Valerio Volpi has just sent me a copy of his new book, The Roots of Contemporary Imperialism. This is what he says about his book:
In my work, I maintain that the presence of men like George W. Bush and all that follows in terms of popular repression and business domination is not the result of an authoritarian regression of U.S. politics, supposedly begun under Reagan: it is, instead, the prosecution of a project that came to light during the age of the Founding Fathers, whose main concern was not people's freedom, but, rather, the devising of constitutional mechanisms intended to defend the properties, wealth and privileges of economic elites. Barack Obama's recent election as the nominee of one of the two wings of the single "business party," despite the rhetoric about "change" and "hope," followed exactly the same pattern.
Indeed, the U.S. Constitution is elitist in origin and nature, and does not include any clause providing for state intervention directed towards the removal or, at least, mitigation of social inequalities; nor does it acknowledge any social or economic rights (an Italian scholar, Maurizio Fioravanti, defines it as "guarantee-Constitution", as opposed to French Revolution "project-Constitutions", which instead envisaged the project of a more equal and just society). In addition to that, the U.S. Constitution is strictly centred on the protection of the status quo and dominant elites' power, and even on the empowerment of the state for the repression of the common citizen and for the domination over foreign nations.
Such phenomenon is made even more serious by the way leadership is determined, together with the presence of a presidential system, characterized by a rigid separation of powers, whose main purpose is not as much preserving the balance of power between the various branches of government, as hindering any radical changes in society; and the presence in Congress, also thanks to the electoral system, of two parties, basically factions of the same business party, whose mainly local dimension makes it more prone to patronage between politicians and powerful lobbies.
The present situation does not represent a betrayal of the Founding Fathers' thought and ideals, as many have argued: it is the logical conclusion of their totalitarian philosophy. Important innovations in the U.S. political system, such as universal franchise or minorities' civil rights, for instance, are the result, as argued by Robert Dahl, How democratic is the American Constitution?, 2nd ed., New Haven: Yale UP, 2003, 130, of "moral convictions, compassion, opportunism, fear for the consequences of disorder, dangers to property and the legitimacy of the regime arising from widening discontent, and even the real or imagined possibility of revolution".
Philanthropy on the one hand; fear of being swept away by the people or minorities on the other, have led to "concessions" by the ruling elite, which, however, have not undermined the tenets of their domination. Such innovations have certainly been important, but rather limited, if we consider that the American people in the XXI century are still denied free health care, a right acknowledged in all major democracies, though the right to bear arms is still considered a fundamental element of American freedom. It is necessary to change the U.S. Constitution thoroughly, and relegate the Founding Fathers to the attic of history, in order to create a new society.
This work specifically aims at linking the constitutional structure of the United States with the creation of the prerequisites for the rise of corporate supremacy, and how such supremacy has allowed big business to replace representative institutions ever since the birth of the republic, and shape US public policy in all fields, from environmental protection to foreign interventions, whichever the party in charge. That is proven by means of dozens of diachronic examples. This book is intended for all those interested in political philosophy, political science, history, constitutional law, international relations, from a radical and critical viewpoint, obviously.
Full Version: The Roots of Contemporary Imperialism
The problem with holistic conspiracies that require thousands of actors and decades of time is that nobody can enact such a strategy coherently. I think the author's argument (and I haven't read this book yet, but may in the near future) can probably be boiled down into several areas.
1) The founding fathers were wealthy landowners that wanted to protect their socioeconomic position. Got that. This is a rather obvious point of view to the serious researcher, despite the fact that it's not covered in any textbook (this book won't solve that problem).
2) The American political landscape has long been rigged to favor the wealthy and the status quo. Check. Again, this isn't new to any honest student of history. In addition, because America is a capitalist society first and foremost (way ahead of any democratic concerns), this will never change.
3) The modern situation in American politics (post-WWII era) features a wide array of corrupt actors that repeatedly game the system to reward their wealthy sponsors. This is also missing from most textbooks, but you can still find a lot of good evidence, from David Simon's Elite Deviance to Misha Glenny's McMafia.
I don't mean to unnecessarily denigrate the author, and I do plan to read this book. However, does he recommend anything to do about these problems? If not, then I fear it will be just like another conspiracy book--long on facts and short on useful suggestions.
1) The founding fathers were wealthy landowners that wanted to protect their socioeconomic position. Got that. This is a rather obvious point of view to the serious researcher, despite the fact that it's not covered in any textbook (this book won't solve that problem).
2) The American political landscape has long been rigged to favor the wealthy and the status quo. Check. Again, this isn't new to any honest student of history. In addition, because America is a capitalist society first and foremost (way ahead of any democratic concerns), this will never change.
3) The modern situation in American politics (post-WWII era) features a wide array of corrupt actors that repeatedly game the system to reward their wealthy sponsors. This is also missing from most textbooks, but you can still find a lot of good evidence, from David Simon's Elite Deviance to Misha Glenny's McMafia.
I don't mean to unnecessarily denigrate the author, and I do plan to read this book. However, does he recommend anything to do about these problems? If not, then I fear it will be just like another conspiracy book--long on facts and short on useful suggestions.
I'll bet if you asked the author he would tell you he believes the philosophy of "property rights" as espoused by John Locke , to be the inspiration behind the United States.
That's a terrible error on his part and likely the cause for producing such a piece of trash book.
That's a terrible error on his part and likely the cause for producing such a piece of trash book.
QUOTE (John Simkin @ Sep 22 2009, 06:31 PM) 
Valerio Volpi has just sent me a copy of his new book, The Roots of Contemporary Imperialism. This is what he says about his book:
In my work, I maintain that the presence of men like George W. Bush and all that follows in terms of popular repression and business domination is not the result of an authoritarian regression of U.S. politics, supposedly begun under Reagan: it is, instead, the prosecution of a project that came to light during the age of the Founding Fathers, whose main concern was not people's freedom, but, rather, the devising of constitutional mechanisms intended to defend the properties, wealth and privileges of economic elites. Barack Obama's recent election as the nominee of one of the two wings of the single "business party," despite the rhetoric about "change" and "hope," followed exactly the same pattern.
Indeed, the U.S. Constitution is elitist in origin and nature, and does not include any clause providing for state intervention directed towards the removal or, at least, mitigation of social inequalities; nor does it acknowledge any social or economic rights (an Italian scholar, Maurizio Fioravanti, defines it as "guarantee-Constitution", as opposed to French Revolution "project-Constitutions", which instead envisaged the project of a more equal and just society). In addition to that, the U.S. Constitution is strictly centred on the protection of the status quo and dominant elites' power, and even on the empowerment of the state for the repression of the common citizen and for the domination over foreign nations.
Such phenomenon is made even more serious by the way leadership is determined, together with the presence of a presidential system, characterized by a rigid separation of powers, whose main purpose is not as much preserving the balance of power between the various branches of government, as hindering any radical changes in society; and the presence in Congress, also thanks to the electoral system, of two parties, basically factions of the same business party, whose mainly local dimension makes it more prone to patronage between politicians and powerful lobbies.
The present situation does not represent a betrayal of the Founding Fathers' thought and ideals, as many have argued: it is the logical conclusion of their totalitarian philosophy. Important innovations in the U.S. political system, such as universal franchise or minorities' civil rights, for instance, are the result, as argued by Robert Dahl, How democratic is the American Constitution?, 2nd ed., New Haven: Yale UP, 2003, 130, of "moral convictions, compassion, opportunism, fear for the consequences of disorder, dangers to property and the legitimacy of the regime arising from widening discontent, and even the real or imagined possibility of revolution".
Philanthropy on the one hand; fear of being swept away by the people or minorities on the other, have led to "concessions" by the ruling elite, which, however, have not undermined the tenets of their domination. Such innovations have certainly been important, but rather limited, if we consider that the American people in the XXI century are still denied free health care, a right acknowledged in all major democracies, though the right to bear arms is still considered a fundamental element of American freedom. It is necessary to change the U.S. Constitution thoroughly, and relegate the Founding Fathers to the attic of history, in order to create a new society.
This work specifically aims at linking the constitutional structure of the United States with the creation of the prerequisites for the rise of corporate supremacy, and how such supremacy has allowed big business to replace representative institutions ever since the birth of the republic, and shape US public policy in all fields, from environmental protection to foreign interventions, whichever the party in charge. That is proven by means of dozens of diachronic examples. This book is intended for all those interested in political philosophy, political science, history, constitutional law, international relations, from a radical and critical viewpoint, obviously.
In my work, I maintain that the presence of men like George W. Bush and all that follows in terms of popular repression and business domination is not the result of an authoritarian regression of U.S. politics, supposedly begun under Reagan: it is, instead, the prosecution of a project that came to light during the age of the Founding Fathers, whose main concern was not people's freedom, but, rather, the devising of constitutional mechanisms intended to defend the properties, wealth and privileges of economic elites. Barack Obama's recent election as the nominee of one of the two wings of the single "business party," despite the rhetoric about "change" and "hope," followed exactly the same pattern.
Indeed, the U.S. Constitution is elitist in origin and nature, and does not include any clause providing for state intervention directed towards the removal or, at least, mitigation of social inequalities; nor does it acknowledge any social or economic rights (an Italian scholar, Maurizio Fioravanti, defines it as "guarantee-Constitution", as opposed to French Revolution "project-Constitutions", which instead envisaged the project of a more equal and just society). In addition to that, the U.S. Constitution is strictly centred on the protection of the status quo and dominant elites' power, and even on the empowerment of the state for the repression of the common citizen and for the domination over foreign nations.
Such phenomenon is made even more serious by the way leadership is determined, together with the presence of a presidential system, characterized by a rigid separation of powers, whose main purpose is not as much preserving the balance of power between the various branches of government, as hindering any radical changes in society; and the presence in Congress, also thanks to the electoral system, of two parties, basically factions of the same business party, whose mainly local dimension makes it more prone to patronage between politicians and powerful lobbies.
The present situation does not represent a betrayal of the Founding Fathers' thought and ideals, as many have argued: it is the logical conclusion of their totalitarian philosophy. Important innovations in the U.S. political system, such as universal franchise or minorities' civil rights, for instance, are the result, as argued by Robert Dahl, How democratic is the American Constitution?, 2nd ed., New Haven: Yale UP, 2003, 130, of "moral convictions, compassion, opportunism, fear for the consequences of disorder, dangers to property and the legitimacy of the regime arising from widening discontent, and even the real or imagined possibility of revolution".
Philanthropy on the one hand; fear of being swept away by the people or minorities on the other, have led to "concessions" by the ruling elite, which, however, have not undermined the tenets of their domination. Such innovations have certainly been important, but rather limited, if we consider that the American people in the XXI century are still denied free health care, a right acknowledged in all major democracies, though the right to bear arms is still considered a fundamental element of American freedom. It is necessary to change the U.S. Constitution thoroughly, and relegate the Founding Fathers to the attic of history, in order to create a new society.
This work specifically aims at linking the constitutional structure of the United States with the creation of the prerequisites for the rise of corporate supremacy, and how such supremacy has allowed big business to replace representative institutions ever since the birth of the republic, and shape US public policy in all fields, from environmental protection to foreign interventions, whichever the party in charge. That is proven by means of dozens of diachronic examples. This book is intended for all those interested in political philosophy, political science, history, constitutional law, international relations, from a radical and critical viewpoint, obviously.
Sounds like an interesting book. I'd suggest the reading of A People's History Of The United States and Voices Of A People's History Of The United States [both by Howard Zinn] as supplemental to this thesis, generally. It seems more than obvious to me - as only those men who owned property could even vote. As the country became more 'democratic' on its 'face', the elites developed more hidden means to maintain control. Control of the public [plebs] within went hand in hand with the first imperialist venture - the theft by warfare and deceit [treaties - all broken by the US] of the land, resources and dignity of the Native Americans, who had discovered Columbus and all who followed. From there we went on to expand by taking about half of Mexico....and on and on and on...right up to the oil under Iraq's sands today. Over an covert imperialism - internal and external - by the Elites. It hasn't changed much in the hundreds of years. It has always been along the lines of one dollar/acre/unit of societal power - one 'vote'. Not much of a real democracy. Sadly, it has almost never been otherwise in any major country.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.