>but I am being provocative because I think the time for 'anti-americanism =
>anti-capitalism' is passing, and this war, paradoxically, is one of the key
>moments that. maybe I'm also wrong to bring it up on a mostly US list...
No, I think a mostly US list is precisely where such a topic should be discussed. We here are in the belly of the beast. Sometimes the view may be clearer from there.
>
>one of the reasons I would have for reaching such a conclusion is in noting
>that you say 'the US corrupts their culture' instead of capitalism
>commodifies cultures. and, in having noted my own visceral reaction to the
>trashing of macdonalds in Belgrade.
I meant the particular US form of capitalism, embodied by McDonalds selling poison greaseburgers for profit. That may have given meaning to the act of trashing the place. Or not. Does it explain any of your reaction?
> moreover, I think the voiding of
>anti-americanism of its anti-capitalist connections is also a result of the
>collapse of geopolitical alignments which we can point to on the map and
>say 'there is anti-capitalism';
So the collapse of a few faux socialist states has caused people to forget the nature of the US threat? And the fact that the US is now clearly the dominant capitalist hegemon hasn't caused people around the world (those who contemplate the essesnce and effects of capital penetration in their societies) to equate even MORE the US and capital?
> and, less convinced of this, but I'm still
>thinking it's a real factor here, is that the US is no longer as pivotal to
>the organisation of global capital, even though it is still militarily
>decisive (due, in part to post-ww2 restraints on Germany's and Japan's
>military force).
Complicated topic. I think I disagree. It looks like the global penetration of US based capital backed by the military and the IMF, is preceding apace (I don't think global capital is that organized, BTW). I say US based capital because we shouldn't overestimate the extent to which any capital is tied to a national border.
>two further points on this: a) is the culture here that is being
>corrupted a product of something outside of capitalism? b) what does
>this defense of culture consist of today, esp when it is no longer
>plausible to make the distinction pure culture versus degenerated culture?
>(I use these words provocatively, since they connote the nazi version of
>anti-americanism.)
I'm on weak ground here, but, yes there are noncapitalist cultures still out there. There is even noncapitalist production (not culture, not the same thing) here in the US. You say all these cultures of the are now impure, but I don't know what purety standard you are using. There is not doubt they are under attack; capital seeks to penetrate everywhere. But does cultural resistance to capital have to be confined to only "pure" versions of past cultures?
Finally, from your previous post, how does the antiamericanism you see become racism in your view? To the extent you see racism toward the US (I think that's what you meant), is there a distinction between that and the racism you see exhibited by the US, in the bombing and in other ways?