[Pen-l] race & imperialism [was: Obama and the Cult of Personality

[Jim Devine <jdevine03@xxxxxxxxx>]

raghu wrote:
> I agree with the above. Indeed in the 20'th century, overt racism has
> been substantially eliminated. I think the letter of the law (though
> maybe not the practical enforcement) in most Western countries today
> is completely non-discriminatory. Note that imperialism has also
> substantially declined in the same time-frame.

completely??? substantially??? please explain.

> Still remnants of both racism and imperialism persist today in milder
> and subtler forms, and to the extent imperialism still exists, racism
> remains at the core of it. The US responds to an economic crisis in a
> European country (currency swap arrangements) very differently from
> say a Latin American or African country (IMF). Travel and immigration
> is far more restrictive for the Third World than for Europe. And of
> course the US has never dared to attempt a "regime change" in Europe
> (except perhaps Serbia?)

definitely in Serbia, while the US intervened substantially in the
political processes of both France and Italy after WW2 and in
Australia (an honorary European country) more recently. The fact that
the US doesn't intervene very often in rich countries (as far as we
know) likely has more to do with the military power of those
countries, along with the fact that US business invests a lot in them
(while their biz invests in the US). It's a more a matter of power
than ethnicity, as indicated by Kolko's study (_the Limits of Power_).

>> Just as it's arguable that the US has to some extent enjoyed a
>> "declining significance of race" (to use William Julius Wilson's
>> phrase) while remaining capitalist, I don't see why we can't have a
>> similar declining significance while remaining imperialist.

raghu
> I don't think capitalism depends on racism to the same extent that
> imperialism does.

explain. The Roman empire wasn't racist, but it was quite an empire.

>> Of course, it does matter how one defines "imperialism." What's your
>> definition, raghu? I see imperialism as a political-economic system of
>> domination, not a type of government policy.

> Simple definition: a system of international power relations under
> which one ethnic group systematically dominates and exploits another
> for economic gain.

so you're defining "imperialism" so that it will fit your thesis (and
doesn't fit ancient Roman or Persian imperialism). Are you an
academic? it sure seems so.
-- 
Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own
way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l