>>> jmhayes at j-o-r-d-a-n.com 10/17/00 12:00PM >>>
James continued earlier:
>> I guess the American example shows that the ideological grip of
>> the powers-that-be over the masses means that the literal monopoly
>> of force can be relaxed without jeopardising state power.
Which is an excellent point: just because you don't have a strict monopoly on power doesn't mean the State doesn't have effective control of the population through other means.
CB: Sounds like Gramsci. Although , I'd substitute the word "force" for "power" in what you say. The state doesn't have even a loose monopoly on power in the U.S. The U.S. ruling class is in the private sector, where power is monopolized - the power of the purse, so to speak.