Re: GLOBAL KEYNESIANISM

Paul-

As I said before, I think many, probably most, of us on this list support
something along the lines of what you're proposing (I refer you to my
earlier post).

What we don't agree on is a) that it should be the ultimate goal, and 
b) how to accomplish it. (As Warren pointed out, FI, global keynesianism,
or better, global social democracy, will probably not be achievable
without revolutionary change).

It's the question of blueprint versus plan -- your GK proposal is a
blueprint that represents a place many of us would say is a way station
toward where we're trying to go (as long as it's green as well as red,
that is), but it doesn't tell us HOW to get there.  When you rule out
certain forms of praxis by fiat, and those forms include the only ones
that the dispossessed majority in the periphery of the world-system have
ever used successfully to advance their interests, then of course we
disagree.

Think about it -- why would the core powers agree to some sort of GK if
the periphery had no power to bring them to it?  Well, where is that power
going to come from?  Not from the spread of neoliberalism, that's for
sure.

Cheers,

RH