>As the global arms race ends with the United States so far ahead
>no other nation even tries to be America's rival, the result may be a world
>in which Washington has historically unparalleled power, but often cannot
>use it.
Although I dislike some of the apparently casual formulations in "Empire" this adds to the argument of Hardt and Negri that we are now at a stage of a battle for global legitimacy.
I would rather a battle against US hegemonism, but it will have to take the form of skirmishes over many specific issues in international bodies. eg do they want anyone to verify their discovery of WMD? Do they want the UN to lift sanctions and on what terms? Do they want consensus about managing the world economy, (under US leadership of course)?
In this respect they are like robber barons powerful enough to seize overwhelming military power in an early mediaeval monarchy, with unestablished systems of law and and ritualised consent.
Pity the SARS cluster broke out in Toronto not Detroit.
Chris Burford London