Petras and Rhodes - Reply to Critics

《Petras and Rhodes - Reply to Critics》由会员上传分享，免费在线阅读，更多相关内容在教育资源-天天文库。

1、JamesPetrasReplytoCriticsRobertRhodesAlbertSzymanski’sattemptedrefutationofourthesisontherecon-solidationofUSimperialismpresentsa‘summary’whichdoesnotinfactcorrespondtowhatweactuallyargued;offersstatisticaldatathatislargelyirrelevanttotheissuesatstake;ignoresimportantaspectsofourposition;

2、andisbasedonaninadequateconceptionofsocialforces.1Letusbeginwithourargument.Wedidnotassertthat‘theUSAsufferedsomerelativelyminorsetbacksaround1970’.Onthecontrarywepointedout:‘ItwasclearthattheoldbasisofAmericanhegemonywascracking,thatnewalignmentsweredevelopingandtheoldbasisofdoingbusines

3、sonaworldscalewascomingtoanend.’2(Emphasisadded.)Ourarticlethendiscussedthe‘internaldynamic,politicalstrengthandglobalstructuralunderpinningswhichfacilitaterecoveryandreconsolida-tionofUShegemonyinglobalpolitics’.3(Emphasisadded.)WearguedthatUShegemonywasbaseduponthecapacitiesoftheAmerica

4、nimperialstate;thecharacterofclassrelationswithinnationalstates;andrelationsbetweentheUS,itserstwhilecompetitorsandthethirdworld.Manyofourpropositionshavebeensupportedbyrecentevents.4Therehas,ifanything,beenanaccelerationoftherateatwhichcountriesinthethirdworld,eventhosewithrelativelynati

5、onalisticgovernments,arebeingincorporatedintotheAmericanImperium.5NotonlyhasJapan’seconomicandstrategicdependenceontheUnitedStatescon-tinued,butintheformercaseithasincreased.OnlyenormousexportstotheUShavepreventedJapan’seconomyfromslidingintodeeperdifficulties.‘Japanremainsfirmlysubordina

6、tetoAmericanimperial-ism.’6IntheMiddleEast,Syriahasbecomeanagentofreaction,andfearofIranianimperialismhascontinued.ThustheUnitedStates,evenmorethaninthepast,remainstheprotectorofregionalstabilityandthedominantpoliticalforce.7WearguedthatdivisionsandconflictswithinEuropere-emphasizetheregi

7、on’seconomicandpoliticalde-pendenceupontheUS,8andnotedespeciallyconflictsoverenergypolicy.Whilesomeprogresshasbeenmadehere,Europeisfacedwith1AlbertSzymanski,‘IsUSImperialismResurgent?:acritiqueofPetrasandRhodes’,pp.145–51above.2JamesPetrasandRobertRhodes,‘TheReconso