FS List

[Peters, Mike [HES]]

I don't know who these comments are being received by. The impression I get
is chaotic babble in a hyperactive kindergarten. Hardly an 'ideal speech
situation'. Someone is now accusing me of priesthood? (Why do you identify
yourself with the conquerors by the way?

Anyway, on the war - there has been interesting debate about the imperative
behind its urgency. It seems economically driven. At least this is the most
plausible explanation to me (but don't rush to make accusations at me for
this - it's just based on impressive evidence). One of the compelling
arguments is the US fear that China, Russia etc may follow oil-pricing in
Euros. Iraq broke away from pricing its oil in dollars (the rule since
1971). If this spreads (Venezuela has tried this too and Chavez has been
subject to a textbook US-sponsored destabilization), then this augurs a
crisis for the US economy, since dollars being effectively backed by oil can
be printed at will. An Australian writer nicely likened this to writing
cheques for all your consumption without them bouncing because they are
recycled to buy oil and never reach the bank, so to speak. This argument
(I'm simplifying it) appeals because it explains the need to wipe out Iraq's
threat to oil price 'stability' (sc. dollar hegemony). I've not been
convinced the motive for the war is simply to secure US control of oil
supplies per se, but this explains much more.

The Negri/Hardt discussion seems to lead nowhere because it's too abstract
and doesn't engage with any facts. There is a nice critique of Negri by
George Caffentzis on the Web which exposes much of the vacuity of his
language. James Petras has made another good critique. These postmodernist
speculations are terribly empty.

Any other ideas about the causes of the war - its likely outcomes, etc?

Is there anyone there still familiar with the Pollock/Neumann/Kirchheimer
debates in the original Frankfurt School in 1940 (the State Capitalism
versus Totalitarian Monopoly Capitalism) ? Those issues were debated
seriously - philosophically as well as in terms of political economy. I'm
not saying they weren't flawed debates, but we could learn from them
perhaps?

Mike Peters 

-----Original Message-----
From: matthew piscioneri
To: frankfurt-school@lists.village.virginia.edu
Sent: 02/04/03 13:47
Subject: FS List


Mike,

Suitably chastized :-).

Await your analysis of the implications.

MattP.







_________________________________________________________________
MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones.Go to  
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp