RE: Imperialism and democracy

["Keaney Michael" <Michael.Keaney@xxxxxx>]

Philip Ferguson writes:

Since the end of the Cold War and the
collapse of (most) national liberation movements, imperiaism no longer
needs these dictatorships.  Moreover, the dictatorships have often
become
an actual obstacle as they siphon off huge amounts of surplus-value and,
from time to time, actually get in the way of IMF, World Bank, WTO etc
diktats.  So, more inclusive and democratic regimes are the preference
of
imperialism today.

=====

Another, related, reason for the sudden, uncharacteristic, emphasis on
democracy is the legitimation of a heavy debt-repayment schedule. While
dictatorships may not always be dependable when it comes to paying back
their accumulated debt, even when they do the legitimacy of that payback
is under question, given the circumstances surrounding the debt's
accumulation and the means of its servicing. Far better to have the
outward appearance of democracy, in which rival elements of a political
class that accepts the status quo (i.e. imperialist hegemony) battle it
out in cosmetic disputes over the distribution of hardship, while the
hardship itself is unquestioned. Anyone with the temerity to question
the regime stands accused as an opponent of democracy, a terrorist, etc.
However, should enough opponents arise it won't be long before
imperialism needs a "strong man" once again.

Michael Keaney


~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.