In my recent “special article” for coffee buyers—American Borg — I argue that we are at an historical tipping point.
One civilizational model is dying. Another is being born.
The causes are complex — and many. There are many opinions about this. But also a lot of agreement.
Michael Hudson recently spoke to Luca Placidi. And summed things up very well. Quotes curated thanks to Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism. One of those “must-read” sites. However, I recommend you read the full text of the interview at Hudson’s site here.
Barbarism or Socialism?
We’re really in a civilizational split, and it goes much deeper. What’s at stake is what kind of economy is the world going to have?
Is it going to be a financialized, neoliberal post-industrial economy, which is what the United States and Europe are pushing? Or is it going to be the kind of economy that textbooks talk about, where economies produce agricultural and industrial goods to feed themselves and make everybody prosper? I almost would use Rosa Luxemburg’s phrase, Barbarism or Socialism, because the West no longer has the means of real economic control over trade and production. It only has military force, terrorist violence and corruption to maintain its control.
The NATO West does financial control by having loaded down the global South and even many Asian countries with dollarized debt for the last 70 years. That dollarized debt holds them in a financial neocolonialism, an international debt peonage. Besides that, the ultimate power that the United States and Europe have to maintain their unipolar control to prevent other countries from going their own way and pursuing their own interests is to bomb them and mobilize terrorism.
The NATO West has lost its basic industrial or agricultural control because it has outsourced its industry to China and other Asian economies, and its sanctions against Russia and other countries has obliged them to become self-sufficient instead of relying on the West for a widening range of their basic needs. So these countries are now in a position to use their labor, industry and agriculture to make themselves prosperous and regain control over their economies, not to make U.S. and European investors rich. They want to take control of their economies in a way that will raise their wages and living standards.
Asked about Ukraine and Israel, Hudson says:
Other countries can’t simply be passive, because what is happening to the Palestinians can happen to all of them. That’s the degree to which Americans will go to maintain their global control. That’s why they are funding the Israeli attack on Palestine and the Ukrainian attack on Russian speakers. The Americans are providing the bombs and other weaponry, subsidizing their armies. This is what is creating the sense of urgency that is catalyzing the World Majority to realize that they must act more rapidly and decisively to make a real break.
Placidi takes issue with Hudson’s statement “sanctions against Russia and other countries has obliged them to become self-sufficient instead of relying on the West for a widening range of their basic needs.” He points out that few countries can really be “self-sufficient”—in this day and age.
That is precisely my point, especially in Part 2 of my current Special Article due for release this coming week. That is why a new civilizational model is taking shape. It is not “socialist” but it is cooperative, collaborative, and at the international level egalitarian.
American militarism—neoliberal barbarism— provides a sense of urgency—overcoming political inertia.
Resistance is not futile!
Thanks for messages!
I got a lot of encouraging messages in response to my American Borg article - and even some extra coffees.
Thank you so much. This kind of response encourages me a lot.
And I will be incorporating some of your ideas in Part 2, hopefully out next week before August. If you weren’t on the list for American Borg and want to read it — you can still buy me a coffee— and I will also put you on the list for Part 2.
Below Ichi and his sister Ni-chan (long tail). Click here to buy us a coffee! Or on the photo.
Hudson’s major blind spot is his upbringing in a communist/socialist paradigm so he views it as the ultimate economic and governance framework.
I like him a lot and his book super imperialism is a must read for understanding US global financial strategy but he defaults to analysis from a socialist Marxist lens.
Although he does acknowledge that China and Russia are examples of mixed economies and they work.
sure would have liked to receive the special article