Keith Hart on Thu, 24 Nov 2016 23:20:27 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> Fwd: What is the meaning of Trump's Victory |
I agree with Alex -- the end of liberalism in all its forms is nigh and the West/Security Council will soon be 'fascist', with the possible exception of poor old Blighty which, according to me, is breaking up and its state no longer able to project power inside or outside its territory. But to use the term 'fascist' is to focus on the wrong period, like referring to post-2008 as a return to the Great Depression. We need a longer-term perspective, such as the 20th and 21st centuries taken together, if we want to place our moment in world history. In 1900, Europeans controlled around 80% of the world's land. Europe itself had a population of 400 million, a quarter of the world's population (36% including lands of temperate zone new settlement). Its expansion was fuelleded by a demographic explosion, 1830-1930. It was the main centre for imperialism and machine industry; Africa had a share of only 7.5%, hardly any cities and almost no machines -- the 'scramble for Africa' from the 1880s was easy, feeding notions of White racial superiority. By 2100, Asia is projected to have 42% of the world's population (down from 60% today) and Africa 40% (up from 15% today). The rest -- all the New World, Europe and Russia, Australasia and Oceania -- will muster 18% between them, Europe 6% (including many migrants from Africa and Asia). This shift is extremely rapid. Between the 1880s and 1914, 50 mn Europeans left home, 37 mn to the US; 50 mn 'coolies' from India and China moved to the Tropics - they had to be kept apart since Europeans earned 9 shillgs a day and Asians 1 shilling for the same work. But the two met in the US and South Africa, where whites already controlled substantial black populations who weremoving fast into the cties. Robert Vitalis, in White World Order, Black Power Politics: The Birth of American International Relations, shows that IR was first driven by racism and imperialism, not by power struggles between states or geographical blocs, as it has been since 1945 (with racism latent, not overt). Foreign Affairs started out in 1910 as The Journal of Race Development. The question was how the whites could retain control in the face of a declining share of the world's population. The outbreak of World War 1 changed everything. In the previous three decades, financial imperialism (what Polanyi called haute finance aka the Rothschilds, JP Morgan etc) ruled the world, the Russian economy grew at an average annual rate of 10% and all that movement transformed art and science -- cubism, relativity and quantum etc. Until then, no-one thought that nation-states could control the turbulence of urban markets, industrial capitalism and population movement -- stated were a fixed and outmoded relic of an agrarian age lasting 5,000 years. A new alliance between capitalists and the military landlord class in revolutions of the 1860s and early 70s gave birth to national capitalism, gestated through the age of imperialism until it became the 20th century's dominant social form. After the Great War, the senseless slaughter of the trenches undermined Europeans' belief in their own monopoly of reason and civilization. The hit movie of 1922 was Robert Flaherty's Nanook of the North, showing an Eskimo's resilience in the face of appalling natural forces. In the same year, Malinowski launched modern anthropology with Argonauts of the Western Pacific, TS Eliot published The Waste Land, Joyce Ulysses and Wittgenstein his Tractatus. During the war, states mobilized and killed off vast armies, they controlled industrial production, set prices in markets and rationed supplies, monopolised propaganda. Trade, transport and migration were severely disrupted. After the war, the race was on to determine which kind of state would rule the world -- welfare state 'democracy', fascism or communism? The world economy, led by Wilson -- who saw that nationalism would undo the European empires, especially the British -- turned inwards to national capitalism import-substituting industrialization (socialism in one country) for 60 years. WW2 knocked out fascism, unleashed the anti-colonial revolution and the Cold War, followed by les trente glorieuses of developmental states in the western capitalist, Soviet bloc and newly independent countries. For the first and only time, governments gave priority to increasing the purchasing power of working people and investing in public infrastructure. This was the last world revolution; Reagan and Thatcher's neoliberal conservatism (ably assisted by Kohl and Nakasone, not to mention Deng, Pinochet, the Chicago School etc) was the counter-revolution. The collapse of national capitalism and of neoliberal globalization in our time is more reminiscent of 1913-14 than anything else, with the US as Britain now and China as Russia. British power was already in decline then and many would like to think that American power is on the way down now. I beg to differ and so does Trump. The US still has all those weapons and bases around the world, a third of the world market, the world currency (a haven in times of turbulence) and generates most of the hardware, software, content and giant organizations of the internet/cell phone economy, which is fast becoming the world economy. Mercantilism has never gone out of fashion. American rulers can ensure that the fighting takes place somewhere else, unless they are foolish enough to declare war on Mexico. Europe will be the main and permanent loser in this world crisis. China imports massive quantities of food and energy and, like the other Asian manufacturers, still relies on exports without having yet replaced them with production for the home market (Lenin's recipe in The Development of Capitalism in Russia, 1899, still the best book on early capitalist growth). Africa's future is highly indeterminate and, with 2 out 5 human beings by the end of this century, that is worth thinking about. Clearly there is nothing inevitable about any of this -- the demography, world money and markets, war, the internet's future, the end of national capitalism, its replacement, the political forms emergent now. I would bet that the US will emerge stronger from what's coming up. In any case, progressives had better start thinking outside the box of an introverted Western politics and link up with where all the people are. The most hopeful political coalitions when I was younger were the anti-war and nuclear disarmament movements. No doubt we want to forget nightmares. We need a vigorous global anti-war movement before it happens. Maybe that is as unlikely as a solution to the world's money problems soon. Many people will have to lose a lot more than they have already before they will contemplate the radical changesi necessary to address these contradictions effectively. In 1938, CLR James published a little book, The History of Negro (now Pan-african) Revolt in which he predicted African emancipation from colonial empire soon. He had no takers from African politicians then and the European far left (he was Britain's most prominent Trostkyist at the time) insisted that the revoluton had to take place in Europe before they would give Africans their independence. WW2 changed all that. WW3 would do the same. We have to decide if we would rather stop it or, like the Bolsheviks in 1917 and the fascists afterwards, take revolutionary advantage of the disaster. Keith On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Alex Foti <alex.foti@gmail.com> wrote: > trump has brought neoliberalism to an end - he's a nationalist not a > conservative - in my view it will bring the demise of liberalism in all > its forms (including those protective of individual rights) across all > of what used to be called the west.... <...> -- Prof. Keith Hart www.thememorybank.co.uk 135 rue du Faubourg Poissonniere 75009 Paris, France Cell: +33684797365 # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: