Re: role of Third World governments

12/31/2000, Jeffrey L. Beatty wrote:
    > I'm skeptical whether there has been a "historical change"
    between the early 1970s and the present.

Dear Jeffrey,

I agree with you that there has been no historical change of
the form "from 'handmaiden' to 'progressive'", for the
reasons you outline.

On the other hand, I suggest that neoliberal globalization
does bring a profound structural shift, most strinkingly
within the core, but also in the realationship between the
core and periphery.

In the core, we have the structural changes brought by
neoliberalism - de-funded governments, abandonment of middle
classes, abandonment of consensus politics, transfer of
sovereignty to WTO, etc.  What this means structurally is
that the Western nations have been reduced to the level of
semi-periphery, and the core has been boiled down to a tiny
elite and their globalist institutions, backed up by the
militaries of the US and EU.  The adoption of elite-troop,
hi-tech, blitzkrieg warfare tactics has eliminated the need
for large-army operations, and hence military suppression of
the periphery can be accomplished without the need for
'satisfied' Western populations.

The shifts in the relationship with the periphery are best
described by Huntington, in 'Clash of Civilizations', and
are exemplified by the US installation of the Ayatollah in
Iran.  Instead of the pretense of 'universal democratization'
of the postwar years, we now have a doctrine of 'civilizational
[ethno-cultural] differences' and ongoing 'civilizational'
conflict.  This shift provides a functional long-range doctrine
which can be used to justify on-going periphery suppression.

rkm