In the 20th Century, four major political system theories; capitalism, fascism, communism and Islamic Caliphate have vied for global supremacy The century ended with the Soviet Union's collapse, leaving American Empire as the unchallenged global superpower.
However, the unparalleled reign of U.S. empire didn't survive the first decade of the 20th Century. 911 shattered the veil of American invincibility. Bush's imperial wars in Afghanistan and Iraq produced global anti-American blowback. By 2008, Wall Street greed had plunged the Western world into financial chaos.
Resistance to "American Empire" gave rise to "Eurasianism," the 21st Century's first newly declared political system. Its chief architect, Alexander Dugin--A.K.A. "Rasputin" is a talented apologist for Russian expansionism.
The core of the new Eurasian world system is building an international coalition to stop American-led globalization from dominating the planet. Eurasianism purports to construct a new and inclusive "multi-polar world order," opposed to an American "unipolar" order.
Dugin's 4th Political Theory challenges core western ideology on two fronts. First, he ask if society is best served by promoting the interests of the individual or the collective interest of the people. Dugin makes it clear that the individual right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is not Russia or Eurasianism's rai·son d'ê·tre. It is the collective interest of society, even if that society is run by a "benevolent" dictator like Putin.
Dugan then attacks the Western notion that human progress is chiefly measured by man's ability to deploy science and technology to produce consumer goods and services to an expanding global population. 4PT reject's the idea that mans aspirations have been reduced to the relentless want of wealth, consumer products and the seduction of an exploitative culture. It condemns globalization's economic and cultural invasion of countries' national sovereignty.
It is important to note that while Eurasianism opposes globalization it is not an anti-capitalist project. It's economic modus vivide supposedly allows for capitalism with some restrictions, namely that the state has the right to control or own its strategic industries like oil, gas and mass media. Capitalist ownership to all areas that don't have the potential to threaten the interests of the state or its ruling class.
Eurasianism also denies that traditional western democracy, with its "open political system, parties and elections" is the only legitimate form of democracy. It authenticates democratic socialism, monarchy and even authoritarian systems like Russia as legitimate expressions of democracy if they reflect the historical methods of choosing leadership and fostering citizen participation.
As long as these unique democratic formations are aligned with a countries' national culture, traditions, institutions, religion and customs they are valid democracies. In short, virtually any system could be considered democracy in Eurasianism's political matrix.
While Dugin's Eurasian system exhorts countries to resist American-led globalization, it also posits that the multi-polar opposition must have a core-leader, namely Russia.
Over the past decade Russian imperialism has expanded it's reach into Georgia, the Ukraine and Crimea,. Eurasianism is also emerging as the ideological and political foundation of Europe's, Alt White political parties. These parties, like France's National Front are supported financially and politically by Moscow.
Eurasianism is emerging as a serious system/theory with its own ideology, class outlook, political eco-system and a growing support base among Europe's Alt White.
For those who still to dream of moving society beyond the pitfalls of post-modern system/theories, Eurasianism is not your ideal system.
For those that envisage a society that provides for the basic needs of its majority; a society that educates its people; one that devolves the maximum amount of decision making power to the widest base of people possible; a society that dramatically restricts corruption in governance, a system that embraces all communities, but promotes the whole; a system that has nothing to gain from aggression and war, then join those on the exploring the frontier of the sixth political theory.
Is There A Sixth Political Theory (6-PT) for the 21st Century?
Yeltsin Takes Power in Russia 1991
The Financial Crisis to Come?
Why would former Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner--the brain who helped Barak Obama reverse engineer America out of the 2008-09 financial crisis-- pen a five page article called "Are we Safe Yet. How to Manage Financial Crisis.?"
The piece that appeared in Foreign Affairs quarterly--mouthpiece of America's captains of empire--was not a warning. It was a crisis management tool for a when, not if moment.
Geithner's assessment is insightful. "The 2008 financial crisis" he says "was the most damaging economic event since the Great Depression, for both the United States and much of the global economy. But how safe is that system today? The answer is important, because although the United States may not face a major crisis anytime soon, it is certain to at some point...The U.S. economy is less vulnerable to a modest crisis but more vulnerable to an extreme one."
Implicit in Geithner's statement is the admission that the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 lacks the tools to manage a sharp financial downturn. True, banks are better capitalized, have more liquid assets on hand, and are less leveraged than in 2008. Hence Geithners statement that the "economy is less vulnerable to a modest crisis."
However, since Dodd-Frank passed in 2010, Wall Street, led by Eugene Scalia-brother of the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia-- has spent millions of lobbyist dollars to gut the bill piece by piece.
As for the notion that government won't bail out financial institutions "too big to fail," forget about it. Through mergers and acquisitions, the concentration of capital has exploded in the financial sector. Thus the failure of one major bank, would send shock waves through the U.S. economy and beyond.
But Geithner's chief warning is that the system's firefighting tools to mitigate a real emergency, are weaker now than in 2008. Why? Because, the emergency powers of the Fed, the FDIC and Treasury Department to wind down a failing financial entity are now restricted by Dodd-Frank.
Specifically, their ability to inject massive government funds to backfill shortages of private capital would require congressional approval. That means their capacity to prevent panic from turning into a run on financial firms, which happened when Lehman Brothers collapsed in 2008, would be problematic.
Grappling with the dynamics of how an economic crisis can escalate into a financial meltdown here and internationally is not on the radar screen of America's Bicoastal Left (ABL), the center or the right. To their credit the Alt Right, is more critical of workings of globalization than the ABL and the center.
This website advances the position that we are living in an era marked by the decline of American empire, the central nervous system of globalization. Further, while political crises, revolutions, and wars in geopolitical hotspots can dramatically impact American empire, the sudden emergence of a financial crises could pose an existential threat to its unipolar superpower status. For example, Great Britain did not lose World War 1, but it was so weakened that it could no longer maintain its empire.
In Great Britain's case the collapse of its global empire resulted in it degenerating into a second-rate capitalist country. They were lucky because the Atlantic Alliance won.
Imagine the United States being reduced to a second-rate economic power, with it's chief adversaries, Russia and China being the two most formidable global powers. It could happen.
A steep or sudden economic collapse could also throw millions of Americans into political turmoil, more devastating than the Great Depression. The political and social upheavals of that period produced some of America's most radical and egalitarian economic changes.
For those with eyes to see, crisis and opportunity are the opposites sides of the same coin. But it is difficult to envisage radical new opportunities, when one is blinded by the science of incrementalism. History suggest Empires collapse under rather cataclysmic circumstances. Precisely the type of Tim Geithner is suggesting when he ask the question "Are We Safe Yet."
Where do Blacks have "virtual" full employment, the highest education levels, home ownership rates and free health care?
Cuba, Of Course
The demographic profile of Cuba's Black population is not only impressive, but arguably globally unmatched. Still, the data points conjure a profound sense of cynicism, as they were achieved under a one-party socialist regime condemned by many as a dictatorship.
By the numbers, Cuba's literacy rate is 99.8%, one of the highest on the planet. To the extent that Cuba has poverty, it is not informed by ignorance.
Cuba has virtually no homelessness and 85%
of its population are homeowners, paying no property tax or mortgage interests.
Blacks in Cuba have free health care. The life expectancy rate is 78.3 years and in 2015, Cuba became the first country to eliminate mother-to-child transmission of HIV and syphilis.
By its own admission, Cuba's government is a long way from achieving "prosperity," however one wants to define it. Despite the brutal 57-year trade embargo the U.S. imposed on Cuba and the substantial loss of subsidies after the breakup of the Soviet Union, Cuba has somehow survived.
Concerning race, Cuban's have admitted that opportunities for Black Cubans are not as great as those for "White" skinned Cubans Stigmas still exist. Work needs to be done.
As a practical matter the argument that Blacks in Cuba are victims of institutionalized racism or are an oppressed minority is a specious claim.
As for the Miami-based right-wing regime critics who insist Black life will improve if a "democratic" government is installed in Havana, show us the proof. Where has any capitalist system provided free health care, eradicated illiteracy and homelessness for its non-white minority citizens? It doesn't exist. Does it?
The Financial Crisis to Come
Webster Bernell Brooks, III
The Thought Leadership Center
Is There a Future for Industrialization
on the African Continent?
"Full Steam Ahead"
1841, Friedrich List wrote: “the power of producing wealth is infinitely more important than wealth itself.” This axiom is just as relevant for industrial “latecomers” as it was for the economies of List’s time. Indeed, the pursuit of increased production possibilities, rather than simply increased production, provides the bedrock for various governmental initiatives falling under the umbrella of industrial policy. However, dynamic efficiency gains for developing countries today are not hidden where the wealthy countries left them. To unlock new levels in productivity, African countries need to navigate a global economic landscape profoundly different from the one in which Germany, the US and the East Asian tigers found themselves.
In the 1980s, international trade started to make room for the “unbundling” of production. Firms began to focus on their core competencies and outsource the rest. As a result, different stages of the production process spilled across borders, turning traditional supply chains into global value chains. For African industry, this fragmentation may be an opportunity.
Improving one’s balance of trade no longer requires mastering the entire production process of a final good: in a world of global value chains, taking over tasks at the end of value chains is a viable alternative. Relatedly, dynamic gains are no longer the exclusive prerogative of manufacturers. The power of producing wealth does not discriminate by sector.
The Transition between Modes of Production on the Occasion of the Marx Bicentennial
Karl Marx is a giant thinker, not just for the nineteenth century, but even more for understanding our contemporary time. No other attempt to develop an understanding of society has been as fertile, provided “Marxists” move beyond “Marxology” (simply repeating what Marx was able to write in relation to his own time) and instead pursue his method in accordance with new developments in history. Marx himself continuously developed and revised his views throughout his lifetime.
Marx never reduced capitalism to a new mode of production. He considered all the dimensions of modern capitalist society, understanding that the law of value does not regulate only capitalist accumulation, but rules all aspects of modern civilization. That unique vision allowed him to offer the first scientific approach relating social relations to the wider realm of anthropology. In that perspective, he included in his analyses what is today called “ecology,” rediscovered a century after Marx. John Bellamy Foster, better than anybody else, has cleverly developed this early intuition of Marx.
I have given priority to another intuition of Marx, related to the future of globalization. From my PhD thesis in 1957 to my latest book, I have devoted my efforts to unequal development resulting from a globalized formulation of the law of accumulation. I derived from it an explanation for the revolutions in the name of socialism starting from the peripheries of the global system.