Re: Ethnic Hegemony and World-System

        The capitulation of radicals to liberals, best seen in the social
democratic parties of Western Europe today, does not invalidate the
radical agenda and will not survive the probable super-crisis of
capitalism later in this century.  There were always two Enlightenments,
the left and the right, the radical and the liberal.  They shared some
values, but differed fundamentally on the issue of freedom of enterprise
and capital accumulation.  Certainly, it is possible that out of the
debacle of 21st-century capitalism a new world order or disorder will
emerge in which the radical agenda loses out to, let's say, the agendas of
fundamentalist Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and
whatever.  These anti-Enlightenment agendas will no doubt give us all
sorts of dandy wars, in which all sorts of reactionary and absolutist
values will prevail and pit everyone against everyone else.  No more talk
of liberty, equality, democracy, human rights, socialism, and all the
other constructs of a once-hegemonic and despised secular West.  Sounds
interesting, but God--so to speak--help my grandchildren and theirs.

        Warren

On Fri, 23 Mar 2001 Threehegemons@aol.com wrote:

> I don't see much point in denying Europe the enlightenment.  True, other 
>cultures may have pointed in similar directions--but it was clearly under 
>conditions of European hegemony and out of Europe that the enlightenment 
>values in the last 200 years spread. Most dramatically, in the last fifty 
>years they (rationality equals science equals progress equals freedom) were 
>embraced by the leaders of the post-colonial world, not because of parallels 
>with the confucian heritage, but because it appeared to be the royal road to 
>'catching up' with the core countries of Europe and North America. 
>Nevertheless, it does need to be noted that this techno-political project 
>failed.  As Wallerstein would say, the radical versions of it got sucked into 
>the liberal versions, and they were all recognized as bankrupt in '68.  The 
>rethinking of this project, addressing such questions as whether rationality 
>means anything if divorced from mathematical logic, what are the conditions 
>for interacting!
 wit!
> h cultures that were surpressed 
> and not invited into the debate when 'universal' values were developed, what 
>'individual rights' mean in a world in which those whose rights are recognized 
>live at the expense of everyone else, whether a singular project is even a 
>good idea...this is palpably a debate taking place beyond the confines of the 
>Euro ethno hegemonic group. I'm not really sure what of the Enlightenment, 
>even in terms of its political ideals (liberty, equality, freedom from the 
>realm of necessity, etc) is going to survive the next century.  Out of the 
>debate currently going on, a different set of values, not secured by a concept 
>resembling 'progress' may come to be seen as epitomizing the good life.
> 
> Steven Sherman
>