The critique of liberalism is all important but at the same time the world of the Economist doesn’t really define or exhaust the category. If liberalism defined and liberalism in practice diverge then we must study the history there with care and not confuse the two, even if the ‘liberals in practice’ do confuse the two.
Lenin hated liberalism, not far behind Marx, but that was another trap. In any case the left has to move to both critique and transcend liberalism. But do they have any prospect of doing so?
This is a fascinating article but the larger history of liberalism, and simple democracy is needed. The left will move to create something worse with the incomplete models of marxism.
Just a caution near an interesting idea for a book on liberalism…
Liberalism is often presented as a loose set of principles like reason, freedom, and the rule of law. But over almost two centuries, the Economist has provided a window into the dominant strand of liberalism in action — with imperial conquest and undemocratic regimes defended in the name of upholding “free trade.”
Source: Liberalism Is as Bad as the Economist Makes It Sound
Terms are fluid and drift into semantic logjam. From our point of view the US is not an empire but a republic showing republican decline, possibly into empire. Modern discourse used to distinguish ‘imperialism’ for ’empire’ and to see imperialism often in tandem with capitalism producing a system of exploitation and dependency if not empire. Since the usage for the British empire contradicts this our ‘quibble’ is a lost cause, but it remains the case that the US is an imperialistic democracy drifting into oligarchy thence possibly into empire. The distinction is clear from the case of Rome and that analog reminds us that the decline of the Roman Empire is a much later phenomenon distinct from the degeneration of the Roman republic.
The point is significant perhaps because empires are entropic while imperialisms are perhaps repairable.
Clearly however the US is in trouble and its state is not really decline but a disease of fascism. The point is that a political rejuvenation is entirely possible in theory because the system two centuries old still has a potential that could be realized.
In any case the analogy of the Roman Empire is not correct at this point and the American system while losing its legacy is still a potential field of political advance if only via revolution.
Source: ‘Oligarchs don’t care about democracy’: Pulitzer winner Chris Hedges warns COVID-19 will ‘trigger a decline unlike anything seen since the Great Depression’ – Alternet.org
This is an invaluable essay, yet one we should critique, because it actually attempts, after a fashion, to consider the actual process of social construction in the wake of ‘revolution’. As we see the whole subject suddenly stumbles into complexities of all kinds. Let us note to start in passing that ‘class struggle’ is not the motor of history. We always caution about statements about historical dynamics. Marxism got it wrong, along with most other attempts. This needs more discussion elsewhere.
The motor of history can only be approximated: our methods of the eonic model suggests a better approach…The macro transitions there are ‘revolutions’ after a fashion, but far more complex…
But we might reiterate our warning Continue reading ” Revolutions in action”
William Dalrymple talks to Salon about his new book on the brutal, imperial history of the East India Company
Source: What happens when a corporation colonizes a country? | Salon.com
Today there can be no doubt about the main force behind our ongoing planetary emergency: the exponential growth of the capitalist world economy, particularly in the decades since the mid–twentieth…
Source: Monthly Review | Imperialism in the Anthropocene
Trump’s “America First” policy is a classic divide-and-conquer strategy of capitalists and imperialists.
Source: A New Socialist Movement Must Oppose Both Capitalism and Imperialism
The ongoing debate about the legacy of Karl Kautsky has touched on many issues of socialist strategy today. In this article, originally published in the magazine Ideas de Izquierda from Argentina, the author focuses on a central question: imperialism.
Source: Social Democracy and Imperialism: The Problem with Kautsky | Left Voice
I have been consistently critical of Sanders’ ‘our revolution’ and ‘socialism’ and this article and the issue of venezuela shows the way that a basically reformist perspective gets entangled in contradictions. Instead of too much indignation we should feel sad that ‘socialism’ in quotation marks will have a hard time reaching lift off. The gesture ends up a plug for ‘revolutionary necessity’…
But in complete contradiction we can ‘support’ these kamikazes as ’tilling the soil’ for a vaunted ‘real socialism’ to come.
A renewed U.S. left is forging its own identity—and anti-imperialism needs to be front and center. Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders’ soft imperialism runs counter to the building of an internationalist left.
Source: Internationalism or State Department Socialism? | Left Voice
It’s been nearly two centuries since Pres. James Monroe used the State of Union address of December 2, 1823, to issue what became known as the “Monroe Doctrine.” In his declaration, he asserted: “The American continents … are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers.” Trump, like most presidents before him, seeks to fulfill Monroe’s assertion. More
Source: Will Venezuela Crisis Split Democrats?