Re: Jim Blaut's thesis

Tue, 22 Apr 1997 16:12:59 +0100
Richard K. Moore (

4/21/97, Nikolai S. Rozov forwarded to PHILOFHI:
> Jim Blaut
> University of Illinois at Chicago
>...Bill Schell's summary of my argument definitely is not "fair and fairly
>complete," since he hardly mentions the crux of the argument. This is a
>detailed, systematic critique of essentially all of the theories purporting
>to show that Europe was more developed, or was developing more rapidly,
>or had greater potential for development, than other civilizations prior
>to 1492...
>... basis for my
>argument that colonialism after 1492 initiated and fuelled the (selective)
>rise of Europe...


Dear Jim,

I was attracted to your thesis because it's an example of a sparse species: a current radical reframing of history which isn't devoted to slavishly fabricating revisionist scaffolding for neoliberal globalization. I was hoping it might lead to additional interesting threads on the philofhi list.

My questions were related to the following perspective. Consider these overlapping events/trends: (1) rise of European nationalism (2) rise of semi-democratic republics (enlightenment) (3) establishment of dominant European gang fighting for global turf (4) rise of USA to dominance in that gang ^ (5) rise of TNC's | (6) USA (as TNC agent) leadership of neoliberal globalist revolution now --------> (global propaganda environment run by TNC-owned media) | (7) establishment of TNC-dominated world government (fascist/feudal) v (8) demise of democratic forms and humanist values (Dark Age II)

These, as I perceive it, delineate the main threads of modern political history and where its going. Your thesis purports to properly explain (1) and (3), and so I'd like to hear more about it. Also, from the historical understanding you've garnered, I'd welcome your perspective on the above characterizations.

Cheers, rkm