[lbo-talk] Fantasy That Drives US Politics

Marvin Gandall marvgandall at videotron.ca
Tue Aug 8 05:38:08 PDT 2006


Yoshie wrote:


> It would be interesting to look at where individual members of the
> ruling class in a given country invest their money -- what proportion
> goes to investment in the government of, and corporations that make
> money in, the country whose citizenship s/he holds, and what
> proportion goes elsewhere. By now it is possible that a majority of
> the ruling class do not feel that their fortunes are tied with that of
> any single country, their own or even that of the United States of
> America.

Doug would have more information about this, or know where to look for more detail. Most individual investment is portfolio investment, and mostly done indirectly through managers of mutual, hedge, pension, endowment, and other funds. The US markets are the largest and most liquid in the world, and only about 10% of the pool of US institutional capital is invested abroad, with only a small percentage of this directed towards emerging markets. Before WW I, there was actually more capital invested abroad in percentage terms largely because of the great interest of British and other European investors in the rapidly expanding US and Latin American markets.

In any case capital movements have less to do with long-term perceptions about rising and declining economies than with short-term risk factors and investment opportunities - in particular, the relative movement of global interest rates and currencies. More capital is lately starting to find its way abroad because the Fed is tightening and there are concerns about the sustainability of the current consumer-driven expansion in the US while Japan, which is recovering from a long downturn, and the emerging markets, with their commodities, current account surpluses, foreign exchange reserves, and more investor-friendly fiscal and monetary policies, are looking more attractive to fund managers.

In other words, the US stock and bond markets are still by far the ones of choice for both American and foreign investors, and from this perspective, a majority of both the US and international ruling class DO feel that their fortunes are tied up with the US. ========================================


>So, a majority of even the American section of the
> multinational ruling class -- let alone the others who live in Japan,
> China, the EU, etc. -- don't feel they need to extricate Washington
> out of the Iraq War or change its Middle East policy.

Not so. The US is still the lynchpin of the international capitalist system. It's economic and foreign policies widely and profoundly affect the fate of the world's ruling classes and peoples far beyond its borders. It's current policies in Iraq and the Middle East are especially destablizing and worrying. There is no other country in the world which arouses such intense interest and passions. In most countries, foreign policy, and in many cases, domestic policy, as well, is determined with the US State Department and US Treasury very much in mind. I would say that "a majority of even the American section of the multinational ruling class" and "others who live in Japan, China, the EU, etc." DO "feel they need to extricate Washington out of the Iraq War or change its Middle East policy." It's hard to understand how such a well-informed and sophisticated observer like yourself can conclude otherwise, but maybe there is a nuance I am missing here. =====================================


>If they care
> about politics at all, they mainly care about tax rates, trade policy,
> fiscal policy, monetary policy, intellectual property rights, and so
> forth, rather than geopolitics.
> That leaves a tiny minority of the American section of the ruling
> class, who are organized and either become members of the power elite
> or fund political campaigns of those who seek to become or remain
> members of the power elite, to direct the multinational empire (which
> is led by Washington but encompasses Japan and the EU, and potentially
> China, Russia, and maybe India also in the near future). They are
> zealots driven by fantasy of the domino theory, it seems to me. When
> a majority are disengaged, a tiny minority can take control. That's
> as true of the ruling class as of the working class.

The polls in the US show that Iraq is the central issue in US politics today, surpassing bread-and-butter issues which are usually at the forefront.

Has there ever been a ruling class in history supplied with the volume of information provided to this one by its vast media network and educational system? The advent of the universal franchise and mass education has, I would argue, broadened the size of the ruling class, including its most politically interested and organized echelons at the top of both of the mass-based liberal and conservative parties found in all bourgeois democracies.

I don't think, as you suggest, that a minority of politically-driven "zealots" have hijacked the political system.

The lesson of Iraq, in fact, is how quickly unrepresentative zealots can be brought back into line by the ruling class, assisted by its class allies abroad. Where are Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz et al now?

========================================


> In the case of Iraq, it is the consequence of the initial choice --
> the rise of Shia factions, especially the faction led by Moktada
> al-Sadr who can mobilize masses (as he showed again last Friday) and
> looks to Tehran* -- that makes the US power elite disinclined to cut
> and run, for, if they cut and run, Tehran can conceivably have its way
> in Iraq**. They do fear the possibility of a militant Shia crescent
> anchored by Iran that may encompass Iraq, Lebanon, parts of
> Afghanistan (especially the areas populated by the Persian-speaking
> Tajiks and the Shii Hazaras), and parts of Central Asia***, perhaps
> even exercising influence over Shiis in the Gulf states, the crescent
> of militancy that stands in solidarity with Sunni Palestinians and
> therefore can win the hearts and minds of Sunni Muslims elsewhere.
> The possibility a militant Shia crescent is real, but the power
> elite's fear of it is far disproportionate to its odds.

I agree with this analysis. I would add that any schoolyard bully and military power has the same fear of "cutting and running" because of the damage it does to their authority elsewhere.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list