>Hardt should try reading the >papers instead of Dutch >sociologists: The EU
>and NATO have spoken out >against US intentions of >widening the war. The
EU
>has condemned the treatment >of Taliban POW's. EU countries >are constantly
>complaining about US >unilateralism. The US is going >out of its way to
>undermine treaties and other >legal institutions devised for >managing
>globalization. The US surplus->become-deficit is threatening >global
economic
>recovery. If the US govt is still >somehow "managing global >capital"
despite
>the mayhem it's creating it >must be in strange and unseen >ways.
>Dubya & S11 have simply blown >"Empire" out of the water and >it's only the
>left's unwillingness to part wth >a shiny new theory that's >postponing the
>death verdict.
If Hardt's a philosopher then I did grad work under Wittgenstein.
The Negri-Hardt book's thesis really rests on there being a reality to globalization.
My analysis is that if the leading economy doesn't practice it, then it doesn't exist. The leading economy (and world's only superpower, etc.) doesn't practice it, so it doesn't indeed exist. Why would Americans be shocked that their government and corporate interests lose decisions at the WTO?
It squawks the globalist talk, it walks the mercantilist walk. US trade policy in support of its hegemony, that is to say.
Charles Jannuzi