GLOBALIZATION AND US IMPERIALISM
Globalization has led to corporate
dominance, political and military hegemony of US imperialism.
This topic has been dealt with James Petras and Henry Vel Meyer
in a very forthright and lucid manner.
They ask the question
“Globalization or U.S. imperialism?” They provide the answer
too, ‘ To the extent that Globalization rhetoric persists, it
has become in ideological mask disguising the emerging power of
US corporations to exploit and enrich themselves and their Chief
Executive Officers to an unprecedented degree. Globalization can
be seen as a code word for the ascendancy of the US
imperialism”. (P 62).
Then the author came out with
facts to vindicate their position. They wrote, ‘ A recast survey
reported in the Financial Times (January 28, 1999) of the
world, biggest companies in the world, the U.S. accounts for
244, Japan 46 and Germany 23. Even if we aggregate all the
Europe, the total number of dominant companies is 173, still far
less than the number around and controlled by the U.S.. Thus it
is clear that the European and not Japanese capitalism remains
the only competitor with the U.S. for dominance of the world
market. The acceleration of US economic power and the decline of
Japan in 1998 was manifest in the increasing number of US firms
among the top 500, up from 222 to 244, and their precipitance
decline of Japanese firms from 71 to 46. These tendency was
accentuated in the next financial year because U. S.
multinational corporations were buying out large number of
Japanese enterprises, as well as Korean, Thai and other firms.
‘If we look at the largest twenty
five firms , those whose capitilisation exceed $86 billion, the
concentration of U.S. economic power is even clear. If we look
at the top one hundred companies, 61 percent are U.S., 33
percent European and only 2 percent are Japanese. To the extent
that the TNG control the world economy, it is largely the U.S.
that has re-emerged as the overwhelming dominate power. In so
far as the very largest companies are the leading forces in
eliminating smaller companies through merges and acquaintances,
we can expect the U.S. haves TNS to pay a major role in the
process of concentration and centralization of capital. (P-63).
Petras and Velt Meyer
penetratingly analyze the Corporate
Advantages of U.S. Corporation.
Among the points they make to
substantiate their points – most important points are :
First, U. S. Corporations have
undisputed control over the U.S. political system to a degree
that is not imaginable in Europe. Both the Democratic and
Republican parties are committed to expanding corporate power
abroad even at the cost of sacrificing social programmes at
home. Whatever minor differences exist over marginal issues,
Congress, the Presidency and Federal Revenue (the U.S. Central
Bank)are oriented towards promoting overseas expansion.
Second U.S. trade unions represent
only 10 percent of the private sector labour force and more
significantly, are totally dependent on and linked with two
major parties. There is no social democratic or left political
threat to the two party consensus on big business overseas
expansion. U. S. trade union officials cooperate with companies’
firing workers, reducing social benefits, and implementing work
rules that maximize corporate power. They force workers to
accept technological charges and job reclassification to a far
greater degree than European or Asian trade union offices. As a
result, U. S. company have been able to accumulate capital and
expand overseas without confronting any of the political
resistance found in Europe or Asia.
Third, the U. S. has the lowest
corporate tax rates of any industrialized country. Corporate
taxes account for 10 percent of federal revenues, but income tax
on wages account for 47 percent. The U. S. has the largest
percentage of workers with at health coverage of any industrial
or semi-industrial countries. Combined, these factors provide
U.S. companies with greater profits to buy out competitors and
finance mergers leading to mere dominating positions in the
world market.
Fourth, the U.S. Treasury
Department can finance the nation’s huge current account
deficits by issuing dollars – the major currency of exchange in
world markets. No capitalist competitor has the privileged
ability to finance its negative balances.
Fifth, U. S. Treasury Department
officials are the most influential members of the IMF with World
Bank and are thus in a position to enforce economic policies
that increase the vulnerability of rival countries and
facilitate U.S. corporation’s take over by lowering barriers to
U.S. financial investment invasion.
Finally, the U.S. imperial state,
via a multiplicity of agencies (Commerce, CIA, Pentagon,
Treasury ) has concentrated its efforts on undermining the
Japanese economy, retaining influence in Europe ( via NATO) and
raising assets of in Asia and Latin America through a
combination of political and military intervention that shape to
development agenda in the direction of free market ….. leading
to reemergence of the American economic empire’. ( pp 64 – 65)
.
They conclude, ‘And it is empire,
not Globalization, that explain why the U. S. economy continues
to grow while Asia experiences massive bankruptcies as the
Brazilian economy collapses ……..’ (p 65).
The authors came to the point how
these policies are interlinked with the growing military might
of U.S. imperialism. They explain, ‘ The growing economic empire
was matched by the growing willingness of the Clinton
administration to use force on Iraq. Central Europe, Asia and
Africa to increase the U. S. military budget and to appoint
hard-line presidential intelligence and security advisors to
direct covert and avert military intervention. Washington is
prepared to defend its newly regained economic ascendancy by all
means necessary by free trade, if possible, by military force,
if necessary “ (P-65).
Very pertinent point. Recent
development of U.S. military aggressiveness as witnessed during
the Presidency of Sr. Bush and presently George W. Bush over all
desperate preparation for aggression on Iraq in violation of
U.S. Resolution and in defiance of world public opinion
confirms the above analysis made by the two authors.
The authors also mention that
through NATO and its expansion in Eastern Europe, how the US has
a greater presence and influence in Europe than at any other
time during the cold war. U.S. influence is in its military
presence in Bosnia, Yugoslavia and (Kenova) and Macedonia, U.
S. influence in the United Nations and particularly its control
over the U. N.. Arms Inspector in Iraq. It is also pointed out
how Washington, violation of U. N. mandates in its earlier
bombing on Iraq and its challenge to the World Trade
Organization via unilateral sanction against Europe on the
bananas issue symbolizes the utter arrogance of American’s
imperial power.
Stiglitz also covers almost to the
same point, ‘Matters are perhaps worse still when the United
States acts unilaterally rather than believed the cloak of the
IMF. The U. S. Trade representatives or the Department of
Commerce, after produced by special interest within the
United States, brings on accusation against a foreign
country; there is decision made by the United States, after
which sanction are brought against the offending country. The
United States sets itself up prosecutor, judge and jury. There
is a quasi-judicial process, but the cards are stacked : both
the rules and the judges favour a finding of guilty. When
this arsenal is brought against other industrial countries,
Europe and Japan, they have the reasons to defend themselves;
when it comes to the developing countries, even large ones like
India and China, it is an unfair match’ (P 62 emphasis added).
India has her own experience of unilateral imposition by U. S.
of the U. S. Law Super 301 against its big country.
Although, Europe is no more united
to follow U. S. dictate as evidenced with the emergence of
latest crisis on Iraq issue with powerful countries like France,
Germany and important other countries like Greece and Belgian
stoutly opposing Bush Plan to attack Iraq without UN mandate,
the points mentioned here are well vindicated by the arrangement
and hegemonic militarily aggressive attitude of U.S.
imperialism’s towards Iraq. It is also understand that U. S.’s
eye on Iraq in more to do with controlling Iraq’s oilfields
than the so called fight against terrorism. The entire
developments in the current period and rapid growth over
formidable posture of U.S. imperialism on the basis of
establishing more control on the world economy directing the
entire process of Globalization through the agencies of World
Bank, IMF and WTO also vindicate Lenin’s theory of Imperialism
when Lenin dealt with the economic basis of the emergence of
imperialism Lenin’s prognosis of on the development of
imperialism has earned intro-controvertible relevance today.
The latest development of imperialism has also to be understood
in the formable background of a unipolar world after the demise
of Soviet Union.
<<
Back ||
Next >> |
