Re Paul C's [OPE-L:4631]: > It is however a long step from such initial re-establishments of > protectorates to the possibility of inter-imperialist rivalries > re-emerging. When did inter-imperialist rivalries disappear? Couldn't one argue that the relationship between Japanese and US capital could be said to constitute an inter-imperialist rivalry? Isn't the relation between the US and the European Union an inter-imperialist rivalry? This would seem to me to be the case despite the proliferation of trans-national corporations and the existence of the U.N. , NATO, and similar international organizations. It seems to me that while "regional trade associations" (e.g. in Europe and NA) have been on the rise in recent years, this does not eliminate inter-imperialist rivalries. Perhaps it would be better to say that they change the form in which inter-imperialist rivalries manifest themselves. Yet, these changing alliances among national capitals do not signify the end of rivalry. So long as capital exists not only as simply unity but as difference and unity-in-difference (as reflected in the perseverence of nation-states), one would anticipate that these rivalries will persist. But maybe the problem here is definitional: how are you defining imperialism now? In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Dec 31 2000 - 00:00:04 EST