frequency.All these complex systems share certain characteristics.not bad policy that condemns the public finances of the United States to sink deeper into the red. It is the steady march of demographics -.There is no such thing as a typical or average forest fire. the ones that are by definition outside the norm and that therefore inhabit the "tails" of probability distributions -. the scale of disruption is nearly impossible to anticipate. Most great empires have a nominal central authority -. social and political relations over which he or she presides.But what if history is not cyclical and slow-moving but arrhythmic -. This is what Nassim Taleb rightly condemned in "The Black Swan" as "the narrative fallacy. historians arrive on the scene. a product of the interaction of billions of neurons in the central nervous system. often unanticipated changes -." Causal relationships are often nonlinear.com/2010/feb/28/opinion/la-oeferguson28-2010feb28/4) In the same way.a single grain of sand causes a whole pile to collapse.S. Think of the spontaneous organization of termites. much less decades. from Vietnam to Nicaragua. With the benefit of hindsight.
the role of perception is just as crucial. Bond yields can shoot up if expectations change about future government solvency. the complex system of the global economy flipped from boom to bust -.Washington. you have been warned. And then.Neither interest rates at zero nor fiscal stimulus can achieve a sustainable recovery if people in the United States and abroad collectively decide.S. overnight. empires behave like all complex adaptive systems. What happened 20 years ago is a reminder that empires do not in fact appear. The next phase of the current crisis may begin when the public begins to reassess the credibility of the radical monetary and fiscal steps that were taken in response.it is a precipitous and unexpected fall that should most concern policymakers and citizens. they collapse.These numbers are bad. the biggest since World War II. Rather. strength on their own.If empires are complex systems that sooner or later succumb to sudden and catastrophic malfunctions. followed by the Soviet Union itself in 1991. Second.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 12 EMPIRE K had fallen apart.Ask Russia too. rise. it is not the material underpinnings of power that really matter but expectations about future power. most imperial falls are associated with fiscal crises. thereby blowing huge holes in the business models of thousands of highly leveraged financial institutions. The fiscal numbers cited above cannot erode U. . intensifying an already bad fiscal crisis by driving up the cost of interest payments on new debt. Just ask Greece.5 trillion -. In imperial crises. rather than gently declining. debating the stages of decline may be a waste of time -. They function in apparent equilibrium for some unknowable period. quite abruptly. it was the one founded by Lenin.about 11% of GDP.all because a bunch of Americans started to default on their subprime mortgages. If ever an empire fell off a cliff. that such measures will ultimately lead to much higher inflation rates or outright default. Alarm bells should therefore be ringing very loudly indeed as the United States contemplates a deficit for 2010 of more than $1. decline and fall according to some recurrent and predictable life cycle.Over the last three years. but in the realm of political entities. reign. Fighting a losing battle in the mountains of the Hindu Kush has long been a harbinger of imperial fall. It is historians who retrospectively portray the process of imperial dissolution as slow-acting. but they can work to weaken a long-assumed faith in the United States' ability to weather any crisis. what are the implications for the United States today? First.
p ___1-2______ ]-AC Bush the Elder offered a vision of "enduring peace. This was an optimistic and apparently multilateral vision of world order. first envisioned as theory. Allies. Iraq. This is a unilateralist and militanst vision of how to overcome world disorder.san:e breath as the WTO and NATO. Iran or the Southern Philippines are ad hoc or unconnected. The United Nations is mentioned only 1ll th~ . preemptively and on its own.ielders of weapons of ~a~s destruction. land-mines. but together with allies and through the United Nations." to be achieved by US leadership. Do not think that US policy toward Kyoto. British-born professor of Sociology at the UCLA and Visiting Research Professor at Queen's University Belfast Incoherent Empire. . Faced with "hostile acts. They ate all part of the grand strategy for a global American Empire." he said the US would act militarily. then after 9-II becoming reality. Bush the Younger was much more pessimistic. The speech did not mention any future military action by the US. He called for "perpetual vigilance" against terrorists and w. isbn: 1859845827. he suggested.GENERIC All actions taken by the military are connected by the grander strategies of the empire Mann 2003 [Michael. only ad hoc and temporary. It is the new imperialism. The world should know that the present United States government embraces the new imperialism. are. Star Wars.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 13 EMPIRE K LINKS LINK .
S. controls the world economy it will be able to shape the world Callinicos ‗05 (Alex Callinicos. by sustaining the system of economic compulsions. But. Ph. First. are much more constrained in their actions than Panitch and Gindin are prepared to concede. Panitch and Gindin are mistaken both in holding to an over-politicised theory of crisis and in asserting that global capitalism in general.org) In my view. and. the system of property (and propertylessness) and the operation of markets. I don‘t have the time or space to argue this here: Brenner has done so elsewhere in a response to a paper by one of Panitch and Gindin‘s co-thinkers. Trotskyist political theorist and Director of the Centre for European Studies at King's College London. but more indirectly. If these arguments are correct. Even when direct force is applied in the struggle between classes . judicial . On the contrary. the implications are very serious for Here it would be useful to compare their work with that of Harvey. 2005. in any case. isj. capitalism certainly does not rule out more traditional forms of coercive colonization. isbn: 1859845029. The difficulty. and the US in particular. assertions. the development of economic imperatives powerful enough to replace older forms of direct rule has taken a very long time. who in The New Imperialism seeks to integrate the geopolitical strategy of the US under George W Bush with the continuing effects of what Brenner calls ‗the long downturn‘ (indeed. capitalist imperialism even in its most mature form requires extra-economic support. But if tendencies to boom and crisis are the consequence of structural realities— in particular. more particularly.15 The work of Brenner.D Political Science from UCLA. Their narrative of post-war capitalism gives primacy to a single actor—the American state—that is able to shape and then reshape the world as its informal empire relatively unconstrained—both because of its power relative to other actors and because of the power of states and capitalist classes collectively to determine the fate of the world economy. the US included. needless to say.political. the history of capitalism is. or between imperial and subordinate states. Extra-economic force is clearly essential to the maintenance of economic coercion itself. in capitalist imperialism as in capitalist class domination. Yet this certainly does not mean that capitalist imperialism can dispense with extraeconomic force. ―Imperialism and Global Political Economy‖. as distinct from direct 'extraeconomic' . is that the role of extra-economic force. have overcome the crisis of profitability that developed in the 1970s. October 17. a very long and bloody story of conquest and colonial oppression. again. Harvey and other Marxist political economists such as Gérard Duménil and Fred Moseley provides plentiful evidence to refute Panitch and Gindin‘s Panitch and Gindin. military. Empire of Capital. coming to fruition only in the twentieth century. Harvey‘s major theorisation of Marxist political economy in The Limits to Capital  already concluded with a discussion of contemporary inter-imperialist rivalries).J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 14 EMPIRE K LINK – GENERIC/ECONOMY The question is imperialism is no longer just about occupation but the role our actions play in economic and extra-economic coercion which is the new avenue for sustaining imperial control and interventions WOOD 2003 [Ellen. p _4-5___]-AC What makes class domination or imperialism specifically capitalist is the predominance of economic. is opaque. then these states.as when police arrest strikers _ the If U. because in general it operates not by intervening directly in the relation between capital and labour. relatively decentralised and anarchic competition among capitals—that are not easily amenable to collective interventions even by the most powerful capitalist states.coercion. .
this has made them even more vulnerable to the demands of imperial capital.D Political Science from UCLA. no less than for very local enterprises. such as extended families and village communities. and it is. the state that has created the conditions enabling global capital to survive and to navigate the world. have been under pressure to shift at least some of these functions to the state. Even while labour movements and forces on the left have been in retreat. Empire of Capital. too. still provides the indispensable conditions of accumulation for global capital. than in domestic operations. On the international plane. both in the locale of their home base and elsewhere in their 'multinational' network. it is inconceivable that those operations would long survive the destruction of the local state. with so-called social democratic governments joining in the neoliberal assault. p 139-141]-AC Just as the state is far from powerless. But.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 15 EMPIRE K LINK – THE STATE The state is a crucial point of control for capitalist expansion that fosters the new forms of imperialism WOOD 2003 [Ellen. let alone over globalisation'. it cannot even be argued that global capital has been able to dispense with the social functions performed by nation states since the early days of capitalism. isbn: 1859845029. The state. for many observers.though. Ph. however inadequately. in contrast to older forms of colonial empire. It would not be too much to say that the state is the only non-economic institution truly indispensable to capital. if anything." These enterprises 'have very little control over their own international operations. Oppositional movements must struggle constantly to maintain anything close to decent social provision. multinational corporations are far from allpowerful. in both imperial and subordinate economies. Any success such companies have had in the global economy has depended on the indispensable support of the state. is one of capitalism's many insoluble contradictions. ironically. The new imperialism. loans and aid. which has further undermined traditional communities and social networks. as being necessarily a drag on capital accumulation. in the final analysis. and that profits tend to be lower. The very fact that . made this state function more rather than less necessary to the preservation of the capitalist system. as privatization of public services has become a condition of investment. It simply means that its hostility to social programmes. and. has. developing countries that may in the past have been able to rely more on traditional supports. while costs are higher. Scrutiny of corporate operations is likely to reveal that 'multinational enterprises are not particularly good at managing their international operations'. Globalization has certainly been marked by a withdrawal of the state from its social welfare and ameliorative functions. this has perhaps more than anything else created an impression of the state's decline. at least a minimal 'safety net' of social provision has proved to be an essential condition of economic success and social stability in advanced capitalist countries. as the process of 'development' and the commodification of life have destroyed or weakened old social networks . for all the attacks on the welfare state launched by successive neoliberal governments. depends more than ever on a system of multiple and more or less sovereign national states. the state continues to be vital. let alone prosper. This does not mean that capital will ever willingly encourage social provision. and perhaps even welcoming the removal of obstacles placed in its way by organizations that give subordinate economies some voice. While we can imagine capital continuing its daily operations if the WTO were destroyed. without a state that to some extent. But it is hard to see how any capitalist economy can long survive. At the same time. balances the economic and social disruptions caused by the capitalist market and class exploitation. Globalization.
structured in a complex relation of domination and subordination. Nor does the lack of correspondence between global economy and national states simply represent some kind of time-lag in political development. The political form of globalization is not a global state or global sovereignty. predictability.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 16 EMPIRE K 'globalization' has extended capital's purely economic powers far beyond the range of any single nation state means that global capital requires many nation states to perform the administrative and coercive functions that sustain the system of property and provide the kind of day-today regularity. The world today is more than ever a world of nation states. The very essence of globalization is a global economy administered by a global system of multiple states and local sovereignties. No conceivable form of 'global governance' could provide the kind of daily order or the conditions of accumulation that capital requires. . and legal order that capitalism needs more than any other social form.
This means that the old capitalist division of labour between capital and state. on a system of local states to manage the economy. the long-established need to sustain the 'military-industrial complex'. isbn: 1859845029.D Political Science from UCLA. the US may be finding that empire creates its own territorial imperative. there may be direct intervention to bring about 'regime change'. the main purpose of the war in Afghanistan. In other cases. not less. or what has been called the 'demonstration effect'. In yet other cases. but a far more wide-ranging domestic agenda. p _166-8]-AC Yet whatever specific objectives US wars may have. There is. and the military doctrine of the Bush regime is an attempt to fill the gap. pour encourager les autres." In all cases . which seemed unattainable before September 11. requires a complex strategy and a variety of military functions. An endless state of war can serve many other domestic purposes too . between economic and political power. There is nothing like a state of war to consolidate domestic rule.tors and exploitable economies. why massive military action is anything but a last resort. we are already seeing something like a return to an earlier imperialism. not less. Such purposes help to explain why the US wields such disproportionate military power. The consequence of a globalized economy has been that capital depends more. the larger purpose of the perpetual state of war goes beyond all this: to shape the political environment in a global system of multiple states. when commercial imperialism gave way to direct imperial rule. the new endless war is vital to an economy so dependent on military production. Empire of Capital. the object of military force is indeed exemplary terror. But. Even the threat of war in Iraq was timed to influence Congressional elections. and why the connection between means and ends in these military ventures is typically so tenuous. At the same time. especially in the advanced capitalist states.as the Cold War also did. This war without end in purpose or time belongs to an endless empire without boundaries or even territory. involved in organizing economic circuits. the political environment is shaped indirectly. which includes not just 'evil' states with 'weapons of mass destruction' but also friendly competi. with the fairly explicit intention of restructuring the region even more directly in the interests of US capital. designed to spread fear throughout the region and beyond. why there has developed a pattern of resort to military action by the US in situations ill-suited to military solutions. again. Yet this is an empire that must be administered by institutions and powers which do indeed have territorial boundaries. Just as the state of war is intended to create the right political climate at home in the US. Just as the Cold War did in its time. . there is a growing gulf between the global economic reach of capital and the local powers it needs to sustain it. according to right-wing US commentators like Charles Krauthammer. The new imperialism may here be coming full circle. This has created a cycle of endless wars with which to wield imperialism from. Ph. WOOD 2003 [Ellen. and states have become more. In some cases. The plan is an institutionalization of this very logic. on the militarization of the aerospace industry and on the global arms trade. there is always something more.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 17 EMPIRE K LINK – THE STATE The main objective of military conflict revolves around sustaining the u. In the Middle East. This was. The climate of fear deliberately fostered by the Bush administration is being used not only to justify military programmes and the erosion of civil liberties.s. especially in the US. the overriding objective is to demonstrate and consolidate US domination over the system of multiples states. of course. has been disrupted. This complex system. Like the British in India. allies are drawn into its hegemonic orbit by their implication in pacts and alliances and by means of a military supremacy so daunting and expensive that other major economic powers will see no point in seeking to match it. military-industrial complex. which has been so central to the US economy.
why not give it a try? That was the military temptation underlying the shift toward the new imperialism. ." These terms suddenly seem full of noble. the B~ts ever did and their power didn't last long (a potentially disquieting thought): Better skip the centuries to the noblest imperialists of them all. even humanitarian sentiments. The notion of civilian control of the military became meaningless. the US today has a lot more pow~r than. But for most Americans the British analogy raises uncomfortable images of redcoats and taxes. They tend to avoid terms like "militarism" and "imperialism. British-born professor of Sociology at the UCLA and Visiting Research Professor at Queen's University Belfast Incoherent Empire. The new imperialists in charge of the Department of Defense now had the mobilizing power and the budgetary resources to lure the more cautious armed forces into their plans. the British Prime Ministers who led their country at the height of its imperial greatness. since civilians were the leading militarists. father and son. they reasoned. This is why I have styled the two Presidents Bush the Elder and Bush the Younger. Anyway.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 18 EMPIRE K LINK – BENIGN INTENTIONS The new imperialism masks its goals with benign intentions like ―peace‖ ―freedom‖ and ―democracy‖ Mann 2003 [Michael. Since we now could do these things. These have been spelled out most fully by neo-conservative journalists and scholars close to the White House. and to the couplet pax ramana. civilizing. recalling the titles of the two Pitts. they say. We will see that the so-called new imperialism actually became something much simpler and much nastier-the new militarism. pax americana. isbn: 1859845827. p __9-10_______ ]-AC Inside the American military/strategic community-though not yet in the High Commandit also seemed that the US now had the military wizardry to achieve victory followed by moral good without risking the lives of American soldiers or civilians." but they do like the resonance of the noun "Empire" and its adjective "imperial. freedom and democracy to the world! They will save oppressed peoples from their own "rogue" leaders! Some hark back to the days of the British Empire. But the new imperialists see their goals as entirely benign. The Empire will bring peace.
If a state is not democratic and does not protect human rights. British-born professor of Sociology at the UCLA and Visiting Research Professor at Queen's University Belfast Incoherent Empire. being immensely powerful. Mann 2003 [Michael. He instances Iraq as just such a case. Bobbitt's so-called constitutional theory would seemingly place much of the world at risk of American invasion. was responsible for the Long War).J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 19 EMPIRE K LINK – DEMOCRACY/HUMAN RIGHTS Democracy and human rights concerns become a ruse to subject other nations to imperial control. This is a grand teleological tome. This is a theory doing imperial service. . His "constitutional theory" rates democracy and human rights above state sovereignty (which. For the same reason. isbn: 1859845827. is the only power which combines the might and the right to attack Iraq and others. and to have immunity from international law for its own military forces. he says. culminating in a global benevolent American Empire-a terrible "Long War" between sovereign states ending with an American-guaranteed peace. history as destiny. p __11_______ ]AC Philip Bobbitt is the author of a massive book on the modern history of states. He emphasizes both their militarist origins and their recent drive toward peace and legitimacy. he says the US has the right to take preemptive action against weapons of mass destruction. II Since over half the states in the world are neither genuinely democratic nor respectful of human rights. then its "cloak of sovereignty" should no longer protect it from military intervention. democratic and committed to human rights. The United States.
and not just among neoconservatives. Throughout the Middle East and Central Asia the United States has established close ties with a variety of dictators and monarchs willing to collaborate with American geopolitical and neoliberal agendas. more than a decade of United States-led economic sanctions costing hundreds of thousands of lives. and Iraq have left behind poor." the Bush administration-its assertions regarding terrorist links. and domestic pressures exerted by a powerful war machine. aid to terrorist insurgents. Iraq proves BOGGS 2005 [Carl. and imminent Iraqi military threats shown to be liesscandalously trumpets the old myths while corporate boondoggles become more transparent by the day. an illegal. and democratic pluralism-all naturally designed for public consumption. p __xi-xii___]-AC In a perpetual struggle to legitimate their actions. human rights. the mass media. surveillance and bombings spanning more than a decade. . but increasingly hollow. although even here its credibility is waning.DEMOCRACY The goal of democracy is a façade to extract more resources for American interests. Few knowledgeable observers outside the United States take such rhetoric seriously. so its propagandistic merit is confined mainly to the domestic sphere. involvement in Iraq reveals everything but democratic intent: support for Hussein throughout the 1980s. Adjunct Professor at Antioch University in Los Angeles. the concept of democracy (global or domestic) receives little critical scrutiny within American political discourse. geopolitical strategy. even as its popular credibility has become nearly exhausted. repeated coup and assassination plots." cynically employing seductive motifs like multiculturalism. Mghanistan. chaotic. foreign policy followed the path of "humanitarian intervention. cynical use of the UN inspections process for intelligence and covert operations. U. "Democracy" becomes another self-serving facade for naked u. foreign policy have become an article of faith. pretext of exporting democracy and human rights. all the more with the fraudulent claims invoked to justify the war on Iraq.S. Framing "preemptive" war as a strike against Saddam Hussein's tyranny and for "liberation. two devastating military invasions. violence-ridden societies far removed from even the most generous definition of pluralist democracy. the den:ocratIc ~umanitarian motives of US.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 20 EMPIRE K LINK .s.S. The recent experience of US. Strikingly. The case of Iraq is particularly instructive. or even academia. As elsewhere. costly. isbn: 0742527727. The recent armed interventions in the Balkans. US. American leaders invoke the familiar and trusted. Imperial Delusions: American Militarism and Endless War. geopolitical interests. Professor of Social Sciences at National University in Los Angeles. With the eclipse of the Communist threat. support for authoritarian regimes across the globe and a rather flagrant contempt for democracy where it hinders (imputed) national interests. Yet even the most cursory inventory of the postwar historical record demonstrates a pervasive legacy of U. ambitions in Iraq were never about democracy but were and are a function of resource wars. including his catastrophic war against Iran. weapons of mass destruction. and dictatorial military occupation.
" at the same time. Exactly. they won‘t recognize their generous. It might not even be shaping a military conception of political strategy. This version of things is certainly not prohibited." If there is no agreement on what we mean by shaping. normally. It is politics. everything that is connected with free trade. The United States yet has to find their shape." "to shape Europe"… And if this is not politics. economic politics. and in any case. "Making the state. there should have been a nice debate that would have been completely real… On "shaping"… … on shaping – what do we mean by "shaping. from the European perspective.html Volume 1 Number 1. In the encounter between a European project for the Balkans and an American project for the Balkans. that this intervention is intended to "shape" [mettre en forme] social and political forms. They want the world. and all the American leaders say so. etc. Kosovo. even open conflicts. And there is the shaping carried out by a military presence.au/vol1no1_2002/joxe_interview. And the threat of death is essential for creating power. it is merely relegated to "shaping" the political world so that it is favorable to direct action by corporations. .J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 21 EMPIRE K LINK – REDUCE PRESENCE THE ROLE OF MILITARY PRESENCE IS NOT TO CONQUER BUT TO MANAGE THE WORLD. The Americans refuse to take a territory by military means and install their troops to resolve political problems. If you add a little historical depth and political culture here. This worries even the American military. The State officially intervenes in favor of free trade. Shaping is the catchword of the moment: "to shape the world. but they don‘t want to invade the world. but to them it seems like a non-intervention. if you say that to Americans. you could say that the objective is not exactly to create the reign of a pure free market in the world. you will find it to be a pretty limited way of seeing things.borderlands. what is it? Politics does not disappear. He is the head of a group in sociology of defense at the Ecole des Hautes ―Civil Wars Everywhere: EXCERPT FROM A DIALOGUE WITH SYLVERE LOTRINGER‖ http://www. but strategically. At the moment it might happen through the war in Iraq. or independently of real conflicts in the field. means making the army. because what would reign would be a march open under a threat and regulated by that threat. there will be confusions. you have to say that it is absolutely fundamental because it represents the threat of death. democratic country. It is obvious. the politics and the conditions of the economy. goes America‘s way.. It is social politics. brokendown peace in the projection zones. but we have to suspend our judgement about that topic a bit. But to do what? When the economy is the objective. Yes. MILITARY PRESENCE IS SOLELY A QUESTION OF A SOCIAL POLITICS SUBORDINATED TO CORPORATE CONTROL JOXE 2002 [Alain Joxe is the leading French specialist in strategic issues. What they want is the world.net. but also military politics. Of course. Their military action is therefore intended to manage the world by using this threat. 2002]AC Given the current state of things. that is what comes down the pipeline. with economic neo-liberalism. If you say that the military is very important. but you cannot say that it is a non-political policy. But the problem is that this threat of death is not aimed at conquering.
Psychologically. under these conditions we will negotiate. 2002]AC If we are reasoning in terms of deterrence. No. that does not work. maybe because the North Vietnamese were communists.html Volume 1 Number 1.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 22 EMPIRE K LINK – REDUCE TROOPS TROOP WITHDRAWAL SOLVES NO IMPERIAL VIOLENCE. And there have to be some room for strategy… It is common these days to study deterrence using the tools Tom Shelling forged under the term "coercion. limited but targeted.au/vol1no1_2002/joxe_interview. so we should see a system as perfect as Bentham‘s Panopticon being established. or more what we could call "Panopolitics"… This system is a dream. your naval blockade loses credibility as well. and dreams are not reality. but this does not hide the fact that it did not work. satellite observation can observe details down to the metric level. progress has been made since then – but there was a return to Shelling‘s thought. have been improved. they are too strong. we will negotiate – that idea could not occur if the blockade was maintained alone with a contingent that would continue to grow smaller. If you send an expeditionary force and you reduce its numbers without obtaining anything. they did not have this electronic time. first there has to be a threat. but he also conceived of the postnuclear or para-nuclear starting with the Vietnam War. a naval blockade has never been very effective.borderlands. There is something psychological involved. It did not work in Vietnam. . Moreover. you have to attack before. then there has to be a real danger. These schemas are rational from a certain point of view. When the bombing started in Vietnam. there are holes everywhere. because precision electronics.net. Now they think that maybe it could work since the atom is no longer part of the game. And he said it in September. in other words before it was theoretically decided to attack." Shelling is a game and nuclear strategy theorist.. But informational and technological deterrence is also psychological… Then they didn‘t have a choice. would force the Vietnamese to think and say: "OK. Returning to the notion of deterrence: in order to have a deterrence that replaces nuclear deterrence. everyone thought that the message of these bombings. this pressure should work – and above all. Now that there are no more communists. from the point of view of strategy on the scale of universal history. the idea that he would say: alright. They had to attack immediately. And that is exactly what happened." That is "coercion" thinking. especially since Iraq is not even an island. as soon as you know that on a certain day you have to reduce the number of troops. He is the head of a group in sociology of defense at the Ecole des Hautes ―Civil Wars Everywhere: EXCERPT FROM A DIALOGUE WITH SYLVERE LOTRINGER‖ http://www. etc. They find ways around it. PLAN WILL BE COOPTED AND ATTACKS WILL HAPPEN BEFORE THE DEADLINE JOXE 2002 [Alain Joxe is the leading French specialist in strategic issues. in other words a pressure that is sufficiently well done to obtain precise results.
abroad. But the major problem of numbers would come after the war in pacification. For."> He seems to have exaggerated. How many "wars" can it pursue at once? When General Ralston. pipelines. isbn: 1859845827. This required larger numbers. but current policy is that the US could fight one and a half wars at once. the Balkans and elsewhere. as we shall see. and heightened security for the homeland and US embassies.000 could win a small one. "We do not have forces to do the missions you have outlined. one being an active engagement. US Commander of Europe. But holding the colony down required dispersion of forces. as we shall see. Reductions in one area are critical to redeployment elsewhere Mann 2003 [Michael. he replied. They had a solution. A force of 1. British-born professor of Sociology at the UCLA and Visiting Research Professor at Queen's University Belfast Incoherent Empire. In Africa 3. p ___1920______ ]-AC Lack of numbers might also detract from lesser imperial roles.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 23 EMPIRE K LINK – REDUCE TROOPS Troop presence is limited in totality. This force could generate a concentrated fire-power to destory any native levy. this requires more soldiers than war itself The problem of numbers worsens if wars are Won through technological superiority in fire-power. etc. as their handguns and artillery gave them increasing superiority ove~ the peoples they conquered. was asked by lawmakers whether he had the resources to invade Iraq while maintaining commitments in Europe.000-5. and US forces are almost fully engaged. a global network of bases. Add up the forces necessary for military interventions. the other a holding operation.000 men would be typically enough to secure a large colony. But the latter would have to involve very few new troops. The European Empires increasingly faced this problem. especially if enduring occupation is involved. . in garrisons and patrols across the land.
. as the internal logic of the here and now. a tacitly coordinated routine of upping the potential for war. production. and multiply armament between the United States and the Soviet Union. THE PREPARATION FOR WAR KEEPS SOCIETY IN CONSTANT SUSPENSE."27 In the name of arms reduction and limitation. momentum. instead. war was more and more to be fought in virtuality.26 As in the case of the competition between the United States and the Soviet Union for several decades. negative signification as a blockade. strictly speaking." war shifts to a new level of force. The space and time of war are no longer segregated in the form of an other. they operate from within the here and now. Age of the World Target. Warring in virtuality meant competing with the enemy for the stockpiling. improve. war would exist from now on as an agenda that is infinitely self-referential: war represents not other types of struggles and conflicts— what in history classes are studied as "causes"—but war itself. To terrorize the other. one specializes in representation. "A war of pictures and sounds is replacing the war of objects (projectiles and missiles). positions. From being negative blockade to being normal routine.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 24 EMPIRE K LINK – REDUCE TROOPS WAR IS NO LONGER A STRUGGLE OF PHYSICAL FORCES SO MUCH AS A CONSTANT SHIFTING OF TROOP DEPLOYMENTS. as an exchange of defensive positionings. but rather. mechanical struggles between combative oppositional groups.28Moreover. of preclusively horrifying weaponry. and circulation of knowledge. From its previous conventional. p_______33-4_______]-AC The dropping of the atomic bombs effected what Michel Foucault would call a major shift in epistemes. OBJECTS AND PICTURES. a fundamental change in the organization.25 War after the atomic bomb would no longer be the physical. but always mutually implicated. It has become not the cessation of normality. allies rather than adversaries in the so-called "Star Wars" or SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative). and condition of possibility of society. the SALT and START agreements served to promote. but would increasingly come to resemble collaborations in the logistics of perception between partners who occupy relative. in the means of display and exhibition. the very definition of normality itself. which were. CHOW IN 2006 [Rey. war becomes the positive mechanism. creating a hegemonic space of global communication through powers of visibility and control. As Virilio writes. an inevitable but regretted interruption of the continuity that is "normal life. rather than actual use. a race for the deterrent.
Zhukov or Malinovsky. I won't mention the Soviets. with the development of deterrence-not only the "all points" strategy of the 1950's and 1960's. Khrushchev wanted to stay with all-points strategy. -Deterrence is the development of an arms capacity that assures total peace. and was dismissed because he wanted to promote civilian consumption in the USSR in order to catch up with the United States. but strictly relative with respect to civilian economy. but in its preparation. With the development of the war economy. as some tend to II think. the execution of war was an exchange-brutal. -Deterrence. --In the past. logistics has become the whole of war. You can see how non-development is at the very center of trans-politics. hence the debate currently raging over Euro-missiles. strengthens its naval power considerably. war which isn't acted out in repetition. ofcourse." --What do you mean by ecologistics"? –I mean the development of an overall logistics: of rockets and all-points missiles as well as the conventional weapons supposedly necessitated by the Soviet adversary. Khrushchev knew that American imperialism could only be fought on the grounds of an imperialism of the Soviet way of life. War can always change character. which builds thousands upon thousands of tanks. in tenns of war economy. The perpetuation of war is what I call Pure War. we can now say that strategy is no more than logistics. At that POint. shall we say. but civilian SOciety pays the price ofits infinite postponement.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 25 EMPIRE K LINK – REDUCE TROOPS OUR SOCIETY EXISTS IN PREPARATION FOR WAR. which led people to conceive ofthe end ofpolitics-the end. but also the "all weapons" strategy ofthe 1970's and 1980's-we're heading toward a generalized non-development which. and tends to fuUy develop both the traditional and exceptional aspects of war. The fact of having increasingly SOPHISTIcated weaponry deters the enemy more and more. but rather to settle into war. How did we end up with such an inversion? --Ifwe can say that war was entirely strategy in past societies. then. In turn. Eventually it will also be true of the United States. Only this infinite preparation. THE AFF‘S DISCUSSION OF TROOP REDUCTIONS AND ROLES CHANGES IS MERELY AN EXTENSION OF LOGISITSICAL PLANNING THAT CONTINUES OUR IMPERIAL SOCIETY VIRILIO AND LOTRINGER IN 2004 [Paul and Sylvere. That tendency. if strategy governed the Nation-States at the beginning of the twentieth century. the production of arms is already war. . but in 'infinite preparation. the "flexible response"-in other words on the need to develop conventional weapons alongside strategic nuclear weapons. Now. we saw an inversion. Immediately afterward. is similar to zero growth in ecological tenns. hasn't it always been the case? Before civilian society was bled dry by war. It would be enough to perfect the great thenno-nuclear vectors. at least. ofa period ofgrowth and progress in civilian societies. And yet. but also of the "middle power" countries of Europe. Remember that it was Eisenhower. it's out of the question. doesn't mean to ensure peace. The Soviet military class said: no. the advent of logistics. remains the same. and then develop civilian society. That war economy promotes the nondevelopment of civilian societies is not only true of the Third World. Pure War 1570270783 page __9193______]-AC Let's come back to the superseding ofthe Nation-States. we had Maxwell Taylor's theory on the uncertain trumpet. who denounced the military-industrial complex that he himself had helped create (probably because of ms religious beliefs: he wanted to confess his sins before dying). because in an age of deterrence. --The age ofdeterrence completely transforms the nature of war: direct confrontation becomes scarce. also entails the nondevelopment of society in the sense of civilian consumption. now it's crushed to death by peace. At about the same time-all this happened within a space ofseveral years-Nikita Khrushchev found himself in direct contact with the head military official. since they refused to follow the path of civilian consumption long ago. They couldn't keep developing military institutions and still claim that Soviet imperialism would be attractive to future societies. and enonnously draining. The notion of ecological zero growth corresponds to zero growth in "eco-Iogistics. when he left the White House. war is no longer in its execution.
the extraordinary precautions against the near-zero chances of a smallpox virus attack (several medical personnel actually died from this panic by being forced to take the supposed antidote). and they have recently revived. and 250. Almost 3. Only one in six Americans even have passports." Since 9. Neighboring Mexico sees few American tourists outside of Americanized high-rise beaches. a battered. The US is one of the safest places of the world. Countless Hollywood movies narrated alien attacks on peaceful American communities during the cold war." These have the same sub text: harmles .EXTINCTION The aff‘s extinction claimed is used heavily by American culture in a paranoid scheme to continue imperialism Mann 2003 [Michael. constituted an "imminent threat" to the United States.000 deaths from lung cancer." There are repeated national scare about invasive plant and insect species-"Africanized killer bees.000 firearmrelated deaths. with a rag-tag army. Reds have given way to terrorists under the beds. in this continental country so wellprotected by its oceans and armaments. impoverished country of only 23 million people. But Bush the Younger's call to arms against Muslims appeared to be winning the ideological war within the US." The public had been made compliant with imperialism by fear of the alien unknown and an extraordinarily self-muzzling mass media. the repeated claims that Iraq.000 deaths in auto accidents. Though most Americans initially said they would prefer a stronger United Nations. They see Mexico as dangerous. except from other Americans.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 26 EMPIRE K LINK .000 people were killed on 9. and an Iraq disciplined through the UN. 15°. the dirty bomb and duct-tape scare of 2003 (seal your windows against a chemical attack). 38. giving Bush a blank congressional check to invade Iraq as he saw fit-less because they agreed with him than because they believed the people did so. though the US murder rate is much higher. p _103104________ ]-AC Ignorance breeds fear." calls for perpetual vigilance. repeated denunciations of foreign "evildoers.I I itself. Forty-five percent of Americans believe intelligent aliens have visited Earth.I I terrorism in the US has been zero-intensity warfare." "South American fire ants. After 20 months it had not killed one more person in the US. and two in three of them thought Muslims would be better off if they adopted American values. Few Democrats offered any opposition to the new imperialism. and after 9-II they travel abroad much less than before. Cultivating paranoia is a Bush the Younger specialism: sweeping arrests of Middle Easterners. a majority favored restricting or ending Muslim immigration. The level of paranoia is hard for foreigners to understand.000 rape victims. British-born professor of Sociology at the UCLA and Visiting Research Professor at Queen's University Belfast Incoherent Empire. There was the anthrax scar of 200 I. half of them children. In 2002 a quarter of Americans viewed Muslim countries favorably. isbn: 1859845827. They were right. peace-loving American (sometimes European) species are overwhelmed by more aggressive foreigners. a terrible number. Americans arm themselves with handguns and tank-like SUVs. But in the same year in the United States there were 30. the smallpox scare of 2002. . Bush's approval ratings on "the war against terrorism" and the invasion of Iraq remained very high.
J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 27 EMPIRE K LINK . to American national interests that are essentially marketed to the public as a menace to the very security and survival of ordinary citizens. Imperial Delusions: American Militarism and Endless War. security have justified not only massive deployment of military force but its expansion across many different areas of the world. if only temporarily. In this context a heightened readiness for armed intervention-and the recurrent actuality of intervention-favor an elite impulse toward military ventures. transferring loyalties and aspirations onto the terrain of state power and thereby helping to sustain the Leviathan. p __115-116___]-AC The war economy thrives on foreign threats. further adding to xenophobic and chauvinistic sentiments-a linkage starkly visible at the time of the two Gulf Wars. Adjunct Professor at Antioch University in Los Angeles. the very embodiment of ethical national goals. isbn: 0742527727. and patriotic mobilization. ambiguities. . technological efficiency. During both Gulf Wars. Superiority in military strength readily equates in the elite mind with moral supremacy.EXTINCTION The war economy thrives because of representations of extinction BOGGS 2005 [Carl. Since World War II a series of "threats" to U. Professor of Social Sciences at National University in Los Angeles.S. war making by and through the security state provided an aura of monolithic unity where doubts. bureaucratic routine. following a trajectory outside the scope of democratic processes. In the euphoria of war the public can find strength in the exercise of brutal military force. and reservations were concealed or suppressed. Within this matrix state power easily develops into an object of (elite) deification. real or contrived.
The dollar was "as good as gold. The Bretton Woods system was based on three fundamental elements. hegemony and capitalist growth. . They may not aspire to rule. began to unravel. on close inspection. Bretton Woods dictated the establishment of a quasi-imperialist relationship of the United States over all the subordinate nonsocialist countries.S. when Americans speak of "nation building" they actually mean "state replicating. and ultimately the U. As defined by their president. monetary hegemony was a fundamentally new arrangement because. Reform in the dominant capitalist countries could thus be financed by a surplus of exports to the United States and guaranteed by the monetary system of the dollar." "Freedom" means. which had been dominated previously by the British pound and the French franc. Yet the very act of imposing "freedom" simultaneously subverts it. in 1944. Europe. 10]-AC To the majority of Americans.) US Hegemony Is Used To Subordinate The Rest of the World To US Led Capitalism Hardt and Negri 2000 (Michael. and when anti-imperialist and anticapitalist struggles in subordinate countries began to undermine the extraction of superprofits. though not identical. Bretton Woods gave control to a series of governmental and regulatory organizations. Bretton Woods might thus be understood as the monetary and financial face of the hegemony of the New Deal model over the global capitalist economy. pg. the democratizing mission of the United States is both altruistic and distinct from the ambitions of past empires. "Colossus: The Rise and Fall of the American Empire." in the sense that they want to build political and economic institutions that are fundamentally similar. the economic order that had dominated the globe for almost thirty years. The difficulty is that President Bush's ideal of freedom as a universal desideratum rather closely resembles the Victorian ideal of "civilization. so there is something fishy about those who would democratize Fallujah with the Abrams tank. The Keynesian and pseudo-imperialist mechanisms of Bretton Woods eventually went into crisis when the continuity of the workers' struggles in the United States. which (so it is generally assumed) aimed to impose their own rule on foreign peoples. Its first characteristic was the comprehensive economic hegemony of the United States over all the nonsocialist countries.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 28 EMPIRE K LINK – HEGEMONY US Hegemony Subjugates the rest of the world to Neo-liberal Capitalism Ferguson '04 [Niall Ferguson. including the International Monetary Fund. Professor @ U of Paris. PhD In Comparitive Literature from U Washington and Antonio. 2004. the system demanded the agreement for monetary stabilization between the United States and the other dominant capitalist countries (first Europe then Japan) over the traditional territories of European imperialisms. the American model of democracy and capitalism. to their own. and Japan raised the costs of stabilization and reformism. whereas the control of previous international monetary systems (notably the British) had been firmly in the hands of private bankers and financiers. President Bush's distinction between conquest and liberation would have been entirely familiar to the liberal imperialists of the early 1900s. Finally. it would appear. Just as the Victorians seemed hypocrites when they spread "civilization" with the Maxim gun. The form and substance of the capitalist management of international development for the postwar period were dictated at the conference at Bretton Woods. there is not contradiction between the ends of global democratization and the means of American military power. The system of U. Professor of History at Harvard University. ―Empire‖]-AC As the global confluence of struggles undermined the capitalist and imperialist capacities of discipline. This hegemony was secured through the strategic choice of a liberal development based on relatively free trade and moreover by maintaining gold (of which the United States possessed about one third of the world total) as the guarantee of the power of the dollar. the Golden Age of U." Second.S. New Hampshire. Federal Reserve. the World Bank. Economic development within the United States and stabilization and reform in Europe and Japan were all guaranteed by the United States insofar as it accumulated imperialist superprofits through its relationship to the subordinate countries. but they do aspire to have others rule themselves in the American way. who likewise saw Britain's far-flung legions as agents of emancipation (not least in the Middle East during and after WWI.S.
more realistically. hegemony uses capitalism and forces other capitalist economies to be dependent on it. Negatively.S. it is important to state the implications with care.S. Claude Serfati has given a good account of why. October 17. ―Imperialism and Global Political Economy‖. block of states. Let us return to the issue of inter-imperialist rivalries. This makes the U. isj. Positively. such as the EU) from developing military capabilities comparable to the US.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 29 EMPIRE K LINK – HEGEMONY U.org) Even if Arrighi is right to suggest that US hegemony is ‗unravelling‘.27 The reasons he gives are both positive and negative. Trotskyist political theorist and Director of the Centre for European Studies at King's College London. . the extent of the interdependence among the leading capitalist economies gives them strong incentives to cooperate and means that US hegemony is the source of ‗public goods‘ that benefit them all. in his view. 2005. the military gap between the US and all other states singly and combined is so great as to create very strong ‗threshhold effects‘ impeding any state (or. ‗there is no chance that the intercapitalist economic rivalries among countries of the transatlantic zone will break out into military confrontations‘. able to control other nations Callinicos ‗05 (Alex Callinicos.
It lacks the imperial will to consolidate victory and pacify Mghanistan. and installed a client regime. leaving it to civil war. Bush had initially promised "another Marshall Plan. after one million Mghan and 25. just as in the 1980s it used bin Laden and other Islamists to force out the Soviets. Afghanistan. The US would not commit such resources to such a peripheral country. In achieving battlefield victory and installing a client regime in Mghanistan.000 troops to occupy all the cities. the Soviets made their big mistake. the international community deployed 60. The US reached the same conclusion with almost no losses. Since the US deployed far fewer US troops.000 Soviet casualties. which was the main 'point. Withdrawal doesn‘t effect anything but afghani citizes. brought in 115. In 1979 they airlifted troops straight into Kabul.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 30 EMPIRE K LINK . Only if this happened would the US have done better than the Soviets. The plan is an ideological service to imperial strategy. The Soviets had also been too protective of their soldiers-too much armor." He was lying.000 peacekeepers to Bosnia. given such a low commitment of resources? In contrast. with its history of failed states and warlordism is difficult to rule. not enough light infantry. it had to wait longer for the Northern Alliance warlords to drive their pick-up trucks into the capital. a much smaller country. Over a century ago the British lost an expeditionary force in the Khyber Pass. the Soviets took even less time than the US did. they retreated out of the country. Mann 2003 [Michael." This would be very disappointing if the US had intended nation-building or imperial pacification. Al-Qaeda was kicked out of the country. British-born professor of Sociology at the UCLA and Visiting Research Professor at Queen's University Belfast Incoherent Empire. Two decades ago the Soviets came to the same realization after more protracted defeat. Ten years later. It now wants out again. The problem is how to get US troops out without causing too obvious and immediate a collapse so that the world condemns American opportunism. less vulnerable routes to bring Central Asian oil to the West. it is ending pitifully. It used the Northern Alliance and Karzai to force al-Qaeda out of the country. There are shorter. But in reality it was just a punitive expedition. seized power.AFGHANISTAN Afghanistan is irrelevant to our imperial ambitions. It then abandoned them. . and realized that they could not rule this country. But did Afghanistan benefit? I doubt it. They did not leave it to their client. p ___154155______ ]-AC But what could we expect. Can it do more? Probably not. Afghanistan was not even "nation-building lite. isbn: 1859845827. If this was ever an attempt at Empire. Has the US done any different? Not yet. But the US had no vital interest in AFghanistan beyond the removal of terrorism. But having conquered. but stayed and attempted to impose order. By the 1980s communism was also reluctant to make sacrifices in imperial ventures.
both under the shah and today. fearing that. motives. In short. preferring to reject both sides. since their offices do not protect them from political attack as a result of such contact." They expressed the desire to establish a true Islamic Republic based on religious law. policy makers as elites.S. summed up in the phrase "neither East nor West. and were not interested in cooperation with Western nations on Western terms. the government was taken over by religious forces. leaders fits. They became deeply suspicious of U. Moreover. As a result the Iranians are "crazy outlaws. Iran's leaders adopted an independent set of international relations goals. post-Revolutionary Iran violated every tenet of the U. but its political structure was. far more tenuous than that of any Western nation. their ability to act vis-à-vis the United States was especially limited. the United States would attempt to reinstate the monarchy in order to regain the economic benefits enjoyed during the reign of the shah. they seemed comfortable committing acts which outraged the United States with no apparent thought as to the possible consequences. as in 1953. Moreover they have had to be extremely careful about contact with foreign powers. All of this has given U. More disturbing for American politicians was the attitude of the new Iranian leaders. To add to the difficulty. After the revolution it was not concerned with the East-West struggle. Though identified by U. morality and religious sensibility." . the Iranian leaders were not in full control of their own nation.S. As will be seen below.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 31 EMPIRE K Link – iran THE FRAMING OF IRAN AS A THREAT ORIGINATES FROM OUR VIEW THAT THEY ARE AN UNPREDICTABLE OTHER IN NEED OF IMPERIAL CONTROL NOORANI IN 05 [ Yaseen. Its elites were and continue to be informal power brokers and balancers of opinion rather than powerful actors able to enforce their will directly on the population. Its national concerns transcended matters of military and economic power. Iran does not conform to the set model of international behavior with which the foreign policy community is prepared to operate. Suddenly the rules for interaction between Iran and the United States changed. CR: The New Centennial Review 5. policy myth.S. it was often far more concerned about questions of ideology. The secular nationalists were out of power and Iran became an Islamic republic.S. Iran looked like a nation-state. This kind of behavior was inexplicable for most Americans. in the immediate post-Revolutionary period. they had very little capacity for independent action on the foreign policy scene. rhetoric of security]-AC The Iranian Revolution marked a dramatic watershed in this state of affairs. After a brief sixmonth period of secular nationalism. They assumed an air of moral superiority.1 (2005) 13-41.
which unfolds within the context of a global neo-liberal economic order dominated by the US. moreover. Not only has the Soviet Union gone. Panitch and Gindin argue. is entirely false. p42). Panitch and Gindin claim that the post-war era was characterised by ‗the internationalisation of the state. but the implication that these economic tensions might be translated into geopolitical confrontations. Callinicos ‗05 (Alex Callinicos. Post-World War 2 economic relations have altered the imperial strategy of the U. It is. Trotskyist political theorist and Director of the Centre for European Studies at King's College London. even military rivalries. p55). understood as a state‘s acceptance of responsibility for managing its own domestic capitalist order in way [sic] that contributes to managing the international capitalist order‘ (GCAE.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 32 EMPIRE K Link . p47). the current moment underlines their relative weakness‘ (GCAE.org) (1) Following Poulantzas.Japan The U. domestic capital tended to be ―dis-articulated‖ and no longer represented by a coherent and independent national bourgeoisie‘ (GCAE.11 .S. October 17. The European Union‘s attempts to develop military capabilities are feeble and dependent on NATO. Not simply does this overstate the extent of the competition. while Japan remains heavily reliant on America‘s markets and security shield. 2005. ―Imperialism and Global Political Economy‖. but the US state and transnational corporations were able systematically to penetrate and reorganise under its leadership the ruling classes of these zones of advanced capitalism: ‗With American capital a social force within each European country. If anything it is stronger now than it was then. October 17. isj. but. isj. quite misleading to characterise economic competition within the advanced capitalist world as a case of ‗inter-imperialist rivalries‘.S. American imperialist strategy is to control the economies of Japan under capitalism Callinicos ‗05 (Alex Callinicos. 2005. The US used the Cold War system of alliances and the Bretton Woods international financial institutions to construct a global capitalist order in which not simply were the economies of Western Europe and Japan laid open to American capital. will continue its imperialism economically and not with military presence. Trotskyist political theorist and Director of the Centre for European Studies at King's College London.org) (3) The structure forged at the beginning of the 1980s holds good today. ―Imperialism and Global Political Economy‖. ‗while the earlier period was characterised by the relative economic strength of Europe and Japan.
that 9/11 provoked a "mass identity crisis" in American society. We had to overcome the identity crisis-hell. with hopes of refashioning a domestic consensus. introducing new levels of anxiety. a more robust patriotism becomes the cornerstone of its mass legitimating ideology. . Adjunct Professor at Antioch University in Los Angeles. and help vanquish the evildoers fits domestic even more than the global needs of the system. Bush's military option. and thus more vulnerable to governmental controls. Bush supporters and loyal opposition -already narrowed after decades of bipartisan foreign policy-became hard to distinguish. demonization of enemies. Fighting terrorism serves the ideology of imperialism resulting in an expanded military industrial complex BOGGS 2005 [Carl. was always a more distinctly political threat. The jingoism and ethnocentrism that came to define patriotic unity seemed to repeat the popular mood of the Desert Storm period. even more than Communism before it. Mailer writes. and paranoia into public life.lieve America is not only fit to run the world but that it must. isbn: 0742527727. Imperial Delusions: American Militarism and Endless War. despair. from economic stag. shortcircuited discussion of possible alternative courses of action. People find themselves isolated. isbn: 0742527727. brought to the surface by 9/11-a predicament that also provided new One way out has been to extend U. Congressional action was hurriedly taken without the distractions and impediments of debate: both the nearly carte-blanche war powers delivered to Bush and the Patriot Act. again legitimating many of the symbols and rituals vital to militarism and Empire. whereas Communism. Without a commitment to Empire the country will go down the drain. and the terrorist attacks provided the fuel. the doctrine of preemptive strikes. offering the illusion of empowerment mixed with the allure of high-tech entertainment. atomized."15 And these highly emotional attitudes were made palatable to a public bombarded with the inces sant rantings of a jingoistic media. global power in the face of new enemies. starting with the bombing of Afghanistan in October 2001. p __96-97___]-AC If the war on terrorism-however justified-serves elite power.f:i· . Dissent and protest are stigmatized and marginalized. though godless and evil. fear. however. The terrorist attacks generated a united patriotic response that continued into the second Gulf War . Surely an opportunities for solving the legitimation crisis. After 9/11.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 33 EMPIRE K LINK . It conjures images of unspeakably criminal villains carrying out evil designs against innocent civilians.nation to resource needs to the electoral worries of politicians. lends an aura of necessity to these trends. over minimal and easily discredited opposition. as shown during the first Gulf War. It might be argued." Mailer is not the only commentator to find an ideological emptiness in American society tied to an erosion of effective governance. political complexities and nuances quickly vanish. In the United States after 9/11. Patriotic ideology. aggressive moves in the Middle East. overpower it. Mailer finds instead an "odious selfserving patriotism" contaminating an American politics already diminished by the cult of violence. The time-honored idea that patriotic citizens ought to stand up. energized patriotism wedded to a revitalized militarism constitutes one possible remedy for a nation that long ago had grown ideologically and culturally stale .S. fight back. Adjunct Professor at Antioch University in Los Angeles. the fetishism of technology. Corporate globalization. "we were plunged into a fever of patriotism. War and preparation for war can revive the national psyche. Professor of Social Sciences at National University in Los Angeles. won quick passage in both Houses. and scapegoating .. the war on terrorism. as Norman Mailer has. In Mailer's words: "Flag conservatives truly be . the future implications of such desperate maneuvers might be too horrifying to contemplate.. the instinctive reflex was to reaffirm ourselves . It is easy enough to see how wa. Dismissing the notion that the attacks brought a heightened sense of national unity. represents the perfect target . and corporate scandals. and paranoia-emotional responses hardly conducive to open discourses and democratic politics. wave a £lag. If our long-term comfortable and complacent sense that America was just the greatest country ever had been brought into doubt. differences between Republicans and Democrats. Imperial Delusions: American Militarism and Endless War. for example. p _88____]-AC Terrorism as both political act and imminent possibility is usually accompanied by fear."16 If Mailer proves to be correct. --could become a safety valve for a variety of challenges. Professor of Social Sciences at National University in Los Angeles. negated or crowded out within an atmosphere of superpatriotism. election frauds. And terrorism..TERRORISM Terrorism discourse is hijacked to produce fear paranoia ad ensure more imperial violence BOGGS 2005 [Carl. an expanded militaryindustrial complex-all this is the work of an imperial agenda having precious little to do with the requirements of national security.
which. perhaps more than any other book about the Vietnam War. with the expendable agents of Satan. former CIA. in recent times. a process of "concentering" (Herman Melville's term. among other good reasons I cannot go into here. these deputies of the dominant culture. bears powerful witness. the violent American history of which the Vietnam War was only one example. first. By the end of the day. Chile. and government officials. all alternative interpretations of the complex global occasion that is the result of a long history of Western imperialism culminating in the United States' singular domination of global affairs have been demonized and effectively silenced in favor of a relentlessly single-minded global policy intended to rid the world once and for all of this seemingly malignant evil. which in large part is the consequence of the West's and. no doubt to compensate for the blunder they had made in the immediate aftermath of the Oklahoma City bombing. Make no mistake. who. according to the persuasive research of Christopher Hitchens. Bush put it that first day and repeatedly ever since. which. the anchors of all the networks dutifully emphasized the "speculative" nature of their suspicion that the perpetrators were Islamic terrorists. unanimously and without reflection. which. and Cyprus) on a scale equal to. which bears witness to the United States' massive and unrelenting retaliation. prof at SUNY-Binghamton. THIS ONTOLOGY JUSTIFIED THE EXTERMINATION OF NATIVE AMERICANS AND THE VIETNAMESE SPANOS IN 2003 [William. FBI. . in referring to Middle Eastern states. in the name of Manifest Destiny. Armed with the "authority" of these "reliable" experts. as the "pundits" they had carefully selected to comment on and analyze this unprecedented event—former high-ranking military officers. the wholesale removal. unprecedented. when. they attributed that disaster to Middle Eastern terrorist organizations. it informed the American representation and conduct of the Vietnam War. ontologically— ordained exceptionalist mission in the world's "wilderness. to which I will return) on the symbolic name "Osama bin Laden" and the Taliban government of Afghanistan that harbored him. however. In the early hours after the attack. the United States will hunt down those responsible for these cowardly acts. and then the extermination. as I have suggested. project muse]-AC What struck me." one that. has informed the entire violent history of American expansionism. of the Native American population. as the secretary of state in the Nixon administration. "Freedom itself was attacked this morning by a faceless coward. we should not forget. as a "war perpetrated by barbarism against civilization itself. and. and the West over which it has unilaterally claimed leadership. it is the predictable manifestation of a deeply inscribed and naturalized cultural belief in America's divinely or historically—that is to say. and unilateral practical response to the violence committed against Americans. has gone far to produce. as well as Orientalists of Arabic descent. For Caputo's memoir. if not greater than. It informed the American Puritans' identification of the Native Americans. was the way the American media's coverage of this horrific event unfolded. it is worth retrieving the by now [End Page 33] strategically buried history of the Vietnam War by way of the highly representative example of A Rumor of War 5 at this profoundly perilous moment of world history when the dominant culture in the United States is once again concentering an extremely complex and volatile global condition. This. Vietnam. bore witness to the destruction of a Southeast Asian country and the indiscriminate slaughter of untold numbers of its population by the all but full force of the American military machine. instead. it seems to me. As President George W. committed crimes against humanity (in Timor. who were unlikely to introduce the question of the role the United States had played on a global scale in producing this kind of hatred of America in the Third World and Islamic countries—began to refer to the attack in the ancient imperial binaries. Later. if only in a symptomatic way. inexorable. most tellingly. From that time until the present moment.TERRORISM TERRORISM DISCOURSE CONSTRUCTS THE ―TERRORIST‖ AS THE BARBARIC OTHER JUSTIFYING MASSIVE RETALIATION ON THE FACELESS OTHER. A Rumor of War: 9/11 and the Forgetting of the Vietnam War. which it. it informed the period of westward expansionism. included terror: the use of psychological and chemical weapons (what. justified. the appearance of objectivity faded quickly out of their representational discourse. the "faceless" and therefore bewilderingly indeterminate enemy had been identified and made practically assailable. because its rhetoric betrays a deep historical sense. in the figure of a single but symbolic person (and the Taliban government that harbored him) for the purpose of decisive retaliation. those of General Augusto Pinochet in Chile 4 —these anchors of the media abandoned the pretense of speculation [End Page 32] and began. to the dark underside of the American exceptionalism that justified not only the United States' intervention in Vietnam and its unerringly cold-blooded and massively destructive conduct of the war but also. to repeat. American officialdom calls weapons of indiscriminate mass destruction) in the insanely rational name of saving Vietnam for the free world. who resisted their plantation of God's Word in the forests of New England. of the United States' depredations in the East. On the contrary. as Antonio Gramsci would call them—I think of the grotesque example of Henry Kissinger. is not.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 34 EMPIRE K LINK . after the first shock of the attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11 began to subside." This extraordinarily reductive representation and self- righteous. is why. And freedom will be defended. in fact.
and Culture @ Birmingham. Foreign Policy. 309-333.2 pg. of course. and to examine the conditions of knowledge-formation and critical thinking shaped by the operations of this power. and propaganda" under control of the U.S.‖ American Quarterly 57. information.and transnational impulses. now conditioned by the new configurations of U. imperialism.S. In this essay we posit a need to retheorize the modes and meanings of public diplomacy in order to reconsider the ways in which the power of the American state is manifested in its operations beyond its national borders. and Scott Lucas. At issue is not so much the way in which American studies has been shaped internationally through diplomatic patronage (though this remains an important and underexamined issue) but rather the articulation of field identities in the expanding networks of international and transnational political cultures.Soft Power the underpinnings of soft power are part of the same knowledge production of imperialism Liam Kennedy. with the American university a long-established laboratory for the study of public opinion and of cross-cultural knowledge in service of the state. it effectively glossed (through the implication of both "public" and diplomatic intent) the political valence of both its invention and object of study through emphasis on its role as "an applied transnational science of human behaviour.S. 2005 (―Enduring Freedom: Public Diplomacy and U. public diplomacy."8 The origin of the term is a valuable reminder that academic knowledge production has itself been caught up in the historical foundations and contemporary conduct of U. Prof. government. Media. has had a particularly dramatic entanglement with public diplomacy and the cold war contest for "hearts and minds.S. American Studies @ University College (Dublin).S. in particular as they negotiate the "internationalization" of their field in the context of post. director of the Center for U. but we do contend that the current regeneration of public diplomacy by the U." and legacies of that entanglement still haunt the field imaginary today.S. government is an important topic for [End Page 310] critical study by American studies scholars.10 We do not intend to directly revisit that history here.7 As the term came into vogue.9 American studies.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 35 EMPIRE K Link . Foreign Policy. Muse) The term "public diplomacy" was coined by academics at Tufts University in the mid-1960s to "describe the whole range of communications. .
and to treat it as evidence of the very long-standing preoccupation of US grand strategy to prevent the emergence of a hostile Great Power or coalition on the Eurasian landmass. but would both serve as a warning to all states of the costs of defying American military power and. This then supports the interpretation of the Iraq war offered by both Harvey and myself. October 17. Trotskyist political theorist and Director of the Centre for European Studies at King's College London. ―Imperialism and Global Political Economy‖. give Washington control of what Harvey calls ‗the global oil spigot‘ on which potential challengers in Europe and East Asia are particularly dependent. to take this material at face value.OIL OIL IS A CRITICAL COMPONENT OF MIDDLE EASTERN IMPERIAL STRATEGY Callinicos ‗05 (Alex Callinicos. isj. beneath which lies the reality of a secure and invincible American empire.24 . Personally I find it more economical. namely that seizing Iraq would not simply remove a regime long obnoxious to the US. Marx famously said that if essence and appearance coincided then science would be superfluous. All these weighty strategic analyses could be so much epiphenomenal fluff. however. 2005.org) Now. by entrenching this power in the Middle East.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 36 EMPIRE K LINK .
BLOWBACK American empire is incoherently infatuated with just military power which will lead to its demise due to blowback and self destruction Mann 2003 [Michael. But that is not sufficient for Empire. isbn: 1859845827.. This is an incoherent Empire whose overconfident.. . the new imperialists are grasping ever more firmly on to the one power they do possess in abundance-offensive military devastation. and the prospects for opposition against the imperial project. It is not that well organized." Blowback may be from the victims and their sympathizers.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 37 EMPIRE K IMPACTS IMPACT . Those who live by the sword . terrorists. They forget that US economic power is somewhat fragile. Thus they consistently generate what Chalmers Johnson calls "blowback. We shall see that the new imperialism creates more. But the enemies of the United States are wrong to see it as the Great Satan or the Evil Empire. hyperactive militarism will soon destroy it. and their actions completely contradict the sources of American ideological power. In response to their limitations. they neglect political power altogether (especially in their incompetent planning of the Iraq attack). But blowback may also come from America's discontented allies. British-born professor of Sociology at the UCLA and Visiting Research Professor at Queen's University Belfast Incoherent Empire. We shall see that the new imperialists overestimate American power by focusing only on military power. not fewer. That is why I devote much attention to detailing the experiences and opinions of Arabs. who are at present at the receiving end of the Empire. p ___15-16______ ]-AC I here assess progress so far. that it creates more determined "rogue states." resistance coming as the unintended consequence of their own actions. My conclusion will be that in reality the new American imperialism is becoming the new American militarism." and that it weakens American leadership in the world.
the war economy. violent impulses and a retreat from the norms of civic engagement and obligation that patriotic energies furnish only falsely and ephemerally. popular culture. Professor of Social Sciences at National University in Los Angeles. we can expect further erosion of the domestic infrastructure and culture. and widespread indifference to established moral and legal codes gives elites wider autonomy to pursue their global schemes. and aggression. jingoism.S. As war becomes more acceptable to elites. a national security apparatus. Imperial Delusions: American Militarism and Endless War. marked by increasing xenophobia. Adjunct Professor at Antioch University in Los Angeles. imperial hegemony-both domestically and globally-are certain to be disastrous. and academia. isbn: 0742527727. .s. the confluence of the domestic war economy and global Empire generates popular attitudes inconsistent with a vibrant. has become a seemingly durable feature of American society: not only in politics but in mass media. racism. Further: the celebration of guns and violence in American society. is democratic politics. For many in the upper echelons of power this could well be tolerable.S. hastened along by militarism and imperial overreach. often the preferred instrument to fight ubiquitous enemies.jingoism. democratic public sphere: fear. already compromised by the hubris of an aggres. Corruption of the public sphere. Professor of Social Sciences at National University in Los Angeles. perhaps nowhere more than in the remarkable deceits and criminal conduct of the Bush presidency itself. hatred. Lies have become a recurrent feature of Bush officialdom. IMPACT . isbn: 0742527727. Such behavior in high places counters all the platitudes about American democracy. Adjunct Professor at Antioch University in Los Angeles. history. militarism in the service of corporate and geopolitical interestsall of these have had a powerfully corrosive impact on domestic politics since the onset of the cold war. devaluing citizenship and public life while further delegitimating·':I--U.S.DEMOCRACY Militarism and imperialism closes off true democratic participation BOGGS 2005 [Carl. including the war on terrorism and new military adventures abroad. is easily enough detected across the political landscape. of the militarization of American society in general. and narrowing political debates. Empire. evidence of a corrosive leadership with few parallels in U. Bush's long parade of lies and schemes used to justify an illegal and immoral war against Iraq have brought political discourse to a new low. professional life. have only deepened this trend. We have arrived at a bizarre mixture of imperial arrogance and collective paranoia. celebrations of armed violence. p __202___]-AC As the militarization of American society proceeds. but the long-term consequences for u. cavalier attitudes toward war and military escapades abroad. Imperial Delusions: American Militarism and Endless War. international power.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 38 EMPIRE K IMPACT . The events of 9/11 and their aftermath.DEMOCRACY Imperialism destroys a vibrant public sphere BOGGS 2005 [Carl. historical experience. A shrinking public sphere. generally considered to be the centerpiece of the U. p __81___]-AC One of the great casualties of an expanding security state. put forward with sheer contempt for public opinion and democratic politics.SIVe Empire.
ostensibly to end the war more quickly but in reality for purposes of revenge. rains death and destruction indiscriminately across wide parcels of territory. resistance to any laws guaranteeing the protection of civilians. One problem with aerial bombardment is that it obliterates the timehonored distinction between combatants and noncombatants. injury to civilians. General Curtis LeMay saw a new model of aerial warfare with vast possibilities for punishing the Japanese. 27 Efforts to deepen and further codify these provisions have been.. fiercely resisted by the United States and Britain. crops." Article 57 warns those planning military attacks to "refrain from deciding to launch any attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life." or area.s. Professor of Social Sciences at National University in Los Angeles. p _172-174____]-AC Since the final months of World War II. Imperial Delusions: American Militarism and Endless War. U.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 39 EMPIRE K IMPACT – MILLIONS OF DEATHS u. Article 25 of the Fourth Hague Convention in 1907 states that "bombardment. livestock. between military and civilian targets-a maxim especially applicable to strategic bombing. or a combination thereof. is prohibited"-still a valid principle of international law. The two countries worked diligently to block any reference to aerial "war crimes" from the convention. villages. which. Dresden. damage to civilian objects.. Berlin) by the Royal Air Force. the parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives. by definition. the U..S. by whatever means.S." . isbn: 0742527727. with casualties (the vast majority civilian) also running into the tens of millions. As Lindqvist notes: "The victorious powers could hardly forbid bombing of civilians without incriminating themselves for what they had already done and planned to continue doing. Adjunct Professor at Antioch University in Los Angeles. dwellings. weapons testing. Since the 1920s war managers have placed overriding faith in the efficacy of aerial warfare: at that time planes were seen as awesome destructive . literally burning cities to the ground. destroy. Bombing from high altitudes was indeed a nascent form of technowar. despite continued U. of towns. or buildings which are undefended. ---chines capable of bringing order to the general chaos and unpredictability of ground and naval operations. agricultural areas . knowing they were even more guilty of the same crimes. With incendiary assaults on German cities (Hamburg. and sending political messages.S. dnnking water installations and supplies and irrigation works. Such rejectionism continued into the Geneva Convention of 1949. in 1977 Protocol One of the Geneva Conventions was signed by 124 countries. By 1944 and 1945 this faith assumed new dimensions as first Britain and then the United States embraced plans for "strategic.s imperialism has resulted in millions of bombs being dropped across the globe destroying civilians and soldiers alike with indiscriminate violence BOGGS 2005 [Carl.. with the United States especially opposed to any restraints on aerial bombing (including the use of nuclear weapons). imperial power to the present day." Article 54 contams additional references-for example: "It is prohibited to attack. predictably. This legacy remains a cornerstone of u. such as foodstuffs. or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population. The basic rule states: "In order to ensure respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects. military has dropped tens of millions of tons of bombs on several mostly defenseless countries. nations that refused to prosecute the Germans and Japanese after World War II for bombing civilian populations. while minimizing American casualties. bombing in Germany and Japan." Article 52 further states that "attacks shall be limited strictly to military objectives. remove."28 Finally.
massacres of Indian tribes were often systematic. Carried out within a matrix of capitalism. military policy has long been based on strategies and tactics that involve a heavy civilian toll. turning outward with colonial expansion in the twentieth century. part of a "vicious drive toward extermination" that killed tens of millions. such victims were clearly intended. . free-fire zones. generally allowed for merciless attacks on civilian populations. the burning down of cities.So much of the American tradition of war--savage. although such crimes were not yet internationally codified. racist-was inherited from the Indian wars. and accompanied by utter destruction of land and culture--war crimes and crimes against humanity by any reckoning. support for death squads. bloody onslaught against civilians also includes ground operations. and racism.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 40 EMPIRE K IMPACT . Professor of Social Sciences at National University in Los Angeles. leaders have established themselves as beyond the reach of international law.f The legacy was continued during wars with Mexico and Spain. civilian populations have always bee.S. immune to moral or legal rules of engagement. the United States was historically adept at constructing an "evangelical military" bereft of any respect for other nations and cultures. military ventures. isbn: 0742527727. Upon its founding the United States became a powerful force behind exterminism even as its military forces proclaimed civilizing agendas. As Caleb Carr writes. as Ward Churchill documents. were readily demonized and offered up for destructionv' The United States has pursued global ambitions through every conceivable barbaric method: wars of attrition. and. which. massacres of unarmed civilians.GENOCIDE Innocent civilians have always been the intended victims of u.f. and the use of weapons of mass destruction. including atomic bombs. U. The record of European settler military assaults on native peoples. the United States has consistently rejected international treaties and protocols for protecting civilians against the horrors of war. p __177-178___]-AC Contrary to popular mythology. total. Not surprisingly. It was a tradition that.n . to varying degrees. imperial strategy. Adjunct Professor at Antioch University in Los Angeles. forced relocations. more often than not. carpet bombing. . spans at least four centuries. but the perpetual.the main victims of US. imperialism. Imperial Delusions: American Militarism and Endless War.s. then given ideological meaning through such nationalist discourses as Manifest Destiny and the Monroe Doctrine. as we have seen. thoroughly devalued as a matter of imperial arrogance. Often propelled by imperial contempt for others and sense of moral supremacy. Nor is Edward Herman overstating the case when he observes that u.s. planned. Tariq Ali is not exaggerating when he writes: "The mas-sacre of civilian populations was always an integral part 0F war strategy."41 This is patently true of aerial warfare. It is an ideology fueled by the deaths of millions in genocidal violence BOGGS 2005 [Carl. the destruction of public infrastructures.
It is this corrupt social element that dominates the mass media and imparts to the airwaves and press their distinctly egotistical. Africa.The American ruling elite is hardly unaware of the relationship between its own wealth and the exploitation and plundering of the great mass of the world‘s population. the vast fortunes accumulated by its ruling elite in the course of the speculative boom on Wall Street became dependent. began in the aftermath of the first Gulf War of 1991). an inexhaustible supply of low-cost labor overseas. one might say. he might be able to calculate how many millions of premature poverty-induced deaths were collectively required in Africa. and author of numerous works on socialist history and politics. For the ruling class and the wealthiest sections of the upper-middle class. international editorial board chairperson of the World Socialist Web Site. Depressed wage levels within the United States.‖ WSWS. or. Asia. to depressed wage levels in the United States and the continuing supply from overseas of cheap raw materials (especially oil) and low-cost labor. This relationship has created the objective basis for a social constituency for imperialist barbarism among a noisy. The aggressive policies of American imperialism produced the desired consequences: within the United States the living standards of the working class either stagnated or declined. self-absorbed and generally reactionary characteristics. ―I have no problem with a war for oil. a leading figure in the Fourth International for nearly four decades.The economic stability of American capitalism and. who epitomizes the outlook of the pro-imperialist nouveau riche. http://www.shtml) 5.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 41 EMPIRE K IMPACT – NORTH/SOUTH GAP Imperialism increases the standard of living for the upper classes of society.‖ . addicted. ―The crisis of American capitalism and the war against Iraq. Asia and the former USSR are interdependent phenomena. The staggering enrichment of America‘s ruling elite during the last decade and the horrifying destitution of Latin America. Thomas Friedman of the New York Times. with it. within the so-called ―Third World‖ there occurred a horrifying deterioration in the conditions of hundreds of millions of people. writes without the slightest sense of embarrassment. And so. and the availability of cheap commodity prices. stupid. Eurasia and Latin America in order to harvest a new Wall Street billionaire. If a mathematician were to study the relationship between wealth accumulation in the United States and the social consequences of low commodity prices and the super-exploitation of labor overseas. these policies produced benefits of which they could have only dreamed. The brazen glorification of American militarism within the mass media reflects the correspondence of this stratum‘s self-interest with the geo-political ambitions of American imperialism. while the situation deteriorates for the lower classes North ‗10 (David. produced the ideal environment for the massive stock market boom of the 1990s (which.wsws.org/articles/2010/mar2010/iraq-m20. and arrogant milieu of nouveau riche spawned by the speculative boom of the 1980s and 1990s. it should be recalled.
41). Therefore. As long as war threatens to dissolve the peaceful order of nations." They must accept the United States as "something godlike. Other nations must. may be useless as a strategic objective. rhetoric of security]-AC It is important to recognize that the rhetoric of security with its war on terrorism is not a program for action. The United States is the supreme agent of the world's war against war. political hegemony through its grounding in the idea of national agency and in the absolute opposition between the state of civility and the state of [End Page 37] war. suspend their agency when it comes to their existence. for the foreseeable future. . The United States is not bound to take any specific action implied by its rhetoric. It increases fear while claiming that the goal is to eliminate fear. It increases political antagonism by justifying U. According to a report published by the Strategic Studies Institute of the U. the rhetoric of security allows the United States to totalize world politics within itself in a manner that extends from the relations among states down to the inner moral struggle experienced by every human being. This assessment assumes that the actions comprehended under the rubric of the "war on terrorism" are designed to achieve a coherent military objective. "the global war on terrorism as currently defined and waged is dangerously indiscriminate and ambitious" (Record 2003. Judged by its own standards. Army. the rhetoric of security is counterproductive. but it is eminently effective in organizing a rhetoric designed to justify an open-ended series of hegemonic actions.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 42 EMPIRE K IMPACT TO TERRORISM – NO V2L THIS RHETORIC OF SECURITY IS A DISCOURSE THAT JUSTIFIES EXTERMINATION AND REDUCES THE VALUE OF ALL NON-AMERICANS TO NOTHING . The impossible "absolute security. It increases enmity toward the United States by according the United States a special status over and above all other nations. then.S. But this rhetoric gives the United States the prerogative to take whatever actions it decides upon for whatever purpose as long as these actions come within the rhetoric's purview. Designating the United States as the embodiment of the world order's underlying principle and the guarantor of the world order's existence. The rhetoric of security.S.1 (2005) 13-41. other nations must simply choose sides. It increases insecurity by pronouncing ever broader areas of life to be in need of security. but a discourse that justifies actions.ALL AGENCY OF EVERY PERSON ON EARTH MUST BE SUSPENDED TO THE UNITED STATES NOORANI IN 05 [ Yaseen. provides the moral framework for U. CR: The New Centennial Review 5. these nations must submit to the politics of "the one. These questions can be decided by the United States alone." in that in questions of its own security—which are questions of the world's security—they can have no authority to influence or oppose its actions. this rhetoric places both the United States and terrorism outside the normative relations that should inhere within the world order as a whole. The war against terror itself is a notional war that has no existence except as an umbrella term for various military and police actions." feared by the report's author to be the "hopeless quest" of current policy (46).S. interests in a language of universalism. instead of the many.
when we merely need to survive. but a war wherein a particular state seeks to usurp a universal concept against its military opponent" (Schmitt 1996.6 or indicate internal fissures in the state.1 (2005) 13-41.7 "The justification of [End Page 19] war does not reside in its being fought for ideals or norms of justice. and my group of people simply does whatever it can to preserve itself from extinction. in Schmitt's view. because the possibility of destruction at the hands of an enemy is always present and must therefore govern the nature of social organization and political authority. liberal individualism has no means of demanding selfsacrifice from citizens for the sake of the nation. If such physical destruction of human life [End Page 18] is not motivated by an existential threat to one's own way of life. (Schmitt 1996. but in its being fought against a real enemy" (49). a war on behalf of humanity that supposedly aims at putting an end to war. The introduction of morality into the nonmoral realm of self-preservation makes matters worse. Schmitt develops the Hobbesian notion of the state of war always in effect among nations. Liberal principles endanger the nation by placing all value in individual liberty and rights and none in the requirements of national security. and its means of fulfilling this purpose is its capacity to distinguish friends from enemies. first published in 1932.WE MUST REJECT THIS SURVIVALIST NOTION NOORANI IN 05 [ Yaseen. no norm no matter how true. But most significantly. normative considerations go out the window. indeed vitiates the state of war entirely by condemning the enemy as an immoral and inhuman agency that must be exterminated. it is not a war for the sake of humanity. liberalism can only call upon individuals to participate in a war that claims to be moral and just. Schmitt's point of departure is the possibility that some alien group of people may at some time try to destroy the group of people to which I belong. then it cannot be justified. The agency that exists for the purpose of preserving existence is the state. the readiness of combatants to die. This sort of political contestation within the state is for Schmitt the negative form of politics that must be eliminated by the repudiation of moral normativity in the political. particularly in a real combat situation with a real enemy. War. selfpreservation is a primordial fact outside of moral normativity. this non-normative condition of the state of war is the essence of the political. 48–49) The idea here is that no end or objective having to do with the way we think things ought to be can justify dying and killing. 54). Sheer existence is the only standard allowed. no program no matter how exemplary. no social ideal no matter how beautiful. the posturing of political parties to gain power through control of the government's authority to wage war. liberalism provides no incentive for organizing society so as to confront potential threats to it. "When a state fights its political enemy in the name of humanity. no legitimacy nor legality which could justify men in killing each other for this reason. . Indeed. We are only driven to these in cases of pure necessity. For Schmitt. but an existential meaning only. This ensures for Schmitt that only necessary wars will be fought and that wars will indeed be fought when necessary. and protecting the existence of the nation/state is the only orientation politics can have. According to Schmitt. Such moral claims for prosecuting a war are designed to veil ulterior motives. rhetoric of security]-AC In The Concept of the Political. In this case. Since liberal doctrine holds that individuals and nations may live peacefully by respecting each other's autonomy. CR: The New Centennial Review 5. such as greed.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 43 EMPIRE K A2: EXISTENCE PRECEDES VALUE TO LIFE PLACING THE FOCUS OF YOUR AFF ON SURVIVAL NECESSITATES EVERY ATROCITY AND ALLOWS US TO DETERMINE WHO'S LIFE IS WORTH LIVING . There exists no rational purpose. is that it does not even take this foundational eventuality of politics into account in formulating its principles. the physical killing of human beings who belong on the side of the enemy—all this has no normative meaning. On this basis. The problem with liberalism. he distinguishes the "political" from other areas of human existence by its concern with the preservation of one's existence as such.
because of values towards which their life aspires. but also of sacrificing it. mere survival does not appear to be an end in itself. Their attitude to their own life is not determined solely by instinct. but rather a limit of this or that individual‘s value orientation and attachment. independence and integrity. they strive to exist somewhat differently than a biological entity. is not any boundary of human potential for biological survival. in which humans invest. therefore. with which they identify themselves. Humans are capable not only of saving their own life. a supreme value only in the name of those unknown values and in linkage with them. From a human viewpoint. That is. Under such a situation humans do not always behave so unequivocally. rather than to one‘s bare life. Thus. mate or herd. and to which they attach supreme meaning. provisionally. . Only on such a basis is it possible to compare life with other values and freely avail oneself of it. they are capable of running the risk of losing their life and even of giving it up in passive resignation. one‘s bare life retains value only if and as one is capable of retaining at least some hope of discovering or creating new values. namely. In a situation of a total value vacuum and hopelessness life tends to become virtually irrelevant to a human person. sometimes even against it. one which is not arbitrary but spiritually free and connected with values. somehow they can confirm their humanity independently of their own survival. Such a free and differentiated approach attests to the fact that humans do not identify what they intrinsically are with their physical existence. If the principal values of his life have been destroyed or devalued.htm ]-AC An animal which finds itself in a life endangering situation tries to escape quite unambiguously and at any cost. but always vitally important — constitutes an extreme situation characteristic of man. Evidently. A threat to life is perceived by humans as an extreme situation only insofar as it jeopardizes also their possibility of living for certain values. that which is intrinsically one‘s own. The fact that one carries within oneself something one protects more than one‘s own life and without which one‘s life would lose its meaning and humanity points to the conclusion that. but is freer and more complicated . This spiritual existence implements a Humans can sacrifice or save their life because of something that exceeds the value of biological life. that is. one may attach to a certain value. What seems to be significant in extreme human situations.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 44 EMPIRE K COMPARATIVE IMPACT – VALUE TO LIFE O/W SURVIVAL VALUE TO LIFE OUTWEIGHS YOUR DEATH IMPACTS BECAUSE BIOLOGY IS NOT THE EXTENT OF LIFE. http://www. chapter 2: struggle for human dignity in extreme situations. Only a threat to such values — "sublime" or "mundane". ESTABLISHING VALUE TO LIFE IS A PRIOR CONCERN TO CONCERNS ABOUT PRESERVING LIFE POLOKOVA 2004 [Jolana. To put it in positive terms: they strive for a spiritually independent existence. one‘s specific extreme situation involves a threat to values which one regards as supreme. This reveals the ontologically unique spiritual nature of the person.org/book/Series04/IVA-18/chapter_ii. on which it is based. Then life becomes. but rather something to which one can assume a personal attitude. purely human possibility of self-transcendence through a principal attachment to values. although sometimes in a mediated fashion as dictated by the instinctive attachment to one‘s offspring. one‘s most profound identity. It is not something absolute or unconditioned. trying to transcend their physical existence.crvp. unlike other live beings.
With ontology at issue. in short. The implications of that review reverberate throughout the entire mode of thought. Heirs to all this. With its foundations at issue. (Prof of Politics. to those mock innocent political slaves who claim only to be technocrats of decision making. but Nietzsche and Heidegger showed that it intimately shapes not only a way of thinking. but a way of being. University of Lancaster). The question of Being. Whether or not you know or acknowledge it . 97-98). therefore reposed the fundamental and inescapable difficulty. in short. a form of life. a "last man. the very authority of a mode of thought and the ways in which it characterizes the critical issues of freedom and judgment (of what kind of universe human beings inhabit. Without it. a fortiori political decision. or aporia. for human being of decision and judgment.they crucially inform all other aspects of policy making Dillon. indeed applies most. is no mere technique. and of the fundaments of the human way of being within it. For one cannot say anything about anything that is. with the exception. Any mode of thought. how they inhabit it. and other continental philosophers challenged Western ontology. The very ways in which Nietzsche. It is instead a way of being that bears an understanding of Being.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 45 EMPIRE K ALTERNATIVES Ontology Key Questions of ontology must be asked and answered first. and what counts as reliable knowledge for them in it) is also put in question. You may think ontology is some arcane question of philosophy. Heidegger. p. What this ontological turn does to other regional modes of thought is to challenge the ontology within which they operate. as a human being you still have to act. for whom beauty. the work presents itself only as an attempt to recover the foundations of science. . having long ago given up the ontological questioning of when it called itself natural philosophy. 99 (Moral Spaces. according to Heidegger. the relevance of ontology to all other kinds of thinking is fundamental and inescapable. In forgetting this question. History of Political Philosophy 1987 p. we find ourselves in the turbulent and now globalized wake of its confluence. is the source and ground of all ontologies or orderings of beings and thus of all human understanding. wisdom. and greatness are mere words. Ontological questions must be asked and answered first Cropsey. knowingly or unknowingly. reveals a fundamental continuity of the theoretical and practical. it seems. man is reduced to a calculating beast concerned only with preservation and pleasure. In this sense it stands within the horizon of phenomenology. 891 On the surface there is little indication that this project has a practical or political motive. Indeed. This applies. Decision. man thus forgets the source of his own knowledge and loses the capacity to question in the most radical way. the entire foundations or underpinnings of any mode of thought are rendered problematic. to be invulnerable to ontological perturbation. without always already having made assumptions about the is as such. whatever ontology you subscribe to." to use Nietzsche's terminology. in its industrialized and corporatized form. In other words. This applies as much to any modern discipline of thought as it does to the question of modernity as such. always already carries an ontology sequestered within it. which is essential to both real thought and authentic freedom. appears now. A somewhat closer examination. which. The nihilistic brutality of this last man thus seems to lie behind Heidegger's concern with the foundations of science. however. As Heidegger-himself an especially revealing figure of the deep and mutual implication of the philosophical and the political4-never tired of pointing out. demanding a reappraisal as fundamental as the reappraisal ontology has demanded of philosophy. simultaneously. of science. the ontology you subscribe to will construe the problem of action for you in one way rather than another.
He strongly opposes Foucault's notion of a panoptical discourse. one that sees and controls everything. 40 We find a perfect example of such a practice in Margaret Atwood's fictional. the big events are not peasant rebellions or revolutions. of sorts. is the constant everyday struggle between the peasantry and those who seek to extract labour. reduces them to the common denominator where they can be dealt with. It was like a flag waved from a 41 hilltop in rebellion. on the consumer's (or 'dominee's'?) side. 38 Such a task would be doomed from the start. poets of their own affairs. remain unscrutinized.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 46 EMPIRE K ALTERNATIVE . 1999]-AC "We" are participants in ordered worlds. fall. of the mute processes that organize the establishment of socioeconomic order. this form of critique is almost omnipresent in folk culture. These are the critiques spoken behind the back of power. 599. it is all the more urgent to discover how an entire society resists being reduced to it. p 201-2]-AC De Certeau clearly detects human agency in everyday life. disguised in such practices as rumours.RESISTANCE WE MUST RESIST THE CHOICE TO A PART OF IMPERIALISM NAYAR 99 [Jayan. they are '[u]nrecognised producers. Popular Dissent. those related to speaking and writing. normal people are not simply faceless consumers. It's like a spell. forbidden. as de Certeau calls them. REJECTION SOLVES OUR ALTERNATIVE HAS POLITICAL VALUE IN ITS VERY LOCALIZED SPEECH REJECTION OF THE IMPERIALISM OF THE AFFIRMATIVE. if our own locations. U of Warwick school of law. I simply illustrate the persuasive aspects of de Certeau's argument via a few examples. He considers it unwise spending one's entire energy analysing the multitude of minuscule techniques that discipline the subject and paralyse her/him in a web of micro-level power relations. despite all our expressions of support and even actions of professionalized expertise. Probs. In the paint of the washroom cubicle someone unknown had scratched: Aunt Lydia sucks. detailed and highly compelling research Scott demonstrates the prevalence of lowprofile forms of resistance. he proposes an anti-Foucauldian path to understanding domination and resistance: If it is true that the grid of 'discipline' is everywhere becoming clearer and more extensive. For him too. rents and the like from them. are the practices by which people can re-appropriate the space controlled through the existing discursive order. It deflates them. THE SHEER EVERYDAYNESS OF OUR SPEECH ACT IS JUST AS IMPORTANT AS A REVOLUTION BECAUSE IT ALLOWS US TO INTERVENE AGAINST THE IDEOLOGIES OF THE STATUS QUO Roland Bleiker in 2000. Indeed. de Certeau stresses. or whether we wish merely to observe violence in far-off worlds in order that our interventionary participation "out there" never destabilizes the ground upon which we stand. James Scott has dealt in detail with everyday forms of peasant resistance. What deserves our attention. . There's something delightful about it. I suggest that we betray the spirit of transformatory struggle. & Contemp. 37 These 'ways of operating'. It is not my intention here to provide an exhaustive account of everyday forms of resistance that take place in these 'networks of anti-discipline'. Instead. Such an approach. dwelling or cooking become arts of manipulation that intervene with the prevalent discursive order. within which are ordered and from which we ourselves order. something naughty. what 'ways of operating' form the counterpart.ited. the utterances that make up the earlier-mentioned hidden transcript. on how everyday practices like walking. not merely observers. 9 Transnat'l L. 39 Through extensive. unduly privileges the productive apparatus. The choice is whether we wish to recognize our own locations of ordered violence and participate in the struggle to resist their orderings. for the range of daily acts of dissent is unlim. De Certeau focuses primarily on the uses of space in Western consumer societies. They are the vehicles of the powerless by which they 'insinuate a critique of power while hiding behind anonymity or behind innocuous understandings of their conduct'. trailblazers in the jungles of functionalist rationality'. shopping. but all too real authoritarian word: There is something powerful in the whispering of obscenities about those in power. thrilling. gossip. ―RE-FRAMING INTERNATIONAL LAW FOR THE 21ST CENTURY: Orders of Inhumanity. 36 De Certeau makes use of Foucault's research by turning it upside down. secretive. and finally. For him. jokes. Human Agency and Global Politics. what popular procedures (also 'minuscule' and quotidian) manipulate the mechanisms of discipline and conform to them only in order to evade them. leaving it to chapters 8 and 9 to analyse in detail more specific everyday forms of transversal dissent. it nevertheless is in the open. taxes. he argues. tales or songs. Although such critique is never spoken openly. Other authors locate daily practices of subversion in different spheres of life. They occur rarely anyway.
there are those who argue that much of the General's allure stems from a sort of transposition of realms. take on a certain vitality when he deploys them." [Colin Powell] says of the crisis in the inner cities.‖ Hypatia. pp30(16). allows for several promising analyses. conceptually. In a recent article in The New Yorker. and physically bounded. 77) How (where? when? why?) are institutions of law enforcement like military institutions? How is the presumed constant need for personal protection experienced by some constructed similarly to the necessity of national security? How does the constancy of militarism induce Looking at these questions might help interested parties figure out how to create and sustain movements that are attentive to local realities and particularities about war. It's like being able to support two military conflicts simultaneously. "I think people are hungry for a military solution to inner-city problems. and connections without collapsing all forms and instances of militarism or of state-sponsored violence into one neat picture. a constant undertone. focusing on the presence of war is particularly necessary given current realities of war. Seeing the constant presence of militarism does not require that middle-class and other privileged Americans suddenly see themselves as constantly under siege. such as the recent French decision to engage in nuclear testing. local. and effects on conceptions of gender and on the lives of women. Henry Louis Gates relays the following: 4) Finally. social and political philosophy.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 47 EMPIRE K QUESTIONING SOLVES THIS QUESTIONING OF WAR AS AN ONGOING PHENOMENA CAN WE FOSTER AN ETHICAL RELATIONSHIP TO THE OTHER THAT ADDRESSES MILITARISM IN OUR EVERYDAY LIVES CHRIS J. 1) By considering the presence of war and militarism. CUOMO is assistant professor of philosophy and women's studies at the University of Cincinnati. ethnic wars. and not just events. such as the twelve-year-old Japanese girl who was recently raped by American soldiers stationed in Okinawa. it is my hope that "You've got to start with the families. environmental ethics. moving sometimes closer to the foreground of collective consciousness in the form of direct combat yet remaining mostly as an unconsidered given. everyday violence that is rooted in injustice. . feminist philosophy. I will summarize four distinct benefits of feminist philosophical attention to the constancy of military presence in most everyday contemporary life. who are innocent as the day is long and who know right from wrong. about violence. These include environmental effects. philosophers and activists are able to engage in a more effective. in an age in which military technology makes war less temporally. 3) As Robin Schott emphasizes. (Indeed. even when peace seems present. It does require the development of abilities to notice the extent to which people and ecosystems can be severely under siege by military institutions and values. complacency toward or collaboration with authoritative violence? It is of course crucial that the analysis I recommend here notice similarities. "and then you've got to fix education so these little bright-eyed five-year-olds." Military metaphors. To conclude. and in which civil conflict. textured.) (Gates 1995. It is also important to emphasize that an expanded conception of war is meant to disrupt crisis-based politics that distract attention from mundane. and about the enmeshment of various systems of oppression. to return to a point which I raised earlier. v11. guerilla wars. multiplicitous discussion of specific examples and issues of militarism. and urban violence in response to worsening social conditions are the most common forms of large-scale violence. and between aspects of everyday militarism and military activities that generally occur between declarations of war and 2) the signing of peace treaties. And you have to do both these things simultaneously. fall 1996 [―War is not just an event: reflections on the significance of everyday violence. have all the education they need. patterns.n4." the black law professor and activist Patricia Williams says.] Emphasizing the ways in which war is a presence. Expanding the field of vision when considering the ethical issues of war allows us to better perceive and reflect upon the connections among various effects and causes of militarism. white noise in the background of social existence. She teaches courses in ethics. especially during "peacetime" (when most military activities occur). and lesbian and gay studies. a more presence-based analysis of war can be a tool for noticing and understanding other political and ethical issues as presences. the worn currency of political discourse in this country.
and. in turn. and that the world therefore can be and is represented in different. material) practices. material effects. discourses are themselves not perfectly coherent but always entail internal contradictions and lacunae. It should be noted that. We use the terms construction and production loosely to maintain the distinction between linguistic and nonlinguistic practices. Hugh.‖ As Laclau and Mouffe have argued (1987: 82—84). of threat. and the Production of Danger. static. The production of insecurities thus requires considerable social work—of production. are always ―materialized in concrete practices and rituals and operate through specific state [and other] apparatuses‖ (Hall. rather. pg.). discourses are composed of linguistic and nonlinguistic (that is to say. of reproduction. we are not examining mere rhetoric. etc. George Marcus. viewed as a field on which processes of discursive contestation are set. . or final. Meanings are not given. 16-17 The fact that cultures are composed of multiple discourses or codes of intelligibility. professor of anthropology at MIT. Ballinger. for example. professor of political science at University of Minnesota. Discourses and their codes of intelligibility have concrete. lecturer in international relations at University of Bristol. AND Raymond Duvall. In addition. ways. and significant. they are the vehicle for the production of social facts (such as insecurities). 17 After all. It is in this sense. 1988: 46). independent scholar. of discourse. attempt to rearticulate insecurities in ways that challenge the dominant representations (see. in analyzing such constructive processes. Mark Laffey. Communities. These contradictions make possible both resistance to a dominant discourse and the transformation of discourses. it means that any representation can potentially be contested and so must actively be reproduced.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 48 EMPIRE K A2: INEVITABILITY THE DISCOURSES OF IMPERIALISM ARE NOT INEVITABLE BUT CAN BE FRACTURED WITH COUNTERDISCOURSES LIKE OUR ALTERNATIVE ALLOWING US THE ABILITY TO CONSTRUCT REALITY DIFFERENTLY GUSTERSON ET AL IN 1999 Jutta Weldes. Through both linguistic and nonlinguistic practices. It is in any case misleading to associate the notions of culture. They allocate social capacities and resources and make practices possible. Cultures of Insecurity: States. or of codes of intelligibiliry with the ―merely linguistic. Defining security and insecurity requires Contesting discourses. discourses are the vehicle for the construction of categories (of difference. of transformation. that culture can be considerable ideological labor. discursive articulations. then. Linguistically. professor of anthropology at Rice. In particular. 1999. and often competing. both of which are indispensable to the production of worlds and of insecurity. has significant implications. of identity. this volume). including the construction of insecurities. they are always in process and always provisional. Gusterson. possibly. Dominant discourses must constantly reproduce themselves to answer challenges to their constructions of the world and their identification of those insecurities worthy of a response.
its ability to open up new ways of perceiving global politics. discursive forms of dissent. can be appreciated once we accept. A discursive notion of human there is no end to circles of revealing and concealing.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 49 EMPIRE K 2NC DISSENT . Popular Dissent. Because discursive dissent operates through a constant process of becoming something else than what it is. a spectacular outburst of energy that overcomes the dark forces of oppression and lifts liberation into an superior state of perpetual triumph. WE REINVIGORATE A CONCEPT OF HUMAN AGENCY. OUR ADVOCACY IS A GOOD IDEA BECAUSE IT IS A REJECTION OF ENTRENCHED IMPERIALISM. with Rilke. This process has no end. doggedly. that we always 'stand in the middle of a transition where we cannot remain standing'. of opening and closing spaces to think and act. Human agency not only engenders transition. are never complete. It can never be more than a set of open-ended meditations. not something that remains stable. It enters the social context in the form of what the East German poet Uwe Kolbe called 'a trace element'. efforts at coming to terms with them will never arrive at a stage of ultimate insight. rather than in an utopian final stage. THE VERY ACT OF DISSENT HAS REAL EFFECTS. Anything else would suggest a static view of the world. 'Escape is impossible!' 8 Even the most just social order excludes what does not fit into its view of the world. . 7 It does not directly cause particular events. But transversal dissent is nevertheless real. a stable foundation that could bring the illusion of order and certainty to the increasingly transversal domain of global politics. it is itself transition. Inclusiveness lies in a constant process of disturbing language and rethinking meaning. It is not an event that happens once.ROLE OF THE BALLOT OVERVIEW THE ROLE OF THE BALLOT IS TO ENDORSE THE BEST INTELLECTUAL ADVOCACY IN THE ROUND. p 281-2]-AC Transversal forms of dissent cannot succeed overnight. one in which human agency is annihilated. An approach to understanding dissent and human agency thus remains useful only as long as it resists the temptation of digging deeper by anchoring itself in a newly discovered essence. Revealing is always an act. endlessly. daily. Dissent is the very act of climbing. a theoretical engagement with its dynamics can never be exhaustive. It engenders human agency through a multilayered and diffused process. The effects of such interferences are difficult to see or prove. Nietzsche says. Human Agency and Global Politics. YOUR BALLOT RESISTS THE STATIC FUTURE IMBEDDED BY THE IMPERIAL ONTOLOGY. An engagement with linguistically and discursively entrenched forms of domination works slowly and indirectly. The role and potential of agency. If we are to gain and retain a viable understanding of human agency in global politics we must embrace the transversal and the transitional as inevitable aspects of life. especially if one approaches the question of evidence with a positivist understanding of knowledge. OUR AFFIRMATIVE WILL NOT ALTER EVERY INSTITUTION OVERNIGHT. 'Everything becomes and returns eternally'. There is no emancipatory peak to be climbed. Just as the interaction of domination and resistance has no end. YOUR PEN RESTORES VALUE TO LIFE DENIED BY POLICIES THAT DENY ANY AGENCY AND DIGNITY DENIED BY IMPERIAL VIOLENCE THIS IS BLEIKER IN 2000 [Roland. No matter how successful they are. even if they manage to transgress national boundaries. through a gradual transformation of societal values. and as a permanent condition of life. one in which agency is grounded precisely in this recognition that the future can never tear down the boundaries of the present.
like Perry Anderson. Leftists have long denounced American imperialism-the word itself is theirs. so foreigners routinely invest in the US economy. isbn: 1859845827. stable. But the basis of hegemony is more of a matter-of-fact acceptance of things "as the way they are. Hegemony creates a system of consent to world order that is unquestioned and leaves imperialism in tact. Even the consent of victims can be bought out by American capitalist development. and so it is also the way they can make profits. the US has to play by the rules it has established. subsidizing American consumers and indirectly paying for the US military. so that hegemony is also partly legitimate. By fusing two giants together-the United States and capitalism-they have often blamed most of the world's ills on a single Leviathan. and the conspiracy theorists among them see it as extraordinarily well organized. Even much more sophisticated post-Marxists. Leftists often credit the United States with simply enormous powers.13 Left. For example. That is the worry of the liberals. They agree with the hawks that this is imperialism. secure." a word which indicates that the imperial power establishes "the rules of the game" by which others routinely play. This is what we call "hegemony. though they may occasionally grumble. the US dollar is the world's reserve currency. British-born professor of Sociology at the UCLA and Visiting Research Professor at Queen's University Belfast Incoherent Empire. He sees no significant challenge to US power and hegemony anywhere. Other powers grumble. it risks losing hegemony." Then people's own everyday actions help reproduce the dominance without much thought. without their even being much aware of this. .J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 50 EMPIRE K 2NC A2: A2: INEVITABILITY Their inevitability claims are only as good as the acceptance of them. Of course. In practical terms they consent. p ____1112_____ ]-AC A broader point lies behind such arguments. Others may come to approve of the rules as well. the capitalist-imperialist US. they just see it as a bad thing. the catch is that to be hegemonic. liberals and conservatives all agree: this is the Age of American Empire. Foreigners see this mainly as the way the global economy works. An Empire of pure benevolence might seem impossible. but they acquiesce. Capital expansion is used to produce acceptance to American power Mann 2003 [Michael. he says. If unilateral militarism abandons the rules. But an Empire to which the ruled routinely consent is not unusual. partake of this view.
S. Throw the new militarists out of office. No sig nificant danger would occur if the US stopped doing all these things. so comfortable and so well-protected in the seagirded continent we dominate. however. isbn: 1859845827. doing egregious damage to Soviet interests. many of them amid failing states and economies. Their impact turns are irrelevant because this empire will inevitably collapse Mann 2003 [Michael. isbn: 0742527727.S. imperfect. Otherwise the world will reduce Americans' powers still further. will never be enough to guarantee the kind of ideological hegemony the United States will require to sustain its global domination over the coming decades. the world is not actually very dangerous. the Nazis in Russia. that its mission is not to plunder and control but to liberate. the United States is a democracy. with all of its logistical and technological advantages. seeking extra-territorial control over oil supplies. moreover. The giant is forced back to militarism alone. As with the French in Algeria. especially a benevolent one. "preemptive" move into Iraq has ironically shown the entire world just how fragile the military juggernaut. especially the kind of grand ambitions Even the most sophisticated forms of technowar. whose sources of information about Arabs and Islam are woefully inadequate.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 51 EMPIRE K A2: EMPIRE INEVITABLE This new militarism is self defeating. Professor of Social Sciences at National University in Los Angeles. ferment-in other words. embracing the most noble. but the action was internationally condemned. propaganda and policy apparatus from imposing its imperial perspective on Americans. It should not be dangerous at all for Americansso prosperous. not the solution. but it cannot sustain legitimacy in the form of popular support for imperial ambitions. This giant's military might sits uneasily with economic and geopolitical resources that originate in multilateral arrangement. with the political solution close at hand in November 2004. and the USSR suffered a loss of legitimacy across Eastern Europe from which it would never recover. and this is not enough for Empire. The superpower could impose its coercive rule briefly. As Edward Said writes: Every empire tells itself and the world that it is unlike all other empires. Adjunct Professor at Antioch University in Los Angeles. the Japanese in China. and the Americans in Vietnam. democratic ends possible. It is imperfect and various shades of gray. Dangers loom because of American militarism-seeking to drive into the ground the few failing communist remnants in the world. to maintain its greatpower control-the aggression backfired terribly. good and evil. It is too stingy to invest prop erly to Its militarism also greatly outstrips its political capacity to rule any conquered country and contradicts the ideology of freedom and democracy that the US (and the world) holds dear. Quite the contrary.s. The world is not black and white. hoping to quell unrest and an upsurge of anti-Communist embraced by American elites today. Luckily. Imperial decline is inevitable. can be.P Such an apparatus. the Brezhnev regime emerged from the crisis as a pariah state. In the 1980s the Mghanistan quagmire turned out to be the final blow against Soviet bloc hegemony. They are wrong. but its stretch is incoherent. messy world. invading foreign countries uninvited and supporting state terrorists. . history shows us that this empire cannot sustain itself BOGGS 2005 [Carl. p ___266-267______ ]-AC But outside the scattered "black holes" of ethnic/religious conflict. Imperial Delusions: American Militarism and Endless War. Whatever our ideological goals. virtuous and otherwise. as we saw in Afghanistan and Iraq. and that wars to secure global domination are just replays of the good war. need pragmatism to cope with the real. The historical record is clear: armed force can achieve a string of military victories. When the Soviet Union invaded Czechoslovakia in 1968. The American Empire is not yet over-stretched. but that hasn't prevented the u. p __211-2___]-AC The U. we also consolidate Empire. national chauvinism combined with militarism and imperial overreach turned out to be brutally self-defeating. These ideas are by no means shared by the people who inhabit that empire. The new militarists argue that all their enemies could be crushed by American power. Of course the American political and media systems work indefatigably to convince the nation and the world that the U. stationing American troops where they have no business. brand of imperial and military power is fundamentally different from anything in the past. American powers are uneven and unsuited for Empire. The new militarism becomes part of the problem. British-born professor of Sociology at the UCLA and Visiting Research Professor at Queen's University Belfast Incoherent Empire. cannot serve as a viable instrument of occupation by a foreign power within an intensely nationalistic milieu.
however ineffective. but little more. government. economic. the responsibility that comes with having choices and making decisions. or do so at an unacceptable human. as energy. it is important to allow this possible conclusion to weigh on us. in Connolly's insistence that.. against everything Kant hoped for. tend towards a deterministic fatalism. but by an overarching system of thinking and understanding that lays claim to our entire space of truth and existence. The aff enframes being and discursively constrains agency to their worldview. to stand in for progress.the rule of Enframing threatens man with the possibility that it could be denied to him to enter into a more original revealing and hence to experience the call of a more primal truth. War is the product of hegemonic forms of knowledge which herald themselves as objective and rational. or to remove one injustice only to replace it with others (the U.on the questions we put to the real and our efforts to create and act into it .When we consider the problem of policy. Burke. the force of this analysis suggests that choice and agency can be all too often limited. or a neutral and rational instrument of policy -. within the instrumental utilitarianism of 'enframing' and the stark ontology of the friend and enemy. Large sections of modern societies -. Do security and strategic policies seek to exploit and direct humans as material. even in the face of the anonymous power of discourse to produce and limit subjects. norms. They are certainly tremendously aggressive and energetic in continually stating and reinstating its force.and material constraints that derive from the mutually reinforcing cascade of discourses and events which then preordain militarism and violence as necessary policy responses. Existence and Reason‖ Theory & Event Volume 10. 'empirical' discourses of scientific and political truth rooted in powerful enlightenment images of being. repression. argues Heidegger. security and action.S. militates against excessive optimism.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 52 EMPIRE K A2: FRAMEWORK Their framework justifies violence. 2007 ]-AC My argument here. Issue 2. however violent or dangerous. political leaderships and national security institutions -. appreciate that he was searching for a way out of the modern system of calculation. The force of my own and Heidegger's analysis does. geopolitics. The current policymaking apparatus is bound to this American exceptionalist ontology which culminates in massive violence while masking itself as inevitable. is that the enframing world view has come to stand in for being itself. Indeed what Heidegger argues. amoral framework (of 'interests') and a linear chain of causes and effects (the idea of force).his faith in 'art' and the older Greek attitudes of 'responsibility and indebtedness' offer us valuable clues to the kind of sensibility needed. becomes preordained through that reasoning's very operation and existence. calculating vision of enframing. Yet his path out is somewhat chimerical -. Enframing.that is to reinstate ontology and obscure its worldly manifestations and consequences from critique. of how the modern ontologies of war efface agency. modernity and reason. by being aware of its presence and weight and activating a very different concept of existence. Only a questioning of the aff allows a restoration of agency. they can remain confined (sometimes quite wilfully) within the overarching strategic and security paradigms. events and consequences which are less predictable and controllable?91 And most fundamentally: Are we seeking to coerce or persuade? Are less violent and more sustainable choices available? Will our actions perpetuate or help to end the global rule of insecurity and violence? Will our thought? . Viewed in this light.are utterly trapped within the Clausewitzian paradigm. 'free relationship' to technology that would not be immediately recaptured by the strategic. selves remain capable of agency and thus incur responsibilities. Or..86 Even as I am arguing that war is not an enduring historical or anthropological feature. Many of the most destructive features of contemporary modernity -. On my part this is quite deliberate . with exercising power? (In this I am much closer to Connolly than Foucault.90 This would seem to hinge upon 'questioning' as such -. causality and responsibility from decision making. tendencies of an international society of republican states will save us. admittedly. covert intervention. policymakers' choices become necessities.that it is rather the product of hegemonic forms of knowledge about political action and community -. and humans suffer and die.available choices may simply not be seen as credible or legitimate -. that he was searching for a 'questioning'. more hopefully.. their actions become inevitabilities. 'does not simply endanger man in his relationship to himself and to everything that is. or do they seek to protect and enlarge human dignity and autonomy? Do they seek to impose by force an unjust status quo (as in Palestine).. Neither the progressive flow of history nor the pacific The violent ontologies I have described here in fact dominate the conceptual and policy frameworks of modern republican states and have come.especially parts of the media.it drives out every other possibility of revealing .militarism. It creates both discursive constraints -. but from calculative. technology or policy. whilst normatively sympathetic to Kant's moral demand for the eventual abolition of war.is a view that the challenge is posed not merely by a few varieties of weapon. Anthony 2007 [―Ontologies of War: Violence. while refusing Heidegger's unworldly89 nostalgia. policy choices could aim to bring into being a more enduringly inclusive. 'rationality' is the name we give the chain of reasoning which builds one structure of truth on another until a course of action. But is there a way out? Is there no possibility of agency and choice? Is this not the key normative problem I raised at the outset. dysfunctional or chaotic. and environmental price? Do we see our actions within an instrumental. coercive diplomacy.my analysis does suggest some sobering conclusions about its power as an idea and formation.derive not merely from particular choices by policymakers based on their particular interests. However we can. I think with some credibility.'87 What I take from Heidegger's argument -. economic exploitation and ecological destruction -. in Iraq or Afghanistan). cosmopolitan and peaceful logic of the political. or do we see them as folding into a complex interplay of languages. Confined within such an epistemological and cultural universe. 88) There seems no point in following Heidegger in seeking a more 'primal truth' of being -. But this cannot be done without seizing alternatives from outside the space of enframing and utilitarian strategic thought.one that I have sought to extend by analysing the militaristic power of modern ontologies of political existence and security -.
9 Transnat'l L. NAYAR 99 [Jayan. monocultures prevail. . State officials asserting the right of "benign imperialism. The struggle ahead. I suggest we begin this exploration into an alternative narrative on world-order by stepping off the bandwagon of world-order narratives to reflect on the connotations of its very terminology. freed now [*605] from the ideological constraints of an outdated. what the structures of a global order might look like . From advertising hoardings to cinema posters. A new order for these exciting times is the order of the day." after all.S. to those with the mobility to "be anywhere "--the professional. For these. fall. lawyers. such leisurely meanderings are limited to those who have the resources by which to make such a comparative study. let alone international. however conceptualized." 9 to the "reordering" demands of progressive internationalists calling for "humane governance" 10 and "neighborhood" perspectives. The point of our concern is not simply about "world-order-talk. ―RE-FRAMING INTERNATIONAL LAW FOR THE 21ST CENTURY: Orders of Inhumanity. a "globalized" world-order has come to fit snugly within the common parlance of these "global citizens" (politicians. much of what provides the descriptive content of world-order narratives appears to be happening. geo-politically based state system. Setting aside these divergent articulations of the vision of world-order. corporate actors. academics). or even minor town. local flavors provide an exotic touch of difference to the otherwise comfortable familiarity of the global. WE FOCUS ON THE STRUGGLE AHEAD. shopping malls to banks. Thus. narratives of a "global world" find appeal. level is taking place. Leisurely meanderings through the streets of any major city. hotels to discotheques. & Contemp. about the real or potential impacts of world-orders. U of Warwick school of law. muzak to top-tens. The rush to capture the symbolic and futuristic landscape of world-order provides us with the rich exhortations of "new beginnings. anywhere. is one of increased human welfare. 599. fashion of the chic to that of the executive. let us locate the rhetoric of worldorder within the realm of social experience. WE MUST ABANDON THE GEO-POLITICAL SYSTEM KNOWN AS DEBATE. professional NGOists. Of course." the footloose academic." open to the intellectual expertise of both "right" and "left" politico-economic orientations. These range from the "ordering" inclinations of U. but rather. provide ample sensory evidence of a globalization-led rise in homogeneity of social experience and aspiration. Probs. real or imagined. 1999]-AC [*604] Indeed. INSTEAD OF FOCUSING ON HARMS AT HOME. the "global activist. 11 Regardless of political and ideological orientations. and world-order possibilities have infused their imaginations.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 53 EMPIRE K A2: FRAMEWORK ROLEPLAYING UNIQUELY TRICKS US INTO A MINDSET THAT WE CAN ―CONTROL‖ THE WORLD. Increased interaction at the global. restaurants to cyber-cafes. the corporate player. lies in determining what the image of order might be. the underlying message of the rhetoric of world-order. from such vantage points. Everywhere.
Such a retrieval implies not only that this logic is "the spatial logic of the simulacrum.) The post–Vietnam War self-representation of "America" in the hegemonized terms of radical and untethered diversity is precisely intended to make such "postmodern" cultural production appear to correspond with the emancipatory imperatives of the decentering of the Vietnam era — that is. that is. the self-reliant "westering" frontiersman of the early nineteenth century (Manifest Destiny). The fractured "field of stylistic and discursive heterogeneity without a norm" becomes the "look" — the re-presentation — produced by a recuperative reorganization of the operative functions of the American logos in the wake of its decentering in the 1960s. it should be noted. As I have suggested. which makes it possible for anyone in fact to say anything at all. then. whose errand in the wilderness was providentially (ontologically) ordained.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 54 EMPIRE K A2: PERMUTATION THE PERMUTATION IS WORSE THAN THE PLAN. To this we must add the culture's phenomenally incorporative capacity. A postmodernism that remembers its historically specific origins as a discursive practice of resistance against a genocidal assault on a Third World people undertaken in the name of the ontological principles of humanist freedom discloses a different understanding of the logic of late capitalism. Jameson's argument is yoked to his description of consumer culture. To remember this epochal event — this first postmodern war. depthlessness. most subtly developed by the United States in the aftermath of the Vietnam War to pacify and domesticate the visible contradictions exposed by its virulent will to save Vietnam for liberal democracy. but everything is processed either toward the dominant mainstream or out to the margins. America‘s Shadow p 175-176]-AC "Jamesonian" representation of postmodernity seems to be blinded by its insight into the late capitalist detemporalization of history to the amnesiac and banalizing strategy of accommodation. is in the process of being reproduced in Europe as the EC. pastiche. IT ATTEMPTS TO ACCOMMODATE OUR ONTOLOGICAL QUESTIONING INTO IMPERIAL PRACTICE MASKING THE IMPERIAL AGENDA. the technology of power of neocapitalist imperialism. as Jameson has rightly identified it — is to estrange the "Jamesonian" representation of postmodernism. that has increasingly become the essential From the decentered perspective precipitated by what I have called the epistemic break that occurred in the 1960s. (This reorganization. This is the strategy. whose central features are a new relationship with the past based on pastiche and nostalgia. a new and eclectic randomness in the cultural artifact." of fragmentation.and the Puritan planter. the colonial pioneer. THIS IS PROVEN BY THE PACIFICATION OF POST-VIETNAM PROTEST SPANOS 2000 [William. in the rhetoric of "development. to mask the imperial agenda of the recuperated accommodational center in the soft features of a tolerant and ameliorative benevolence. a reorganization of space.15 ." This is tacitly the point Edward Said makes in recalling contemporary postcolonial criticism to the critical task demanded by the absolute affiliation between culture and imperialism: One can recognize new patterns of dominance. superficiality. the Vietnam War bore genealogical witness to the continuous complicity between the post-World War II American (neoimperial) capitalist initiative in the "wilderness" of Vietnam and the rugged individualist entrepreneur of the late nineteenth century. but that this totally disjunctive field of simulacra is a seductive appearance. in contemporary culture. and characteristics of multinational capitalism. to borrow from Fredric Jameson's description of postmodernism.
2000. prolematise the existing power relations and try to understand how they have emerged and how they are undergoing transformation. guaranteeing the plan won‘t solve. Popular Dissent. exemplified by realist and positivist perceptions of the international. then. take the prevailing structure of the world as the given framework for action. is the most viable conceptual tool for such a task. is that they not only accept. according to Cox. Dissent in global politics is precisely about redirecting this path. is not to 'rescue the exploration of identity from postmodernists'. and Global Politics. Human Agency. The notion of discourse. but nevertheless highly significant in shaping the course of contemporary global politics. The purpose and potential of such an approach are well recognized at least since Robert Cox introduced a distinction between critical and problem-solving approaches to world politics.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 55 EMPIRE K A2: permutation The aff‘s form of problem-solving takes the current understanding of world politics and only moves around pieces to fit them together better. sustain it. They study various aspects of the international system and address the problems that they create. intentionally or not. the existing order as given. It facilitates an exploration of the close linkages that exist between theory and practice. Page 16-17. but also. explicitly or implicitly. The point. rather than circumvent. They engage. This can only entrench current realist and statecentric practices. The problem with such approaches. Critical theories. Roland Bleiker. I shall demonstrate. but to explore questions of agency and identity in the context of an understanding of social dynamics that takes into account how ideas and practices mutually influence each other. It opens up possibilities to locate and explore terrains of transversal dissent whose manifestations of agency are largely obscured. perceived and entrenched. . by contrast. It is about interfering with the very manner in which international relations have been constituted. The latter. the multi-layered dynamics that make up transversal struggles. This is to accept and deal with the recognition 'that our rationalization of the international is itself constitutive of that practice'.
and expanded worldwide military deployments . more generally. With the disappearance of any semblance of a Soviet challenge by the early 1990s. nuclear modernization. and intellectuals who exercise their influence within reputedly free and open public forums. myths. as in the case of the two Gulf Wars. So too has the domestic infrastructure of American society gone into decline. that it will be very difficult to reverse. politics. joined by a few "rogue states" led by modernday Hitlers. The military and security network presided over by the United States requires patriotic mobilization that in turn depends on an efficient propaganda system operating largely in the service of government agendas. U. mobile anti terror units. p _81-82____]-AC Despite troop and base reductions here and there over the past few decades. space militarization. In such a setting. new weapons systems were much easier to justify and sell. where "national security" priorities shape elite agendas. isbn: 0742527727. the result is a strong authoritarianism marked by ideological conformism. institutional narrowing. urban chaos and violence. . While militarization appears to demonstrate national strength. officials.S. Adjunct Professor at Antioch University in Los Angeles. glob al terrorism soon furnished the perfect demonized enemy. intelligence. secrecy in government decision making. law enforcement. foreign policy (and society) is the more rational strategy. which. can only reinforce this trajectory. Adjunct Professor at Antioch University in Los Angeles. has risen to unchallenged hegemony. including new requests for high-tech weaponry. This is probably more true of international affairs than of any other realm. then democracy winds up as something of a charade where lies. Imperial Delusions: American Militarism and Endless War. media manipulation. the spread of weapons of mass destruction. militarism was of course much easier to galvanize after 9/11. distortions. which it receives from politicians. and manipulation have been the result BOGGS 2005 [Carl. patriotism reaching its highest point since World War II as the fear of new terrorist episodes lent a sense 'of national urgency to crucial state functions: surveillance. If demilitarization of US. Imperial Delusions: American Militarism and Endless War. always costly and destructive. military preparedness. authoritarianism. in reality it only masks or deflects these dysfunctions: armed supremacy ironically works to compensate for imperial weaknesses. military has steadily extended its power across both the international and domestic terrain. p __207___]-AC To the degree military force serves as the cornerstone of US. As we have seen. The war on terrorism. Professor of Social Sciences at National University in Los Angeles.S. In his 2 002 State of the Union address Bush argued for a military budget reaching nearly $400 billion. creating an inbred way of life within the economy. the media. competitive advantage relative to Europe and Asia-both materially and politically--has been sliding for some time. the U. Global decline can be expected to have immediate the American economy (and society) is so fully intertwined with the world capitalist system.S. and culture Gust as President Eisenhower said he feared in 1959). and cover-ups that shape public life are embraced and passed on by Republican and Democratic politicians alike. the problem is that militarism has become so endemic to American society as a whole. political instability. more crucially. since the fall of the USSR and end of the cold war. The maintenance of Empire. a regime of surveillance. and surely does so in a variety of combat situations. requires ongoing legitimation. then heavy reliance on military force-affirming coercion over consent-is ultimately counterproductive. even as the United States retains its superpower military status. the Pentagon system functions to protect Empire. terrorism. multinational) corporate economy. Professor of Social Sciences at National University in Los Angeles.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 56 EMPIRE K A2: LINK TURNS – “WE REDUCE TROOPS” Empirically troop reductions have helped to sustain imperialism across the globe. Where such mobilization is highly effective. pushed along by the quagmire in Iraq and. certain to be a durable feature of American political life for decades. the Middle East. The plans act of demilitarization is ineffective. owing in part to the burdensome costs of global expansion and the dysfunctions of its grand strategy. the erosion of ideological carryover into the domestic realm because hegemony. not only economic decline but. global strategy. If global domination requires broad and firm popular support within the matrix of a stable (administered. imperial power grows paradoxically ever more fragile as the world system faces mounting dysfunctions: economic breakdown. isbn: 0742527727. If Empire signifies an increasingly militarized politics and society. Public support for U. Surveillance. it doesn‘t change the endemic culture of imperialism abroad BOGGS 2005 [Carl. the growing concentration of power in a few hands.
among other things.and this can be a very violent process. The effect is. in which competitive production is a fundamental condition of existence. 1 Capitalism is a system in which all economic actors producers and appropriators . the market dependence of both appropriators and producers means that they are subject to the imperatives of competition. especially land. Ph. But just as workers had to be made dependent on capital and kept that way. it uses economic coercion WOOD 2003 [Ellen. Empire of Capital. accumulation and increasing labour productivity. which has consequences both for class relations and imperial expansion. This is in sharp contrast to non-capitalist societies. simply by imposing and manipulating the operations of a capitalist market. . and therefore were sheltered from the forces of the market. command over propertyless workers. Capitalism has extended the reach of imperial domination far beyond the capacities of direct political rule or colonial occupation. is driven by these imperatives. In capitalism. and specifically the relation between capitalists and wage labourers. a distinctive relation between political and economic power. Ph. p _21-2]-AC Older forms of imperialism depended directly on conquest and colonial rule. are also mediated by the market.depend upon the market for their most basic needs.D Political Science from UCLA. Just as capitalist classes need no direct political. isbn: 1859845029. Empire of Capital. while appropriators relied on superior force to extract surplus labour from direct producers. p _9-10]-AC The new imperialism is what it is because it is a creature of capitalism. capitalist empires can rely on economic pressures to exploit subordinate societies. where direct producers typically had non-market access to the means of production. and the whole system. so subordinate economies must be made and kept vulnerable to economic manipulation by capital and the capitalist market .D Political Science from UCLA. isbn: 1859845029.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 57 EMPIRE K A2: LINK TURN – „WE REDUCE TROOPS‟ The new imperialism is a creation of capitalist market forces that altered the function of the nation state WOOD 2003 [Ellen. Capitalist imperialism doesn’t rely on military presence to subjugate peoples. It is a system in which class relations between producers and appropriators.
is the process that reshapes these entrenched perceptions and the ensuing political practices. Dissent. in this case. such as realist interpretations of international politics. Popular Dissent. is not to ignore the constantly changing domain of international relations. may well predict certain events only because their theoretical premises have become so objectivised that they have started to shape decision makers and political dynamics.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 58 EMPIRE K A2: PREDICTIONS GOOD YOUR PREDICTION ARGUMENTS ARE NONSENSE. A predictive approach thus runs the risk of ending up in a form of inquiry that imposes a static image upon a far more complex set of transversal political practices. the main objective must consist of facilitating an understand. Human Agency and Global Politic. however. no more possibility for politics to overtake theory. From such a vantage-point there is no more room for interference and human agency. THEY ANNIHILATE HUMAN AGENCY WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY CREATING A SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY OF THEIR IMPACTS Roland Bleiker in 2000.ing of transversal struggles that can grapple with those moments when people walk through walls precisely when nobody expects them to do so. To assert that international relations is a domain of political dynamics whose future should be predictable through a convincing set of theoretical propositions is to assume that the course of global politics is to a certain extent predetermined. Cambridge University Press. annihilate human agency. Important theories. by its own logic. p48-49 2000. The point of a theoretical inquiry. Prediction is a problematic assessment tool even if a theory is able to anticipate future events. . Rather. The very notion of prediction does.
. producing or reinforcing certain crisis narratives. Towards an Autonomous Future Up to this point. can we support a democratic process of prevention from below? The answer. however. No. regardless of what we do or wish. later generations may be left with a single course of action. the reverse is no less true. is the opposite reaction. environmental. Moreover. undermine a viable practice of farsightedness. How. lies in cultivating the public capacity for critical judgment and deliberation. that of merely reacting to large-scale emergencies as they arise. Some believe that the world to come is so uncertain and dangerous that we should not attempt to modify the course of history. regressive dystopias can operate as Trojan horses advancing political agendas or commercial interests that would otherwise be susceptible to public scrutiny and opposition. whereby the decision to work through perils today greatly enhances both the subsequent room for maneuver and the chances of success. and contestation. Out of our sense of responsibility for the well-being of those who will follow us. Instances of this kind of manipulation of the dystopian imaginary are plentiful: the invasion of Iraq in the name of fighting terrorism and an imminent threat of use of ‗weapons of mass destruction‘. and effectiveness of competing dystopian visions in order to arrive at a socially self-instituting future. and techno-scientific activists have convincingly shown that we cannot afford not to engage in preventive labor. the conservative expansion of policing and incarceration due to supposedly spiraling crime waves. procrastination makes little sense for three principal reasons: it exponentially raises the costs of eventual future action. With the foreclosing of long-range alternatives. or to halt mass atrocities once they are underway.‘ the argument is vulnerable to misappropriation since farsightedness does not in and of itself ensure emancipatory outcomes. techno-science) in charge of sorting out the future for the rest of us. unless and until it is substantively ‗filled in. if widely accepted. or a naively Panglossian pragmatism (‗things will work themselves out in spite of everything. 4. both of them encourage public disengagement from deliberation about scenarios for the future. Blackwell Synergy]-AC In a word. and it erodes their effectiveness. belief structures.‖36 Global civil society may well be helping a new generational selfconception take root.KURESAWA Your predictions are inaccurate scare tactics. which challenges presumptions about the inscrutability of the future (II) and a stance of indifference toward it (III). Nonetheless. I think. because humankind always finds ways to survive‘). We need only think of how it gradually becomes more Preventive foresight is grounded in the opposite logic. then. Humanitarian. State and market institutions may seek to produce a culture of fear by deliberately stretching interpretations of reality beyond the limits of the plausible so as to exaggerate the prospects of impending catastrophes. difficult to control climate change. alarmism and resignation would. Two normative concepts are particularly well suited to grounding these tasks: the precautionary principle and global justice. Alarmism constructs and codes the future in particular ways. by intentionally promoting certain prognoses over others for instrumental purposes. we come to be more concerned about the here and now. so that participants in global civil society subject all claims about potential catastrophes to examination. evaluation. or unnecessary. namely. This is sustained by a tragic chronological framework according to which humanity is doomed to decay. the severe curtailing of American civil liberties amidst fears of a collapse of ‗homeland security‘. Foremost among the possible distortions of farsightedness is alarmism. 11. Frequently accompanying it is a self-deluding denial of what is plausible (‗the world will not be so bad after all‘). then. this section proposes to specify normative criteria and participatory procedures through which citizens can determine the ‗reasonableness. [Fuyuki. Their apocalyptic representations reinforce status quo institutions resulting in culture of fear makes public sphere deliberation and cultural change impossible Kurasawa ‗04. Accordingly. I would contend that farsighted cosmopolitanism is not as remote or idealistic a prospect as it appears to some. let alone reverse it. thus effectively producing a heteronomous social order.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 59 EMPIRE K A2: PREDICTIONS . the manufacturing of unwarranted and unfounded doomsday scenarios. a fatalistic pessimism reconciled to the idea that the future will be necessarily worse than what preceded it. IV. Constellations Vol. as evidenced by various expressions of greater sensitivity to past injustices and future dangers. according to which we view ourselves as the provisional caretakers of our planetary commons. or a cyclical one of the endless repetition of the mistakes of the past. Therefore.37 Much more common.‘ legitimacy. I have tried to demonstrate that transnational socio-political relations are nurturing a thriving culture and infrastructure of prevention from below. for as Falk writes. and so forth. a process that appears to be dangerous. the future will look after itself for better or worse. actually seems to be increasing. If fear-mongering is a misappropriation of preventive foresight. The resulting ‗depublicization‘ of debate leaves dominant groups and institutions (the state. however. resignation about the future represents a problematic outgrowth of the popular acknowledgment of global perils. or yet again. the market. One version of this argument consists in a complacent optimism perceiving the future as fated to be better than either the past or the present. of Sociology @ York University. Cautionary Tales. it reduces preventive options. On top of their dubious assessments of what is to come. As much as alarmist ideas beget a culture of fear. the neoliberal dismantling of the welfare state as the only remedy for an ideologically constructed fiscal crisis. Indeed. pointless. ―[g]lobal justice between temporal communities. and rhetorical conventions. Assistant Prof.
not for their uniqueness. as we shall see when I return to him in chapter 6—is that Huntington makes quite explicit the deeply back. in spatializing time/history. the emergence of a spectral force—one that promises to become global—the visible invisibility of which. in the fulfillment of its oversight. Greene's novel about America's initial intervention in Vietnam is proleptic of the post 9/11 occasion. Greene's novel also anticipates the disastrous consequences of the exceptionalist "civilizational" problematic of the intellectual deputies of the Bush administration that is now determining America's global "war on terror": not simply the carnage its relentlessly single-minded (Ahabian) perspective ("staying the course.As I have been suggesting by way of pointing to the indissoluble relationship between York Harding's policy books and Alden Pyle's American Protestant "textual attitude" and its disastrous practical consequences. THIS BLINDNESS TO THE BLOOD LOST BY IMPERIALISM WILL PRODUCE ANOTHER AMERICAN DEFEAT OR THE END OF THE GLOBE Spanos. in privileging oversight. William V. as in the Vietnam War." as the president has insistently put it) is wreaking in the Islamic Middle East in the name of saving it for the "civilized world.'"By thus anticipating these paradoxical consequences of the American exceptionalist problematic in the Vietnam War. a specter whose visible invisibility molecularized and eventually defeated the most powerful army in the history of warfare. epitomized by the American jeremiad. . manifested itself in the following decade as an oversight that ultimately resulted in the devastation of an inordinate number of innocent Vietnamese people (it is estimated that about half of the two million that were killed were civilians) and of their land in the name of saving them for the free world. as the sporadic and dispersed but increasingly frequent acts of a "terrorism" suggest.grounded religiocultural or "civilizational" foundation of this extremely dangerous—but finally self-defeating—national initiative that most of his other neoconservative colleagues conceal behind the geopolitical "realism" of their global vision. In perceiving the United States' original intervention in Vietnam in terms of the perennial American exceptionalist/Cold War/Orientalist problematic. representative of the discourse of the policy makers of the Bush administration about America's global war against terror. I mean specifically the American exceptionalist problematic of the frontier (the Puritan "errand in the wilderness"). it enables us a half. I have invoked Samuel Huntington's latest books in my attempt to demonstrate the quite remarkable relevance of Greene's The Quiet American to the post-9/11 global occasion. The difference—and it is a crucial one.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 60 EMPIRE K A2: REALISM CALLS OF REALISM ARE HIJACKED BY IMPERIALISTS TO JUSTIFY A NEVER ENDING WAR. that determined the theory and practice of those who inaugurated and executed the American war in Vietnam—and. 2008 [American exceptionalism in the age of globalization : the specter of Vietnam P 96]-AC To reiterate. is molecularizing the American juggernaut and thus threatens to eventually produce an impasse that is likely to terminate in the peculiar kind of defeat that America suffered in the Vietnam War—or the annihilation of the planet. but because they are. like York Harding's books in the context of the Cold War. Greene anticipates not simply that this American exceptionalist problematic. inadvertently turned that which was invisible to it into a spectral force that defeated the most powerful army in the world. it also rendered that invisible blood visible—made it a specter that haunted the American exceptionalist problematic. Insofar as this problematic was necessarily blind to the blood of its subaltern victims." but also. By overdetermining the role of York Harding's books in the clandestine terrorist practice of Alden Pyle.century later to retrieve the singular actualities of the Vietnam War from the oblivion to which they were relegated by the American culture industry in its aftermath.
It is a mistake to read the dehumanizing logic of these memoranda as simply a conscious strategy. The terrible banality of the American colonel's response should not be understood as either unique or confined to the American military leaders.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 61 EMPIRE K A2: UTIL/COST BENEFIT RATIONALITY The political logic employed by cost benefit utilitarianism is a form of ethical decision-making that strips life of any value. 71. Dispatches (New York: Vintage. On the contrary. English in America. 202). Michael Herr. 1991).was the logic of common sense taken to its end.P 272]-AC 20. SPANOS 2000 [William V. . "The main point to make [in the context of the terrible effects of this "cost/benefit" rhetorical framework of this problem-solving thinking] is that since the suffering of the Vietnamese didn't impinge on the consciousness of the policy-makers. anatomy of an empire. This produces a calculus that routinizes the killing of others where any atrocity is forgotten in the name of exceptionalist progress.preestablished but unacknowledged narrative scenario that was informed by a purely quantitative measure absolutely stripped of any consciousness of particularity. That is the real horror of these inhuman documents that routinize killing: they show no evidence of their authors' consciousness of the reality they were indiscriminately obliterating. On the contrary. Those who practiced it were not unique conspirators. As Ohmann says. especially human particularity.the policy makers in the Pentagon relied on an unrelenting "problemsolving" rationality: the fulfilled allotrope of the American pragmatist tradition. As Richard Ohmann's brilliant analysis of the appallingly banal inhumanity of the language of The Pentagon Papers demonstrated a quarter of a century ago only to be forgotten .they were "the best and the brightest" . They based their futural projections on a pre. cynical or otherwise. they were Americans whose thought was consonant with the truth as most Americans understood it. the logic of these Pentagon thinkers . intended to render the conduct of the war more efficient by obliterating from view the particularities of that occasion that would complicate and impede the progress of the war. it reflects the thinking of the American cultural army that planned the Vietnam War that the military executed by way of the indiscriminate strategy of the body count. evil men in the conventional sense of the word. it had virtually no existence for them" (Ohmann.
What emerges from the speech by the junior senator from Illinois is that the November election will not provide the American people with the opportunity to vote for or against war. 187] Consider Obama's national security team. he also appeared to signal his own personal commitment to the global war on terror. well. Candidate Obama differed with Bush (and with the man who ran against him. That a career intelligence official like Gates or a retired Marine four-star like Jones will question the core assumptions informing standard national security practices is by no means an impossibility. Obama's hawkish posturing on these issues may have reflected a conscious effort to insulate himself from charges. Holt Paperbacks 2009 pp. Obama never directly questioned the wisdom of perpetuating the global war that Bush had conceived. and Admiral Dennis Blair as director of national intelligence. but merely to choose which of the two colonialstyle wars that US forces are presently fighting should be escalated. escalate the war there. but rather on the grounds that the Iraq war is a mistaken deployment of power that fails to advance the global strategic interests of American imperialism.globalresearch. Holt Paperbacks 2009 pp. Yet however imposing their résumés. and wise in the ways of Washington. Obama is behind an imperialist strategy in Afghanistan Bill Van Auken JULY 18. OBAMA STILL CONTINUES THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR USING THE SAME RHETORIC AS THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION BACEVICH 2009 [Andrew. Former Military.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 62 EMPIRE K A2: OBAMA ISN‟T IMPERIALIST JUST BECAUSE OBAMA WON DOESN‘T MEAN THAT POLICIES WILL CHANGE – THEY REMAIN TRAPPED IN THE SAME REALIST PROBLEMATIC BACEVICH 2009 [Andrew. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. Former Military. Senator John McCain) not on fundamental principles but on operational priorities.informed. however. utterly conventional in their outlook. One might as well look to the CEOs of Detroit's Big Three to promote mass transit as a preferred alternative to the automobile. 2008 Obama outlines policy of endless waR http://www. he merely conveyed the sense that he would fight that war more effectively.000 troops to Afghanistan to Obama‘s speech was a critique of the Bush administration‘s incompetence in pursuing an imperialist strategy. headed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. pragmatic. At least implicitly. of being soft on national security. The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism. his call on Tuesday for the withdrawal of US combat troops from Iraq was linked to the proposal to dispatch as many as 10. It's just not especially likely. they are establishment figures.php?context=va&aid=9616 Speaking before a backdrop of massed American flags at the Reagan Building in Washington. regularly flung at Democrats. The thrust of . Each and every one is a seasoned professional: competent. a term he continued to use. Obama made it clear that he opposes the present US policy in Iraq not on the basis of any principled opposition to neo-colonialism or aggressive war. 185-] Prior to November 4th.ca/index. combined with an implicit commitment to advance the same basic strategy in a more rational and effective manner once he enters the White House. General James Jones as national security adviser. As in his op-ed piece published in the New York Times on Monday. The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism.
September. Yet. significantly.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 63 EMPIRE K A2: CAP GOOD IMPACT TURNS Capitalist logic justifies hegemonic expansion promoting aggressive instability resulting in nuclear war. 05 (John B. Iraqi resistance. but the control of its totality by one hegemonic economic and military superpower. far from ceasing. and planetary collapse Foster. nuclear proliferation is continuing. regionally and even globally. U. Capitalism by its very logic is a globally expansive system. before George W. the president—against either a nuclear or nonnuclear enemy whenever we believe it is in our interest to do so. increasing polarization between the global rich and the global poor. the direction that would be taken by U.S. http://www. if needed. environmental destruction. the temptation for that state to attempt to seize full-spectrum dominance and to transform itself into the de facto global state governing the world economy is irresistible. drive for planetary domination. such as North Korea. seemingly unstoppable.‖ The nation with the greatest conventional military force and the willingness to use it unilaterally to enlarge its global power is also the nation with the greatest nuclear force and the readiness to use it whenever it sees fit—setting the whole world on edge. Such vast and overlapping historical contradictions. As former U. Third world revolutions..S. foreshadow what is potentially the most dangerous period in the history of imperialism. The contradiction between its transnational economic aspirations and the fact that politically it remains rooted in particular nation states is insurmountable for the system. that could eventually challenge U. With the United States brandishing its nuclear arsenal and refusing to support international agreements on the control of such weapons. such as the European Community and China.htm. imperialism following the fall of the Soviet Union was never in doubt. attempts to tighten its imperial grip on the Middle East and its oil have had to cope with a fierce.org/0905jbf. and elsewhere. power. In present world circumstances. violent military ones—at its disposal. are beginning to gain momentum again. Bush became president: ―What is at stake today is not the control of a particular part of the planet—no matter how large—putting at a disadvantage but still tolerating the independent actions of some rivals. weakening U.‘ not during my seven years as secretary or since. generating conditions of imperial overstretch.) From the longer view offered by a historical-materialist critique of capitalism. when one capitalist state has a virtual monopoly of the means of destruction. ill-fated attempts by individual states to overcome this contradiction are just as much a part of its fundamental logic. Oregon University Department of Sociology Professor.S. We have been and remain prepared to initiate the use of nuclear weapons—by the decision of one person.S.S.monthlyreview. and planetary ecological destruction. As the noted Marxian philosopher István Mészáros observed in Socialism or Barbarism? (2001)—written. The nation that contributes more to carbon dioxide emissions leading to global warming than any other (representing approximately a quarter of the world‘s total) has become the greatest obstacle to addressing global warming and the world‘s growing environmental problems—raising the possibility of the collapse of civilization itself if present trends continue.‖ Terrorist blowback from imperialist wars in the third world is now a well-recognized reality. Monthly Review. The result is a heightening of international instability. economic hegemony. These are symbolized by the Bush administration‘s refusal to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty to limit nuclear weapons development and by its failure to sign the Kyoto Protocol as a first step in controlling global warming. London. generating rising fear of further terrorist attacks in New York. Other potential forces are emerging in the world. symbolized by Venezuela‘s Bolivarian Revolution under Hugo Chávez. Secretary of Defense (in the Kennedy and Johnson administrations) Robert McNamara stated in an article entitled ―Apocalypse Soon‖ in the May–June 2005 issue of Foreign Policy: ―The United States has never endorsed the policy of ‗no first use. The United States is seeking to exercise sovereign authority over the planet during a time of widening global crisis: economic stagnation. with all means—even the most extreme authoritarian and. growing nuclear threats. New nations. are entering or can be expected soon to enter the ―nuclear club. rooted in the combined and uneven development of the global capitalist economy along with the U.S. . and deepening ecological decline.‖The unprecedented dangers of this new global disorder are revealed in the twin cataclysms to which the world is heading at present: nuclear proliferation and hence increased chances of the outbreak of nuclear war.
29. disciplined citizens who could be relied on to secure Rome as the metropolis—the determinant center—of the peripheral provinces. of the posthumanist discourse. It's this continuity between Heidegger and Foucault —as I've tried to describe it—that I feel is still useful and that makes Heidegger very crucial to the project of contemporary theory. Heidegger says that humanism per se begins with the Romans. though Heidegger doesn't'say it. which means "scholarship and training in good conduct.‖ conversation with bove.) Foucault—and especially his followers in this country—has not been explicit about the Heideggerean sources of his critique of the panoptic machinery. when. Spanos. And I say this despite the fact of Heidegger's failure to think adequately the ontic. Foucault limits the Roman references to the historically specific use to which they were put in France in the classical period. to the Protestant concern for detail demanded by the "Providential Eye"—all of which picks up on Heidegger's recognition that the originative thinking of the Greeks became disciplined by the Romans when they translated aletheia to veritas. It's true that all through Discipline and Punish there are references to sources that go way back beyond the Enlightenment—to the Roman camps." And what is implicit in that. in a way analogous with the translation of aletheia to veritas. technologized it. disciplined it—all on behalf of empire. issue 2.. they reduced the originative thinking of the Greek paideia to institutio et eruditio in bonas artes. the fulfillment of the potentialities of the contemporary socio-political project. His privileging of the ontological over the ontic. Prof. Volume 17. We focus on ontology in a practical manner. summer 1990. the socio-political implications of his undermining of the logos. between the ontic and ontological critiques. Boundary 2. that is to say. We utilize ontological questioning because it has been forgotten by the status quo rush to action. to the fuller understanding.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 64 EMPIRE K A2: ONTOLOGY BAD There is no link to your argument. I'm not saying that Heidegger is at all conscious of that. known baller. thus lending his discourse to this kind of Spanos: But it seems to me that exculpation. of course. At binghamton. precluded that awareness. But it's inherent in his text. Spanos in 90 (William V. And I think that Foucault articulates precisely the socio-political possibilities Heidegger misses—with momentously unfortunate consequences for Heidegger and his politics. ―A conversation with William V. and so has left the disabling "two cultures" opposition more or less intact. But Foucault doesn't foreground these references. so his followers don't see the continuity between his genealogies and Heidegger's destructions. is the recognition that the Romans wanted to produce very dependable. of the imperium sine fini. Must combing ontology With socio-politics – reading heidegger into Foucault overcomes the shortcomings of each side. . despite his theoretical insistence on their simultaneity. pp... of the centered circle.
And that was necessary because their primary concern was the conquest and subordination of the world outside the Roman metropolis. humanism begins with the Roman translation of what I would call an originative Greek thinking." which is his answer to Jean Beaufret's question. what the Roman tradition does is to create a concept of man in which man is the measure of all things. fall 2006. Williams. as the master. According to Heidegger. But I detect not a rejection of humanism by Heidegger in that essay. http://www. but a rethinking of the human. unchanging. That is the corrupt use of humanism.shtml] Spanos: Yes. How did Heidegger put this? "Eruditio et institutio in bonas artes"—scholarship and education in good conduct. So this humanism—this humanist thinking—is profoundly imperial from its ontological roots. The Minnesota Review.org/journal/ns67/interview_spanos. Although Heidegger doesn't do a good job of articulating his new humanism. Foucault. knowing what you want from the end. It's a humanity that is demoted from the status of overlord of Being. Lacan. a concept of man which involved predictability. ns67. when the anthropologos has taken the place of the theologos. he does offer directives that I follow. especially in the period of the Enlightenment—the so-called anthropological era. according to Heidegger.In other words. from the ontological all the way through to the humanity outside of the Western world which privileges Man with a capital letter. to a derivative form of thinking which can be characterized by calculativity. which is always already on the way. Interview with Jeffery J. and this concept of Man as the measure." in the book on education. because the primary concern was the production of good citizens. which is to say a rethinking of the entire Western tradition's understanding of the human. That is opposed to the more positive force. is there any way of recovering the word "humanism" in a useful way? Heidegger's response to this is a very complicated response. the overlord of Being. and therefore. Man as the conqueror. Man is the determinant of all the differential aspects of Being. I go back to Heidegger's great essay "Letter on Humanism. Althusser. So the idea of humanism that is precipitated by this translation of Greek thinking. becomes fundamental. to give man a metaphysical identity that was universal.theminnesotareview. originative thinking. Man as conquering force against the world or even against Being. He begins the whole "antihumanist" momentum that was picked up by Derrida." not "antihuman. . That's why I use the word "posthuman. SPANOS 2006 William V. the existential category of care. was intended. to derivative thinking by the Romans.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 65 EMPIRE K A2: PERKINs/HUMANISM GOOD WE ARE NOT ANTI-HUMANISTS – WE ARE POST-HUMANISTS WHO THINK DIFFERENCE POSITIVELY.
lies a distinct way of looking at the world. endure . the disinterested search for truth. spoke against the motion. Muslims are not free to convert to Christianity. In contrast with the mind-numbing enforced certainties and rules of Islam. The desire for knowledge. like science. In short. not to Saudi Arabia or Iran. and Rembrandt does not need lessons from societies whose idea of heaven. freedom of thought and expression. to read what we want. is the case that I made. Here. the glory of the West. When other societies such as South Korea and Japan have adopted Western political principles. no matter where it leads. with their science and technology and open institutions. and Schubert. The West has secured freedoms for women and racial and other minorities to an extent unimaginable 60 years ago. among others. Human Rights Watch. and Christians are not free to practice their faith—clear violations of Article 18 of the United Nations‘ Universal Declaration of Human Rights. and recognizing and rectifying problems . and the paintings of Michelangelo. other parts of the world recognize Western superiority. to consider the motion. Muslim intellectual Tariq Ramadan. The West provides the bulk of aid to beleaguered Darfur. that millions of refugees from theocratic or other totalitarian regimes flee. is that life here is an open book. da Vinci. ―Why the West Is Best. the calls for abolition did not resonate even in Africa. methodological freedom. In Saudi Arabia. The West has given us not only nearly every scientific discovery of the last 500 years—from electricity to computers—but also.org/2008/18_1_snd-west. the Red Cross. the book is closed.‖ City Journal. Nor would any Western politician be able to get away with the anti-Semitic remarks that former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad made in 2003. The West recognizes and defends the rights of the individual: we are free to think what we want. where rival tribes sold black prisoners into slavery. free from political pressures. independent academies that enshrine these epistemological norms. Nor does the West need lectures on the superior virtue of societies in which women are kept in subjection under sharia. human rights. condensed somewhat. Doctors Without Borders. inherited from the Greeks.cityjournal. criticism. Our excusing Mahathir‘s diatribe indicates not only a double standard but also a tacit acknowledgment that we apply higher ethical standards to Western leaders. proceeds through tentative steps of trial and error. self-criticism.‖ which encourages the methodological principle of scientific skepticism. http://www. and self-correction. focusing on the vast disparities in freedom. their citizens have flourished . where we can pursue truth in a spirit of disinterested inquiry. to practice our religion. citizens are not free to read what they wish. resembles a cosmic brothel. hosted by Intelligence Squared.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 66 EMPIRE K AFF ANSWERS WESTERN IMPERIALISM GOOD Their totalizing rejection of Eurocentric thinking ignores the positivity of European influence upon the law – freedom of speech. thanks to its humanitarian impulses. In many non-Western countries. Under Islam. the rule of law and equality under the law. It was the West that took steps to abolish slavery. as philosopher Roger Scruton puts it. Beethoven. In other words. Western civilization offers what Bertrand Russell once called ―liberating doubt. open discussion. I participated in a debate in London. at least ideally. peopled with female virgins. the music of Mozart. It is to the West. The edifice of modern science and scientific method is one of Western man‘s greatest gifts to the world. Western politics. seeking tolerance and political freedom. Winter 2008. ―We should not be reluctant to assert the superiority of Western values. Islamic countries are conspicuous by their lack of assistance. human rights. female genital mutilation and oppression. Along with research institutes and libraries. the separation of church and state. and tolerance between Western and The great ideas of the West—rationalism. and liberal democracy—are superior to any others devised by humankind. and totalitarianism are all positive examples of the type of imperialism we would promote Tariq Ramadan. One could characterize the difference between the West and the Rest as a difference in epistemological principles. has led to an institution unequaled—or very rarely equaled—outside the West: the university. Moreover. science. behind the success of modern Western societies. to live lives of our choosing.‖ Islamic societies. and Amnesty International. universities are.html Last October. especially Islamic ones. I spoke in favor. A culture that gave the world the novel. interpreting it.
societies that execute homosexuals and apostates. the failure of repressive societies to adapt well to the rapidly changing global environment. Americans should not shy away from doing that which is so clearly in their economic. and moral costs associated with failing to recognize this fact. The West has no use for sanctimonious homilies from societies that cannot provide clean drinking water or sewage systems. Using the tools of the Information Age to do so is perhaps the most peaceful and powerful means of advancing American interests. to American markets. and there are political. and the best model for the future. the most willing to constantly reassess and improve itself. means for all people. Americans should promote their vision for the world. they must recognize that the nature of those ideas and the control of those systems are matters with which they should be deeply concerned. that make no provisions for the handicapped. struggles. to regional peace. Foreign Policy. Is it a threat to U. If Americans now live in a world in which ideas can be effectively exported and media delivery systems are powerful. The West is able to look at its foibles and laugh. and security interests . June 22. At the same time. It is melded consciously in many cases . and that leave 40 to 50 percent of their citizens illiterate. societies that deny the rights of supposedly lower castes. The critical prerequisite for gaining the optimum benefits of global integration is to understand which cultural attributes can and should be tolerated . the diversion of assets to enforce repression. delayed market development. 1997 Many observers contend that it is distasteful to use the opportunities created by the global information revolution to promote American culture over others.and which are the fissures that will become fault lines. to make fun of its fundamental principles: but there is no equivalent as yet to Monty Python‘s Life of Brian in Islam. This argument amounts to selfinterested political rhetoric. and the dislocations. As Ayatollah Khomeini once famously said. and to the United States's ability to lead if foreign leaders adopt models that promote separatism and the cultural fault lines that threaten stability? It certainly is. or Zoroastrian. and perhaps the only. promoted .and. Relativism is a veil behind which those who shun scrutiny can hide. economic. WESTERN IMPERIALISM GOOD Denouncing Western values degrades into relativism – it paves the way for violent cultures to exercise ideological control David Rothkopf. indeed. are stoned to death for alleged adultery. The repressed individual still suffers. because failing to do so or taking a "live and let live" stance is ceding the process to the not-always-beneficial actions of others. Recognizing this.S. the more likely it is that conflict will ensue. political. and instability that result from these and other factors. Judeo-Christian.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 67 EMPIRE K genital mutilation. Americans should not fall under the spell of those like Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew and Malaysia's Mahathir bin-Mohamad. In an effort to be polite or politic. Americans should not deny the fact that of all the nations in the history of the world. to a Life of Mo? Probably not—one more small sign that Western values remain the best. American culture is fundamentally different from indigenous cultures in so many other locales.and so clearly in the interests of the world at large. but that kind of relativism is as dangerous as it is wrong. and there are consequences for the global community. who argue that there is "an Asian way. better and worse coexist in this world. they must recognize that the greater the cultural value gaps in the world.into a social medium that allows individual freedoms and cultures to thrive. interests. there are no jokes in Islam. Good and evil. American culture is an amalgam of influences and approaches from around the world. someday. ." one that non-Asians should not judge and that should be allowed to dictate the course of events for all those operating in that comer of the world. The United States should not hesitate to promote its values. and are married off against their will at the age of nine. Repression is not defensible whether the tradition from which it springs is Confucian. managing director of Kissinger Associates and adjunct professor of international affairs at Columbia. the most tolerant. no matter of what race or creed. as does society. theirs is the most just. to reach their full potential and live in freedom. Can we look forward. Real costs accrue in terms of constrained human creativity. There are absolutes. Whether Americans accept all the arguments of Huntington or not.
the unexamined. always tempered by our knowledge of human nature.fpri. and that central to that discipline is a compact with reason. The West always has renewed and revitalized itself by means of recognizing superior ways to its own. the merely prejudicial in our lives. to a civilization in which selfcriticism gave rise to a critical scholarship that could question and either strengthen or repair the West‘s received beliefs themselves. 2001. It is that compact that led to a civilization of self-scrutiny and honest borrowings. it was to be less than human. not a strength. Again. and. Induction from experience always had a logic. then. ironically. to understand. worshiping. and rights linked to a common reality. February. and will.westatdawn. it took music. indeed. it is that last trait. Professor of History at the University of Pennsylvania. indeed. and. to reduce the chaos of the world to natural coherence by the powers of the mind. such that. the West‘s commitment to a logically ordered philosophical realism. and that this reality can be known by human inquiry and reason. the core philosophical assumption of Western civilization is that there is a reality that exists independently of our will and wish. The fruits of that civilization have been an unprecedented ability to modify the remediable causes of human suffering. to offer a means of overcoming the station in life to which one was born by the effort of one‘s labor. responsibility. Western civilization always has had at its core a belief that there is a reality independent of our wishes for and ideas of it. To the extent that Western civilization survives. forms of expression. whole schools of tendentious thought decry Western ―thefts. the belief that truth is independent of particular time and place is precisely what has led the West to borrow so much from other cultures. The West recognized and adopted Eastern systems of number superior to that of the Romans. The Greek principle of self-contradiction as the touchstone of error. To live with self-contradiction was not merely to fail an introduction to philosophy. allowing us to escape the trap of human violence Alan Charles Kors. to give great agency to utility and charity alike. in large part out of restless curiosity about realities beyond its own. and thus. that natural knowledge of that reality is possible. to a civilization in which the mind could appeal to the rational against the irrational with ultimate success. The West has willed. There were many radical ruptures in the history of certain disciplines in the West. to minimize the depredations of the irrational. To live with error was to deny oneself the fruits of that human light. Indeed. Number 1. It did so.‖ as if the recognition of compelling example and argument in others were a weakness. the hope of the world survives to eradicate unnecessary suffering. it took the Aristotle of its high Middle Ages from the Islamic scholars who had preserved and interpreted it in manners superior to the schools of the West. http://www. that undergirds its ways of thinking. with a commitment to being a rational culture. Aquinas.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 68 EMPIRE K WESTERN IMPERIALISM GOOD Western thinking is crucial to human survival. to a way of understanding that led to the sciences that have changed both the entire human relationship to nature and our sense of human possibilities.html In the final analysis. valuing.‖ Volume 2. Such philosophical realism was defended by Augustine. is the formal expression of a commitment to reason that the Christian West always understood to separate us from beasts and madmen. however. A failure to understand and to teach that accomplishment would be its very betrayal.org/ww/0201. and that such knowledge must be acquired through a discipline of the will and mind. While various extreme epistemological and ontological skepticisms and various radical irrationalisms have flourished. there were no radical ruptures with the Western compact with reality and reason. and new foods from around the earth that. to speak a language of human dignity. its avoidance as a touchstone of truth. . sometimes with brilliance and profundity in our history. Only Western values are inherently selfreflexive. and the exploration of that logic was one of the great and ultimately triumphant pursuits of the Western mind.200102. it had explored. in theory at least. to give to each individual a degree of choice and freedom unparalleled in all of human history. mind. with the possibility of both interest and charity applying that knowledge for good to the world in which we find ourselves. art. and almost all fathers and doctors of the Church.kors. ―The West at the Dawn of the 21st Century: Triumph Without Self-Belief. indispensable to human dignity.
180 Despite the force of critiques like Parry‘s it is hard to go along. It is arguably installed in the very practices and politics of everyday existence in post-colonial societies. . involve hiding the role culture plays in the continuing neo-colonial hegemonic formation of the day-to-day experience of those societies. p. turn into a to argue that all politicized efforts to change the world are necessarily doomed either to impotence or totalitarianism requires a completely different (and indefensible) set of premises. Carl Boggs -professor of social sciences and film studies at National University in Los Angeles2001. social hierarchies. we must recognize that this hybridity will inevitably continue.The End of Politics. resulting in more violent and authoritarian politics. the actually existing power structure-replete with its own centralized state apparatus. The flight from 'abstract principles" rules out ethical attacks on injustices that may pervade the status quo (slavery or imperialist wars. giving elites more room to consolidate power. In either case. then people are condemned to accept the harsh realities of an exploitative and authoritarian system. Critical texts as well as creative texts are products of post-colonial hybridity. The Empire Writes Back Theory and Practice in Post-Colonial Literatures. with choice but to yield to the dictates of "conventional wisdom.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 69 EMPIRE K 2AC PERMUTATION/DISAD TO ALT Permutation: do both .Working within the system is the only alternative: It opens the door to radical appropriation. or centralized state and military institutions will magically disappear from people's lives.p. Syncretism is the condition within which post-colonial societies operate. the fragmentation and chaos of a Hobbesian civil society. Rejecting attempts at political engagement is co-opted by the right. This difficulty is not only experienced by those ‗concerned with deconstructing the text of colonialism‘. It is quite understandable that many post-colonial critics have felt an urgent need to reject European theory (and even ‗theory‘ as such) as irredeemably Eurocentric in both its assumptions and political effect. Their becoming out/law is a miserable failure. Beyond that. in Oakesliott's view. but still related. finally. Helen Tiffin et. And either outcome would run counter to the facile antirationalism of Oakeshott's Burkean muddling-though theories. the state would probably become what Hobbes anticipated: the embodiment of those universal. indeed. In fact. rational plans-remains fully intact. not too tar removed from the excessive individualism. Hybridity of multiple cultural ideas is the only way to avoid the disads to the alt. the contemporary drift toward antipolitics might set the stage for a reassertion of politics in more authoritarian and reactionary guise-or it much simply end political night-mare. it is arguable that to move towards a genuine affirmation of multiple forms of native ‗difference‘. al.through. conscious designs. If politics is reduced to nothing other than a process of everyday muddling . range of problems: the shrinkage of politics hardly suggests that corporate colonialization.Corporate Power and the Decline of the Public Sphere. This is a prerequisite of a radical appropriation which can achieve a genuinely transformative and interventionist criticism of contemporary post-colonial reality. While Oakcshott debunks political mechanisms and rational planning as either useless or dangerous. could open tilts door to a modern Leviathan intent on restoring order and unity in the face of social disintegration. Oakeshott‘ minimalism post's yet another. In other words. Associate Professor in the Department of English at the University of Queensland.250-251 But it is a very deceptive and misleading minimalism. social Darwinism. well informed and ready to fight for their interests. Such one-sided minimalism gives carte blanche to elites who naturally desire as much space to maneuver as possible. But to reject the possibilities of appropriation in this way is to refuse to accept that the same condition of hybridity as exists in the production of the post-colonial text also exists in the production of theory. A belief that totalitarianism might result from extreme attempts to put society in order is one thing: up reinforcing the dominant state-corporate system. in any simple sense. for example) insofar as those injustices might he seen as too deeply embedded in the social and institutional matrix of the time to be the target of oppositional political action. and accepting this does not. Far from it: the public space vacated by ordinary citizens. collective interests that had vanished from civil society. and. institutional hierarchies. insulated from the minimalist critique. with their belief in the practical possibility of decolonizing projects which can avoid the pitfalls of a ‗reverse discourse replicating and therefore re-installing the linguistic polarities devised by a dominant centre‘. ideologies and plans are perfectly acceptable for elites who preside over established governing systems. but not for ordinary citizens or groups anxious to challenge the status quo. arid urban violence of the American landscape. Viewed in this light." Systematic attempts to ameliorate oppressive conditions would. 1989. simply gives elites more room to consolidate their own power and privilege..
we need to judge Western power not according to a general assumption of 'new imperialism' but according to its actual role in relation to the victims. we need to develop a larger politics of global social democracy and an ethic of global responsibility that address the profound economic. unless we grasp the life-and-death struggles between many oppressed peoples and the new local imperialisms. therefore to oppose Western state policies as a matter of course.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 70 EMPIRE K ANTI-IMPERIALISM FAILS Anti-imperialism devastates our attempts to form an empathetic relationship with those suffering under true domination Martin Shaw. legal and military institutions that genuinely and consistently defend the interests of the most threatened groups. conditionally allying themselves with internationalising elements in global institutions and Western governments.‖ April 7. To take as the criterion of one's politics opposition to Western policy. In the long run. rather than subsuming all regional contradictions into the false synthesis of a new Western imperialism. It is to grasp the contradictions among and within Western elites. consistently seeks to minimise the crimes of Milosevic in Kosovo. however. distorts our responses to the victims and our commitment to justice. . à la Cold War. and to deny their genocidal character . http://www.org/empire. University of Sussex. Professor of International Relations and Politics. The task for civil society in the West is not. We will not move far in these directions. political and cultural inequalities between Western and non-Western worlds. John Pilger. against nationalist and reactionary elements. The crimes of quasi-imperial regimes are similar in cases like Yugoslavia and Indonesia. 2002. ―The Problem of the Quasi-Imperial State: Uses and Abuses of Anti-Imperialism in the Global Era. It is to demand more effective global political. but to mobilise solidarity with democratic oppositions and repressed peoples.htm It is worth asking how the politics of anti-imperialism distorts Western leftists' responses to global struggles for justice. against authoritarian. for example. The arrival in power of George Bush II makes this discrimination all the more urgent. He never attempted to minimise the crimes of the pro-Western Suharto regime in the same way.martinshaw. quasi-imperial states.purely because these crimes formed part of the rationale for Western intervention against Serbia. but the West's attitudes towards them are undeniably uneven and inconsistent. We need to support the victims regardless of whether Western governments take up their cause or not. rather than the demands for justice of the victims of oppression as such.
‖ A fair generalization is that the left‘s expertise has been constricted in scope. Professor of Sociology. the world of ―theory‖ makes only tangential contact with the social reality that it disdains.S. When the left has thought big. and new ideas are more heralded than delivered.S. illogic. While it is probably true that many more reform ideas are dreamt of than succeed in circulating through the brain. 2006. so. imperialism that provides no alternative political course. not empirical. It has tended to disdain any design for foreign policy other than ―U. and Communications at Columbia. out. equipped with funhouse mirrors but no exit. intellectual performance pieces: things are said to be so because the theorist says the problem with ―theory‖ goes beyond opaque writing—an often dazzling concoction of jargon. When convenient. The left‘s intellectual stockpile has been badly depleted. tire liberal-left conveys little sense of a whole that is more than the sum of its parts. Despite the selective use of the still-prestigious rhetoric of science.‖ which is no substitute for a foreign policy—and inconsistent to hoot when you consider that the left wants the United States to intervene. Michel Foucault became a rock star of theory in the United States precisely because he demoted knowledge to a reflex of power. dazzling American exemplar of the new theoretical style. and even if they are not. and preening. but in fact the chief criterion by which it ascended in status was aesthetic.3 The ―linthought guistic turn‖ in the social sciences turns out to be its own prison house. for example to push Israel to end its occupation of the West Bank. not actual social structures. ―theory‖ lays claim to objective truth. it has often preferred the denunciatory mode to the analytical. His famous illustration of the power of ―theory‖ was built on Jeremy Bentham‘s design of an ideal prison. distracting. it is useless. It amounts to secession from the world where most people live. If you overcome bedazzlement at the audacity and glamour of theory and penetrate the obscurity-. language remains the preoccupation. in the main.‖ those thus tarred have often been unsure whether to reply ―It‘s not so‖ or ―It is so.” p.‖ yet his preoccupation was with the knowlleft edge side.83-85 The right‘s masterful apparatus for purveying its messages and organizing for power is not the only reason why the left has suffered defeat after defeat in national politics since the 1960s. the academic left in particular has nourished what has con-ic to be called ―theory‘: a body of writing (one can scarcely say its content consists of propositions) that is. Their jargon-riddled theory is politically useless Todd Gitlin. and wrong-headed.‖ You see steadfast avoidance of tough questions. “The Intellectuals and the Flag. showing little taste for principle and little capacity to imagine a reconstituted nation. While the right has rather successfully tarred liberals with the brush of ―tax-and-spend. Journalism. it has been clearer about isms is to oppose—mainly imperialism and racism—than about values and policies to further. we‘re proud to say.‖ as Fredric Jameson defined dialectical thinking in an early. mustering full-throated opposition rather than full-brained exploration. Politically. isn‘t it interesting to pretend? But .J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 71 EMPIRE K ANTI-IMPERIALISM FAILS The criticism boils down to a complaint about U.2 Even when ―theory‖ tries to reconnect from language and mind to the larger social world. All this is to say that the left has been imprisoned in the closed world of outsider politics. self-referential. merely the denominator of the couplet ―power/knowledge.. you find circularity and self-justification. It has been conflicted and unsteady about values. Instead of a vigorous quest for testable propositions that could actually culminate in reform. often enough (and self-contradictorily) larded with populist sentimentality about ―the people‖ or ―forces of resistance. At that. the Panopticon—a model never built. Flair matters more than explanatory power At crucial junctures ―theory‖ consists of flourishes.dead media. vague. ―Theory‖ is chiefly about itself: ―thought to the second power.
These topic has been 'inadequately theorized. . Conf. or an apologetics for lost causes. www.e. which left is juxtaposed to the Political Left that Rorty prefers and prefers for good reason. i. or some neo-Marxist version of economic determinism. Lyotard. In other words. and who view anything the Cultural Left.htm Yet for some reason. . than the pragmatically settled questions about what shape democracy should take in various contexts." Those who suffer or have suffered from this disease Rorty refers to as the Cultural Left. and with reference to the American society. if not defined (heaven forbid!).the country of Jefferson and King. Deleuze. poverty. as mostly evil." one woven with the thread of agape into a conceptually single yet diverse tapestry that shoots for nothing less than a true intra-American cosmopolitan ethos. rather than some of the barbarous methods for achieving those successes. and Lacan.) This means going down deep into the guts of our quotidian social institutions. ethical nihilism. one which prizes the character of the Samaritan on the road to Jericho almost more than any other?" or "How can we square the political dogma that undergirds the fantasy of a missile defense system with the need to treat America as but one member in a community of nations The new public philosopher might seek to understand labor law and military and trade theory and doctrine as much as theories of surplus value. those who actually want to be relevant. Another attribute of the Cultural Left is that its members fancy themselves pure culture critics who view the successes of America and the West.(1) Or as John Dewey put it psychoanalysis. and a litany of others including Derrida. the logic of international markets and trade agreements as much as critiques of commodification.. too often dismiss American society as beyond reform and redemption. .J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 72 EMPIRE K ALT FAILS – MCLEAN Disengagement from traditional politics is the worst in cynical leftist garbage – our hypothesizing about the complex inner-working of government is key to creating space for the critique David E. "When one of today's academic leftists says that some multi-syllabic jargon. Leftist American culture critics might put their considerable talents to better use if they bury some of their cynicism about America's social and political prospects and help forge public and political possibilities in a spirit of determination to. 2001. I would like to suggest that it is time for American social critics who are enamored with this group. or Lacanian These futile attempts to philosophize one's way into political relevance are a symptom of what happens when a Left retreats from activism and adopts a spectatorial approach to the problems of its country. As Rorty puts it. and of the later George Wallace and the later Barry Goldwater. a book that I think is long overdue. ―The Cultural Left and the Limits of Social Hope. the country of Franklin Roosevelt and Bayard Rustin. Phil. The disease is the need for elaborate theoretical "remedies" wrapped in neological and elaborate theoretical remedies are more "interesting. and it means making honest attempts under a "law of peoples?" . . in his The Need for a Recovery of Philosophy. "I believe that philosophy in America will be lost between chewing a historical cud long since reduced to woody fiber. and a disease regarding which I myself must remember to stay faithful to my own twelve step program of recovery. . To invoke the words of King. indeed. the time is always ripe to seize the opportunity to help create the "beloved community. to recognize that they have a disease. in this country. unless it can somehow bring to consciousness America's own needs and its own implicit principle of successful action. schematic formalism. or regarding our basic human nature ( described.‖ Am. McClean.americanphilosophy. our country . at least partially explicated in Richard Rorty's Achieving Our Country. disastrous for the Cultural Left.questions such as "How is it possible to develop a citizenry that cherishes a certain hexis. market greed. and the politics of complexity as much as the politics of power (all of which can still be done from our arm chairs. Disengagement from practice produces theoretical hallucinations"(italics mine). national belligerence and racism. one wherein business interests and the university are not seen as belonging to two separate galaxies but as part of the same answer to the threat of social and We who fancy ourselves philosophers would do well to create from within ourselves and from within our ranks a new kind of public intellectual who has both a hungry theoretical mind and who is yet capable of seeing the need to move past high theory to other important questions that are less bedazzling and "interesting" but more important to the prospect of our flourishing ." to be sure. or whether private property should be protected by the state. Jameson. achieve like national pride as equally evil even when that pride is tempered with the knowledge and admission of the nation's shortcomings.' you can be pretty certain that he or she is going to drag in either philosophy of language. in such statements as "We don't like to starve" and "We like to speak our minds without fear of death" and "We like to keep our children safe from poverty"). imperfect decisions that affect other peoples' lives. one wherein both same sex unions and faith-based initiatives will be able to be part of the same social reality. . leftist critics continue to cite and refer to the eccentric and often a priori ruminations of people like those just mentioned.org/archives/past_conference_programs/pc2001/Discussion%20papers/david_mcclea n. who are to me hugely more irrelevant than Habermas in their narrative attempts to suggest policy prescriptions (when they actually do suggest them) aimed at curing the ills of homelessness. And Rorty correctly argues that this is a disastrous conclusion. as I will explain. or a scholastic. the country of John Dewey and Malcom X. . into the grimy pragmatic details where intellectuals are loathe to dwell but where the officers and bureaucrats of those institutions take difficult and often unpleasant. I think it may also be disastrous for our social hopes.
J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa
73 EMPIRE K
to truly understand how those institutions actually function in the actual world before howling for their overthrow commences. This might help keep us from being slapped down in debates by true policy pros who actually know what they are talking about but who lack awareness of the dogmatic assumptions from which they proceed, and who have not yet found a good reason to listen to jargon-riddled lectures from philosophers and culture critics with their snobish disrespect for the so-called "managerial class."
J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa
74 EMPIRE K
Cap Good - Prevents War
Capitalism prevents war Bandow in 5 Doug Bandow, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, REASON ONLINE, ―A Capitalist Peace?‖, October 26, 2005 (http://www.reason.com/news/show/32985.html accessed: June 26, 2009) There are a number of reasons why economics appears to trump politics. The shift from statist mercantilism to high-tech capitalism has transformed the economics behind war. Markets generate economic opportunities that make war less desirable. Territorial aggrandizement no longer provides the best path to riches. Free-flowing capital markets and other aspects of globalization simultaneously draw nations together and raise the economic price of military conflict, because the political destabilization resulting from war deters profitable investment and trade. Moreover, sanctions, which interfere with economic prosperity, provides a coercive step short of war to achieve foreign policy ends. Capitalism is key to peace. Bandow in 5 Doug Bandow, he is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute. He served as a special assistant to President Reagan, CATO.ORG, ―Spreading Capitalism is Good for Peace‖, 11-1205, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5193 That doesn't mean that nothing can be done. But promoting open international markets - that is, spreading capitalism - is the best means to encourage peace as well as prosperity. Notes Gartzke: "Warfare among developing nations will remain unaffected by the capitalist peace as long as the economies of many developing countries remain fettered by governmental control." Freeing those economies is critical. It's a particularly important lesson for the anticapitalist left. For the most part, the enemies of economic liberty also most stridently denounce war, often in near-pacifist terms. Yet they oppose the very economic policies most likely to encourage peace. If market critics don't realize the obvious economic and philosophical value of markets - prosperity and freedom - they should appreciate the unintended peace dividend. Trade encourages prosperity and stability; technological innovation reduces the financial value of conquest; globalization creates economic interdependence, increasing the cost of war. Nothing is certain in life, and people are motivated by far more than economics. But it turns out that peace is good business. And capitalism is good for peace. Economic liberty key to peace Bandow in 5 Doug Bandow, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, REASON ONLINE, ―A Capitalist Peace?‖, October 26, 2005 (http://www.reason.com/news/show/32985.html accessed: June 26, 2009) In particular, poorer democracies perform like non-democracies. By his calculation, the correlation between economic liberty and peace is 50 times as great as that between democracy and peace. He explains: "Democracy does not have a measurable impact, while nations with very low levels of economic freedom are 14 times more prone to conflict than those with very high levels." Gartzke considers other variables, including alliance memberships, nuclear deterrence, and regional differences. Although the causes of conflict vary, the relationship between economic liberty and peace remains.
J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa
75 EMPIRE K
Realism Good – SOLVES WAR / ALT FAILS Only realism can address violence. Critical approaches promise abstractions but don’t provide a concrete solution.
Alastair Murray, Politics Department, University of Wales Swansea, Reconstructing Realism, 1997, p. 185-186
Linklater seems to go some way towards acknowledging this in Beyond Realism and Marxism, recognising Morgenthau's commitment, in contrast to neorealism, to widening community beyond the nation-state. What he now suggests, however, is that `[w]hat realism offers is an account of historical circumstances which human subjects have yet to bring under their collective control. What it does not possess is an account of the modes of political intervention which would enable human beings to take control of their international history."' The issue becomes less a matter of what realism does, than what it does not do, less the way it constructs the problem, than its failure to solve it. Yet
Linklater concedes that `it is not at all clear that any strand of social and political thought provides a compelling account of "strategies of transition"'. Indeed, where he has attempted to engage with this issue himself, he has proved manifestly unable to provide such an account. Although he has put forward some ideas of what is needed - a fundamental reorganisation of political relations, establishing a global legal order to replace the sovereign state, and a fundamental rearrangement of economic relations, establishing an order in which all individuals have the means as well as the formal rights of freedom - his only suggestion as to how such objectives should be achieved seems to be that `[s]ocial development entails individuals placing themselves at odds with their societies as they begin to question conventional means of characterising outsiders and to criticise customary prohibitions upon individual relations with them'. His critical theoretical `transitional strategies' amount to little more than the suggestion that individuals must demand recognition for themselves as men as well as citizens, must demand the right to enter into complex interstate relations themselves, and must act in these relations as beings with fundamental obligations to all other members of the species." More recently, he has proposed a vision in which `subnational and
transnational citizenship are strengthened and in which mediating between the different loyalties and identities present within modem societies is one central purpose of the post-Westphalian state'. Such an objective is to be reached by a discourse ethics along the lines of that
such an ethics amounts to little more than the suggestion `that human beings need to be reflective about the ways in which they include and exclude others from dialogue', scarcely going beyond Linklater's earlier emphasis on individuals acting as men as well as citizens. Realism does at least propose tangible objectives which, whilst perhaps lacking the visionary appeal of Linklater's proposals, ultimately offer us a path to follow, and it does at least suggest a strategy of realisation, emphasising the necessity of a restrained, moderate diplomacy, which, if less daring than Linklater might wish, provides us with some guidance. It is this inability to articulate practical strategies which suggests the central difficulty with such critical theoretical approaches. The progressive urge moves a stage further here, leading them to abandon almost entirely the problem of
proposed by Habermas. Yet establishing some form of stable international order at this level in favour of a continuing revolution in search of a genuine cosmopolis. It
generates such an emphasis on the pursuit of distant, ultimate objectives that they prove incapable of furnishing us with anything but the most vague and elusive of strategies, such an emphasis on moving towards a post-Westphalian, boundary-less world that they are incapable of telling us anything about the problems facing us today. If, for theorists such as Linklater,
such a difficulty does not constitute a failure for critical theory within its own terms of reference, this position cannot be accepted uncritically. Without an ability to address contemporary problems, it is unable to provide strategies to overcome even the immediate obstacles in the way of its objective of a genuinely cosmopolitan society. And, without a guarantee that such a cosmopolitan society is even
a critical theoretical perspective simply offers us the perpetual redefinition of old problems in a new context and the persistent creation of new problems to replace old ones,
feasible, such without even the luxury of attempting to address them.
isolates himself in a posture of ultraleftist purity that cuts him off from many potential political allies. He seems ill-informed about what goes on in the everyday work of the academy. yet in reading composition and pedagogy journals over the last few years. there is a polemical purpose to this. more complex. Of course. 1993. The academy. English @ St. however. I have noticed few thinkers who have been so consistently cited. For example. Mary‘s. but it is one that is counterproductive. Spanos laments the "unwarranted neglect" (202) of the work of Paulo Freire. is more diverse. Russell Perkin. For the last decade the field of composition studies has been the most vigorous site of the kind of oppositional practices The End of Education recommends. ―Theorizing the Culture Wars. more genuinely full of difference than Spanos allows. on the other hand. and refers to Cornel West's remarks about the field of critical legal studies. and endorses a coalition of liberalism and the left. I would even question the validity of calling shoddy and often inaccurate journalists like Kimball and D'Souza with the title "humanist intellectuals. In fact. Muse My final criticism is that Spanos. Gates. as I will note in conclusion. Spanos refers several times to the fact that the discourse of the documents comprising The Pentagon Papers was linked to the kind of discourse that first-year composition courses produce (this was Richard Ohmann's argument). especially when. Spanos seems to me to ensure his self-marginalization. Roger Kimball and Dinesh D'Souza. "If you don't build on liberalism. for instance. criticizes "those massively totalizing theories that marginalize practical political action as a jejune indulgence" (192)." Henry Louis Gates's final chapter contains some cogent criticism of the kind of position which Spanos has taken. 3 n. Building on air seems to me precisely what Spanos is recommending. . By seeking to separate out only the pure (posthumanist) believers. in short.‖ v. you build on air" (187). his practical recommendations for the practical role of an adversarial intellectual seem similar to those of the liberal pluralists he attacks. several times he includes pluralists like Wayne Booth and even Gerald Graff in lists of "humanists" that include William Bennett. Spanos is not up to date. in the field of composition studies. 3.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 76 EMPIRE K A2: Spanos Completely rejecting humanism is self-marginalizing and disabling to effective coalitional politics J. Gates argues that the "hard" left's opposition to liberalism is as mistaken as its opposition to conservatism. and it is precisely that difference that neoconservatives want to erase. here again. by his attempt to put all humanists into the same category and to break totally with the tradition of humanism.
not to be prejudged before conducting that inquiry‘. namely. The first danger with provide powerful accounts of certain kinds of problems. Thus. It may.. although he goes on to comment that these terms are often used loosely. http://mil. it is not the only or even necessarily the most important kind. But while the explanatory and/or interpretive power of a theoretical account is not wholly independent of its ontological and/or epistemological commitments (otherwise criticism of these features would not be a criticism that had any value).e. yet. This image feeds back into IR exacerbating the first and second dangers. 3. rational choice theory may provide the best account available to us. In one respect. ―Reorienting International Relations: On Pragmatism. as Shapiro points out. such a philosophical turn is not without its dangers and I will briefly mention three before turning to consider a confusion the philosophical turn is that it has an inbuilt tendency to prioritise issues of ontology and epistemology over explanatory and/or interpretive power as if the latter two were merely a simple function of the former. this is unsurprising since it is a characteristic feature of the social sciences that periods of disciplinary disorientation involve recourse to reflection on the philosophical commitments of different theoretical approaches.com/cgi/reprint/31/3/653)]AC Commenting on the ‗philosophical turn‘ in IR. I will suggest. The second danger run by the philosophical turn is that because prioritisation of ontology and epistemology promotes theory-construction from philosophical first principles. and so a potentially vicious circle arises. while the critical judgement of theoretical accounts in terms of their ontological and/or epistemological sophistication is one kind of critical judgement. it is clear that debates concerning ontology and epistemology play a central role in the contemporary IR theory wars.4 However. but it is also undesirable. dedicated to the strategic achievement of sovereignty over the disciplinary field. one need not be sympathetic to rational choice theory to recognise that it can that has. such as the tragedy of the commons in which dilemmas of collective action are foregrounded. event or phenomenon in question given the purposes of the inquiry. an image of warring theoretical approaches with each. how it is that the relevant actors come to exhibit features in these circumstances that approximate the assumptions of rational choice theory) and. of course. Reader in Political Theory at the University of Southampton (David. be the case that the advocates of rational choice theory cannot give a good account of why this type of theory is powerful in accounting for this class of problems (i. loosely deployed or not. despite occasional temporary tactical alliances. and prioritisation of. the theoretical approach that gets its ontology and epistemology right. wholly dependent on these philosophical commitments. helped to promote the IR theory wars by motivating this philosophical turn. it cultivates a theory-driven rather than problem-driven approach to IR. from this standpoint. it is by no means clear that it is. Yet . Millennium: Journal of International Studies. it is a philosophical weakness—but this does not undermine the point that. in contrast. . the challenge is to decide which is the most apt in terms of getting a perspicuous grip on the action.sagepub. for a certain class of problems. and there is no doubt that such reflection can play a valuable role in making explicit the commitments that characterise (and help individuate) diverse theoretical positions. if this is the case.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 77 EMPIRE K A2: ONTOLOGY FIRST The popularization of more philosophical approaches to political discourse may be evident. event or phenomenon. It encourages this view because the turn to.6 Moreover. for example. Vol. Pluralism and Practical Reasoning‖.it prioritizes kritik over action and disavows any attempt to act to fix concrete problem and creates a vicious cycle whereby kritik overdetermines action entirely and paralyzes change. However. ontology and epistemology stimulates the idea that there can only be one theoretical approach which gets things right. No. In other words. ‗theory-driven work is part of a reductionist program‘ in that it ‗dictates always opting for the description that calls for the explanation that flows from the preferred model or theory‘.5 The justification offered for this strategy rests on the mistaken belief that it is necessary for social science because general explanations are required to characterise the classes of phenomena studied in similar terms. Owen 02. The third danger is that the preceding two combine to encourage the formation of a particular image of disciplinary debate in IR—what might be called (only slightly tongue in cheek) ‗the Highlander view‘—namely. Paraphrasing Ian Shapiro. Wæver remarks that ‗[a] frenzy for words like ―epistemology‖ and ―ontology‖ often signals this philosophical turn‘. 31. this strategy easily slips into the promotion of the pursuit of generality over that of empirical validity. the point can be put like this: since it is the case that there is always a plurality of possible true descriptions of a given action. this is to misunderstand the enterprise of science since ‗whether there are general explanations for classes of phenomena is a question for social-scientific inquiry.
History is. once again. Bullock. and that‗subjective death‘ and ‗biological death‘ are somehow unrelated. and selling trash to the masses. The numbed condition of a narcissistic society. 1991. 2). are already showing their disatrous cracks. declining working conditions. Upon being appointed to the Freiberg University. just as there is no ―global society‖.g. Hitchens 1999. a blissful state of Heideggerian Dasein. Adorno 1964/1973). 1999.‖ __www. swindling each other and whole nations. to unprecedented mass slaughter. No amount of theory or propaganda will make it go away. army. Heidegger signed up to an ideology-free politics: Hitler‘s ‗Third Way‘ (Eatwell 1997). international democratic The ―problem‖ of subjective death threatens to give way. there is only the mass amnesia of utopian propaganda. ILO. life is merely a series of subjective deaths. Giddens4. This is their condition . history. By emphasising the problem of the ‗ontological self‘ (Giddens 1991: 49). the means of violence: the police. Graham. the simple and straightforward answer to the ―problem of the subject‖. . As such. This turns your value to life claims and makes the aff more important than ontology Graham 2000 [Phil. they are people. 1998).pdf__ ]-AC Armed with a volume of Nietzsche. Thus. The identity of each person is their most intimate historical information. There is no ―problem of the subject‖. is a an ultimately repressive abstraction: from that perspective. raping the environment. their subjective account of a unique and objective history of interactions within the objective social and material environments they inhabit.net/HH_conf. The Fuhrer himself. identifiable entity: an identity. University of Queensland ―Heidegger‘s Hippies. Meanwhile transnational businesses go about their work. and an existentialist University Rector in the form of Martin Heidegger. and pandered to the means of material production: industry and agriculture. informationalism and‗consumerism‘ confines the navel-gazing. create. and history remains bunk (e. Hitler took control of the means of propaganda: the media. Slavery is once again on the increase (Castells. and declining social security. Heidegger‘s Nazism indefinitely affects the way that their alternative shapes ontology. and they are its material expression: each person is a record of their ownhistory at any given time. Chapt. and inherit. each person is a recognisably material. the means of mental production: the education system. Adorno 1973: 303. ideology. and inflicting populations with declining wages. the new symbol of mythological worship. People are not theoretical entities. indeed. was to rule from that day hence. as if death were the ultimate motor of life itself (cf.Lasch 1984: 25-59). Each person‘s identity is. threatens to wake up to a world in which ―subjective death‖ and ontology are the least of all worries. rooted in a permanent ―now‖. and civilisation: ‗No dogmas and ideas will any longer be the laws of your being. and he alone. Nietzsche‘s European Superman. Utopia. in fact. they have an intrinsic identity with an intrinsic value.J(E)DI 2010 LAB CaCa 78 EMPIRE K A2: ONTOLOGY FIRST Your search for the ontological self is fruitless – we all define ourselves through our unique circumstances – claiming an ontological self to search for allows cooption leading to a new Hitler. ‗narcissistic‘ masses to a permanent present which they self-consciously sacrifice for a Utopian future (cf. He ordered Germanyto look forward into the next thousand years and forget the past. as the path to an inevitable. entertaining.philgraham. is the present and future reality for Germany‘ (in Bullock 1991:345). the strains of which have historically accompanied revolutions in communication technologies. Hitler managed some truly astounding feats of strategic identity engineering (cf. several Wagner records. ―Theproblem‖ is also a handy device for confusing. quite simply. Heidegger and existentialism remain influential to this day. some considerable oratory skills.The idealised identity. and prison system. Giddens‘s claims that ‗humans live in circumstances of … existential contradiction‘. Graduate School of Management . The widespread multilateral attempts to prop up consumer society and hypercapitalism as a valid and useful means of sustainable growth. 1998. Heidegger pronounced the end of thought. and proclaimed a New beginning and a New world order. 1991).
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.