To Be Or Not To Be: The Nation Centric World Order Under Globalization
By Jerry Harris

Conclusion

Battered by Bush and their own past failures some transnationalists are growing less sure of the inexorability of globalization. Jeffrey Garten, dean of Yale management school laments that “It is almost as if globalization has moved into neutral gear.” (Guy de Jonquieres) But neutral gear is never a real choice for capitalism; expansion or decline is the rule. The main question for capitalism in the present moment is which international system of accumulation will win out? It is a dialectic not only being played out between nations, but primarily between different blocs of capitalists that span national territories. As shown by the above examples, US globalists are part of the transnational capitalist class bloc. As senior economist for Morgan Stanley, Stephen Roach, states, “The confluence of history, geopolitics, and economics leaves me more convinced than ever that a US-centric world is on an unsustainable path.” (Roach) Such a deeply rooted perspective shows that the most insightful globalists fully understand the depth and historic significance of the struggle they face.

It is the many structural changes already fully present in the transnational accumulation model that makes a US-centric world unsustainable. This sets the stage for world politics today. But it is important to remember that opposition to nationalism is much broader than the transnational capitalist class. Millions throughout the world are fighting for global justice and an international order based on solidarity. It is also important to remember that nationalism is a powerful force throughout the world with many reactionary manifestations. All of these political and social forces are tied to a unity of opposites. They exist in relationship to each other and their expressions are determined by this relationship. The struggle is a complex process of transformation and the balance of forces change even as they act and react.

Like Hamlet’s ghostly father, nationalism still stalks the castle’s ramparts of the new globalist order, haunting the would be rulers and motivating their opposition. Will the old international system of national competition reassert itself with modified transnational aspects, or will the transnational capitalist class establish a stable political project around its new forms of accumulation? Can the global justice movement create an alternative that will mobilize millions to build a better world, or will the world sink into nationalist and reactionary forms of violence? These are the main questions that confront us today. This is the dialectic of our time.

Bibliography

Finnegan, William. “The Economics of Empire.” Harpers Magazine, Vol. 306, No. 1836. May 2003. Pages 41 – 52.

Clark, Wesley. “Iraq: What Went Wrong.” New York Review of Book. Vol. 50, No. 16. Oct. 23, 2003.

Harris, Jerry. “The Conflict for Power in Transnational Class Theory.” Science & Society, Vol. 67, No. 3. Fall 2003. Pages 329 – 339.

More >>