revolution and repetition0001

8/2/2019 Revolution and Repetition0001

1/18

Rwolution and RepetitionKojin Karatani

1 l?oofi+in i +ho Q+r+a

Histonansoftensay hat hosewho donjt knowhistoryare ikely to repeat lBut doeshis mean lat by knowinghistory wecanwethercbyavoid ts repetition?Oristhere eally sucha hingas he epetitionof history?Thiskind of problemhasneverbeen hought hrough;historians, ho aresupposedo bescientrfig aveneveraddressedt, even f they ntuifvely acknowledget I believe hatthee s repetion history and hat t is posslbleo treatit scimtiftcally.Nhat s repeatedD io besure,not aneventbut the structure, r the epetitive truchtre. urprisingly,whena structuresrepeated,heeventofFn appearso be repeated swell.Howevetis OnIy herepellve structurehat canbe repeated.

Marx sthe hjker whoattemptedo elucidatehe repefifvesfucture, It isgenerallyhought hatMarx'sviewof history s based ndevelopmenta-ltagegad notconcerned rth repettionButhe did th-ink hrough treprcblemofrcpetiorLwhichappearedn oneof his earlyworks,Tla EightemthBrumairefLouisBantparte.Theopening entencesf the ext referp {:tselyto the epeonfhtstory: Hegel emarkssomewherelrat all factsandpersonagesf great mportancen world historyoccur,as twere, wrce,He forgot o add: hefr-rst meas aged, the second s arce."

HereMarx emphasizeshat whathappened etweenhe FrenchRevolution f1789 nd Napoleon's oronaon asrepeated rxtyyearsaer by the process ftheevolutonof 1848 tnt resdted n luis Bonaparte'soronation. hereare,however,Irlorc epetitions.n the ust place, he process f tre first FrenchRevolution ollowed he


2/18

patternof ancientRomdshistory;hese re epetitions s e-presentation.ut t is notbecausehepastdesignwasadoptedhat theseepeltons occured: hese epetiorsaenot concemedmere$with the problemofrepresentalon, epresentatonecomesactual epetion nly when here s astructual similarifybetweenhe pastand hepresent,hat s to say,orywhen here sa repettivestructe nherento thenaton thatfanscends heconsciousnessf eachrdwidual

It isprobably n PhilosophyfHistoryhat Hegelwote whatMarx referred o:"byrepeltory thatwhichat fust appearedmerelya matterof chance ndcontngency,becomesreal and ratfied s{stence." Hegeleferso theevent nwhidr Octavianbecamehe ustRomanEmperorafr his adoptive ather,Caesar, ad beenassassrntedin hls attemptobe heemperor,Caesar ought o become mperorwhen heclty ofRome ould no ongermaintarrrhe epublican rinciplesn its exparsiory nd wasmurdered y thosewho choseo deferLdhe epublig ncludingBrutus. t isonly aftertheassassinationf Caes r,however,hat heRoman eopleacceped he empireandemperor s revitable eality.Caesar everbecameheemperor, uthis namebecamegeneral oun hat signifies mperor czarKnrer) Marx might have orgotten hiscontextwhenhe wote thai"Heselremarlcsomewhere."

NonetheLess,n ?keEightemthrumaire fLwis Bonapmte,arx ftnds epetitionin theemergencef the empireout of the epublic ealZedby the FrenchRevoluon ntheRevolution f 7789, heKingwasexecuted nd he Empaoremerged.rom thesubsequentepublicwith the people's upport.Thjs s what Freudcalledhe"rehrrnofthe epressed.Yel +heEmperors the etum of themurderedking,but isno onger hekinghimself.The emperor tands or anEmpirehat trarscendshe boundaies f theoty-state r nation-state.t is becausefthis structurehat Caesalseventappearso be


3/18

repeatedn otherplaces nd imes.Forexample, apoleon,who garned ower n theFrenchRevolutonand b subsequent art attemptd to counttrBrifsh industrialcapitalism y estabhshingEuropemtnion.Napoleon rownedhimselfemperorandestablishedn Ernpirenot becausee wasmindful of thepastbutbecausef thepolitco-economicalituaon f the me.

lndeed,Napoleon concept ouldbeca1ledprototypeof theEwopea Unio&but at thispoint n hrstory,his scheme ould bemoreproperlyseenas heprecursor fElt+Je{ThirdRech:he conquest f Europe.Concernrnghispoint, HarmahArendtstateshe ollowing: "TheNapolmnic ailure ouniteEuropeunder he Frenchlagwasa clear ndicaonhatconquest y a nation1ed ither o the ull awakenjng f theconqueredeople's ationalconsciousnesnd oconsequentebellionagainstheconqueror, r toqryarury. nd thoughgnarmy, ecauset needs o corsenf.rnaysuccessfullyule over oreignpeoples,t canstayn powerory f it destroysust of allthenational rsttutions of its ownpeople".

Napoleorf warof conquest anbe called he ustexampie f anation-stateimpenalistic xparsronesulting n another aton-state.n the wenethcentury,imperialismhusproducednation-statesll over he world.Generally peakingmodemstaswere ormedby separatinghemselvesromtheold world enLpires. tates erivedfom thesameworld empireshare common u1turaleligiousbackgror-rLdvm if theycompetewith oneanother. f theywere hreatenedy a stateoriginating rom anoherworidempire, heywor:Jdneverthelesseunitedbased nthe dentity of the oldworldempre. n aword, they return to theEmpire.But f anation-statexpandstselfand iesto become n Empi.re,t cannotavoid becomingmperiaiistic. hus hemodemnatron-state,n he onehand, zubsistsn its reactrono the Empirg but, on the other


4/18

hand, s nclined o abolishrcelfand efum o theEmpire.Tlsparadoxicaltructuecauseshe repeltion inherent o thestate.

2.Repetitionn Capita-lMarx refers o aother epetiton uLTheEightemth rumoire:he clrlsi.sf 1851. his

economrcnsishelpedBonaparte aLsupport tom the stateapparatuses,uchas hemtary and he bureaucrary.Only under he secondBonapar oes he state eemohavemade tselfcompleteiyndependenL sagainst iul society,hestatemachine asconsolidatedtsposion...." It isat hjspoint hatMarxdiscoversheencouriterbetweenhe wo kinds of repetiveness:epetitLvenessf thestateand hat of capitalisteconomy. o oneat thattme pardattention o therepetivmessf thisphenomenoncalleda aisis. It was assumedhat hecommercialrisiswas he esultof therevolutionof1848 nd resolvable y economic olicies.

Marx did not sufficientlynvestigateheproblemofthepenodrcai risis. Hebeljevedhat thegeneral risiswouldbring about he world revoluhon n Europeandwaited or the comingcrisis. No revoluloryhorvever,ook placa althougha orsisrrdeed ccurredn 1857. hecrisis s a serious roblem or capta-listconomy, ut itneitherdesfoys he system or automaticallyrelds evolutioru,On he contrary,asevere nsisor depressioneads ocounter-revoluonhe ncidentsmentiondtnTheEightemth rumaire fLoltisBonapmtettesto the act hat he economic risis aciiitatestheestabLishmentf a state apitalistorder,suchasBonapar's,,ather han a socjalistrevolulon.

Marx/sstudyof capitalist conomy ecame ophisticatedfter1857,when heabandoned is eschatologicalope orsucha crisis.t wasaftsr hisperiod hatMarx


5/18

started nvesgatlg the cnsis or the busrness rTcle n its own, mdependently of thepolitical A crisis s not a mrstakeof economicpoLiry, arLddoesnot lead to the collapseofcapitalisrrl Mar< began o conceiveof crisis as an nevrtablesickness nherent n theaccumulation of capital.Then why is there such a thrLg ascnsis?

ir4ostMarxistssuppose hat crisrs s causedby anarchicoverproductronor the"contradrclon betweensociali"ed production andcapitalisticappropriation." Yet, hisidea explains he possibilityof crisis,but not the causeof tts periodrcoccurrence.As far asI know, only Kozo Uno gavea convincinganswer o this mystery. He explored heproblem of crisis and thebusinesscyde in termsof the population law of capitalisrnLabor is a peculiar commodity; it is difficult to increase t immediately rL a shortageanddifflcult to decreaset wherL t is overstocked.Workes dismrssed n a recession ompriselhe"reservearmyof abor."During penodsof prosperityernplol'rnen! ncraseg agesrisg and the rateof profit drops,but smcecredit s stlt good,capital conffiues toproduce accordrng o the appearanceof demand, Eventually, credit is ruined and a crisistakesplace,suddenly revealingthat commodieswere being overproduced.Everyaisis,therefore,emergesasa credtt crisis,but the causeof the periodic crrsis n industrialcapitalismLiesn thepeculiarity of the labor commodity.

A crisis ad its subsequentdepressronbanlcupt and weed out fragile busrnessesthat canot secure her own profits. By lowering wagesarLd he rnterest ate,howevelthe depressionallows capital to nvest n new equlpment and teclinology. Eventuallyprosperity returns,and another crisisoccws. Thuscapitai accumulationor the advanced"orgaruccomposition of capiiaf is gurded by thebusinessrycle. From this perspectvgthe crisisdoes not destroycapitalismbut is an ndisperLsable rocess or capitalaccumulaon.Conversely,what is applaudedas he automaticadjusnent apparatusof


6/18

capitalist conomy ignifies he act hatcapitalaccumulation anonJyproceed rolerLtly.Now it is clear hat the penodical risisoccus n a wage aboreconomy.Why

thendid the crisesakeplaceat nteryalsof approximatelyenyears? nd why rs t thatafter hecnses f 1857,1866, nd1873, ctuonicdepression nsuedstead of a dramaticcrisrs?hese uestonscanbe answeredn Ermsof the primaryproductor iheworldconmodrty.Theclassicaleriodical nsisemergedwhen he cottonndustry wasdommant. hecotton ndustrydemanded argeamout of abor; heplantsandequpmentswould weaout aboutevery enyealsand need obe enewed.Fome1860s,owever,a fansition o heaq/ rndustriesookplacewhichcaused increasenequipmentnvestrnentconstantapital)and a decrease theaverageateof profi!evenwhen aborproductivrty the ateof surplusvalue) ose. ikewrsgsrncehe heavyindustries o not needasmuch aboras he cottonndustry doe,nernploymentincreasesd domestic onsumplondecreases.onsequently,he depression ecamecluonic.Futhermorq,he producs of heavy ndustries eqredoverseas arkeis.Thisrscalled theexportof capital, In thiscaset was he state's ole osecurehesemarkets.As a esult, evere onflictsaose etweenhecoutriesalreadyn possessionfcoloniesoverseas,uchasBntain,Fraceand heNetherlads, nd henewly growingpowerysuchasGermany,America,andJapa.This s what s caled mperali*n.

ThebusinessycleMarxgraspedn Capitalake rhe ormof a shortwave hatwas atercalled uglarcycle,On the otherhard,Kondratieffpointedout the"longwave" hat hasa fifty- or sty-yearcyde. n my \,'lew,he djfference f length s notimporiant.The ongwave s aphenomenonhat s caused y ttLe hange f theworldcommodities. he ransitionsofz{rorldommodites,uomwool, o cotton, o hearyindustriego durableconsumer oods, nd he nformation ndustry,have esultedn


7/18

the ong severe epressiors,f nottrises.This ansition causes hange ot only at heIevelof technology ut alsoofsodety n gerLeralnspiteof the differencen appearancathebasic rinciple hat Marx pointedout s st-1lelevantcapitalaccumulations possibleorLlyhrougholent reconfiguratiorLnd his s exactlywhat compels apitalist ocietyto repeattself.Nonetheless,his principledoes ot zufficeo probe he repetion fhistoryassooal ormation.

3.SocialFormation iewed hroughModeofExdrangeIn CryitalManproded afarmoreprofoundnsight nto the repettiveness f

capitalist conomy,hanhedoesn TlEighteenthrumairefLouisBonaparf.et, herepetiveness.1 he wel of the state,whichhadbeen etfor+h Tlu Etglltemth, xnevermentioned gainby Marx.Thestatewas egarded smerelya superstrucfiire 'determined y theeconomic tructwe.Generally peakingManistsseeshestateor thenaonasapolilcal or idmlogicalzuperstructureetermined y the economicalsubstructure,hat s, hemodeofproduction. hisew, howwer, is not onlyinapp[cable o pre


8/18

theperspectrveof modes of exchangg nsteadof modes of production. Bnefly, therearetfuee basicmodes of erchange: eciprocityof gift and retur&-plunder and redlstribufon;arld commodity excharLge.n my view, every socral ormation existsas a unctureoftheseexchangemodes,and differencesbetween hem dependon what the primarymode s andhow those modes aerelated. n the capitahstsocial ormatron,commodrtyerchange1sdomrnant, but the other modesof exchangeand their derivave still existurmodfied form. The statebecomesamodem state,and the dissolvedcommunitybecomes narionasdn imaginedcorrununity.

Thus the tluee modesof exchangeare rasformed into the trinity of capitafnation and state. From this point of ew, it is obvious hat the statehasan autonomythat is totally different from that of capital. They are rooted in different principles ofexchange.Marx tn Capitalabstracted apital away from the state and the nation bybracketing he dlmensionsof other exchangemodesbecawe he is attempting to graspthe systemcawed by commodity exchange n i1spwity. It is better, hough, to explorehow eachof the other modeso{ exchange orms a system(asMarx drd conceming tiesystemof capitalisteconomy), han to complarn of his not dealing with the stateand thenation. The antfuopologs$ suchas Marcel Maussor l,evt-Strauss,or example,haveattempted o descnbe he reciprocaicomposton of society. We should begin thesamework regarding the state.

As statedabove, hepenodical risisdoesnot take placeuhl society scompletely r+organized by ttre mode of commodity exchangearLd he commodificationof labor.Differently put it is not unti-lcapitalisteconomyexperiences he periodical crisisthat it carrmanifes 1EMtottoftty Thesameprinciple appiiesto the state'sautonomy:only the repetition proper to it can attest hat the state s autonomous.


9/18

4.Histoncal Stagesof CapitalismThehistory of social ormaon must be ewed by considenng he relation

between he two subjects:hestateand capital.The repetitivenessof the stateand that ofcapita-l hould be examtnedat the same me. The stateand capital are n acomplementaryrelaoryevenwhile they are opposed o eachother. Nelther of themcanbe reducedto the other.

In Crpital,Marxbracketed the state n order to grasp he mechanjsmof capitalisteconomypurely, but when it comes o seerg he actual capltalistsocial formatiors, wemust reintroduce thestateasan acfve agent But, nsteadof doing so, Marxistsfied tograsp he historical drangeof capitalisteconomy n order to explainchanges n thepolitical supersfuctffe. It is generallyconsidered hat the capitalisteconomyhasmarked the historical stagesof developmentas ollows; namely,mercantiJism,ndustrialcapitalism, mperialism, latecapitalism,etc,

From a different vie.r\pomt,hesestages an also becharacbrizedby changesn theworldcommodifyThestageof mercanlism s charactenzedby the wool indusl1r,industrial capitalismby the cotton ndustry, imperialism by heavy industry, and latecapitalismby durablecorsumer goods,sudr as automobilesarLdelectricalappiiances.Anew stageof latecapitalisrnbegan n the n 1980s,n whtdtinformaonbecamethe worldcommodity.The chartbelow demonstrateshesestages Frgue1).Thesechaagesbasicailycorespond to the developmentof productive power.,anddranges n political superstructureareexplainedupon this basis. But fom such aperspective,t is impossibleto grasp he repettive structureI menhoned. Meanwhle, itmay besaid that Immanuel Wallerstein reintoducedthestae as an agent that existsside


10/18

1 0

by sidewiih capital. He thereby ecoruidered rages n socralormationsrom theperspectivef a world system onstituted ystateandcapital.This showhecameoleew hehistory of the modemworldsystemn ternsof the shifu from onehegemonicstateo another. Previously,Manistshad hought hai of the 19centuyasastageclLaracerizedy [beralism,whi]e he ate19centr:rywasmarkedby a shift oimperialJsm. n fact, iberahsmfreeradepory)was Britishpolicy;othernationswereeitherprotectionist, r they were n heprocess f beingcolonized. If wemaycharacterizehe19centuryby Bntisheconomic olicy, t isbcause ritainwasahegemonn world capitalism.

Liberalisms apolicyemployed y a hegemon If so, iberalismmustbepossiblen any period. Wallersteinhiks so. ln hisview, herewereonly threehegemorsn the modernglobaieconomy. br otherwords,ory lueeslates doptedberalism:he Netherlands, ntain,and he UrutedStates. etweenhe atterhalfof thesxteenthcenturyand hemid-seventeenthenturywhen Britainhad mercantihst rprotectionistolicies, heNetherlands as ibera| polifcally it wasnot an absolutemonarchy uta republic. n fact,DescartesLd ocke ought efuge n AmsterdanLwhereSpinoza ould also ind a home.Wallersteln bserved egemonyntfueespheres: manufacturingcommercg nd

then inarce.n his ew, a stateirstestablishesegemonyn manufacturingand henproceedso commerce nd finance. A hegemons the statewfuch gais superiority nall spheres. But t doesnot last or long. At the same ime, t doesnot faIIsuddely,becauseven houghastateoses egemonynproduction, egemonyn commerce ndfinance ansIlberetained.

Forexample,heDutdr maintained egemonyn commerce nd inanceeven


11/18

1 1

afterBntainoverwhermedhem n themanufacturingpherenthe atterharfof ttreeighteenthentury.t was n therueteenth entury during hestage alled"liberalism")hatBritaindomurad hemcompletery,owever, f theperiodofBritishhegemonyscalledberalism,hesameermshourd eappedo theperiodof Dutcirhegemon

Mercanritism,ntheotherhad, istheperiodof theabsencefa hegemoryhat s,theperiodwhen heNetherlandsosthegemony,ndBntalnandFrance onsequentryfought oattain r Theabsencefa hegemon anarso e oundatthestage atedrmpenalJsmfter1970n which Britan osthegemonyn themanufacturingmdustry,andAmeric4Germany, ndJapan egano fightforhegemony. r thisperspective,t isnowonder hata similantycanbe oundbetweenhestages fmercantilism ndrmpenalism.Dnelopment thestages f capitalism amotbepurely rear.Thesedeveiopmenbequirenotonlychangesfworldcommoditybut alsoongdepression.That s tosay,t requires repetionherenttothecapitalist ystem. n theotherhand,it entailsmortalstrugglesor hegemony monghestates nd hereforeepetionirerent n thedrmension f thestate.Accordingly,hestages f world capitarismanbeseen s he epetion f thestages f imperiali.smndiberali.smseeFigure1).In thischart,or exunple,mercrnristnsa tansitionarstagerom Dutch o Britishberatsm,hat s,astagen whjchtheNetherlands eedeclinurg ut BritainandFrancewerenot yetpowerfuJenoughorepracet andstruggred gaisteachother Aiso,tltestage f irnperialismfter7g7Os meukedy Bntainsdeclineand heattemptbyGermany'Amenc4andJapanoe-divide he erritoriesormerryheldby thepreviowrnpenalpowers.


12/18

T2

Thestages f world capitalismhus orm not ody theLinear evelopment fproduction ut also healtemation aween hestageof tbetalismndmryrialism.Inmyview, hisaltemationoperatesm a sty-year ycle.As a result, hehistoryof the modernworldappearso repeattseeveryonehundredand wentyyears.t is uncertain hatthiscyclewill contnue,but it might be productive sa heuristic ypothesis.

5. The Current StageThe 1990s s considered he stageo neoliberaLism.lts ofun said that Americ4 Like

theold British Empire, sooverwhelmingly holds the hegemony hat its policles arerepresentativeof liberalsrn. \zVhileAmencawas the hegemonbefore199Q t starteddecl-rning conomically from the 1970s,aswas nd.rcatedby theend of the gold standardsystem n 171. America is following the course hat the Netherlandsand Britain oncetrod: wh e dechmng n manufactwing rLdustries,Amerlcan retarnshegemony urfinanceand commerce of natural resources, uch as oit grain, or energy.

Dunng the age of BnshLiberalisn,war posedno danger o Britain. Beht'een1930and 1990 especiallybaweenl(As and1975),Amenca was as iberal as nineteenthcenfiry Britain The developed capitaLrst tateswere rurder America proctior!cooperatedwlih each other by regarding ihe Soviet bloc as he enemy, and adopted thedomesticpoliciesof worker protecnonad sodal welfare.Contary to appearances,heinternationalSoviet bloc and domeslc socialistpartes stabilizedworld capitalisnr, atherthan threatenng t The Cold Wa is therefore he stage of liberalistnvn+h merica as hehegemon Srnce he 1980s,Reaganiteor Thatchentepoljcles,sud:i as etrenchnent ofsocialwelfarg deregulation of capital, or tax reducon,havebeenadopted n theadvancedcapitalist states.Thesepoliciesare generally consideredneoliberaf but they


13/18

1 3

arenot inconsistentwith the imperialism thatwas dominant in the 1880s.As a matter offact, herewas sooal welfae at the time of beralism n Britain and the United States.

Lenin iruisted that the stagesof imperiahsmcou.ldbe historically charact*izedby "capital export ': capitalseeks he global market becausehe domestic market is neversufficientfor lt. Arendt described he imperialism of the 1880sas he hberation of a statetied to capital, from theyoke of the nation. Rejeting the nation's demands, he stateabandoned ts domesticworkers and ient economicand mtary support to the capitalthat \ /ent abroad.This is dso happening n the neoliberal stage.

Globali-6 5141"d n the 1970s,when the advancedcountnes suffereda fallingrate of profit and chronic depressiondue to thesaturalon of the market with durableconsumergoodsbecause f signifcant development n Japanand Crmany.As a result,Americancapital had to find is way in the global free market This global competitoryhowever, s impossible wrthout recourse o military hegemony.Thb current stageo{capitalism s more neoimperalhanneoliber l.

According to Antonro Negn and Michael Hadt, America actednot as anrnpenalist statebut like the Roman Empire becauset sought the approval of the UnitedNations n the Gd f W at o{ 1991n spite of the fact that it had overwhelning miliaryhegemony.However, I cannotagreewith the idea that the United Statesof America snot imperiallsm but Empire. No nation or statecan avoid falling into imperialism if itattempts o become Empire. Tenyearsafte the Gulf War, in effect, he Iraq Wardisprovedthe idea that Amenca is not imperiaLi.sm ut Empre: America pursuedunilateralism a+Jrcrhan approval from the United Nations.

To be sure, Negn and Hardt do not pusue the dea of the American Empire; forthem,Empire is a place hat hasno place. The empire is nothing other than theworld


14/18

1 , 4

market. They say:"ln its ideal form there s no outside o the world maket the entireglobe s its domain. We might thus use he form of the world market as a model lorunderstandnrgmperial sovereignty. . In this smooth spaceof Empre, lhere s no placeof power -it is both everywhere and nowhere. Empire is an ou-topia, r ra)Iy anon-place.1

In his empre asworld market, stateshave no importance. A srmilar remark ca befound in the 1848Communistr4mifesto Malrx ndEngels, which predicted that thedifferencesof pmples and stateswould be armulled n the "rntercouse n everydrechory universal nter-dependenceof natons." This ew ignores the dimensionsofthe stateand nafon. The revoluons of 1848, or example, esulted in state capitalismand imperialism rn FrancearLdGermany rather than anrLullLrLghe differencesbetweenpeoplesand states.

Today the ft'amework of the nation-state s sajd to be debilitated. It is true that theelementof the nation hasbeen discarded,but this doesnot at al1mean hat the state sdissolved. t is only by the will of the stateas zuch hat onestate can ally itseJfwrtharother state.Therewas neve a state hat rejectedallianceor subordinatron when itsown survival was at stake.Only the nation as he "imagrred community" rejecb t.

The theoristsof the EuropeanUnion argue hat the Uruon transcends he modemsoverelgnstate.As the naf,on-state s forced Lntoexlsnceby gLobalconomg,however,ois the regronal iruon of the states. n order to courterAmerica and Japan,he Ewopeanstatesormed the European Union and delegated her economic and mtary powers tothe super state.Thrs cannotbe cal1ed ublation of the modern state.For it is under thepressureof world capitalsm or the world maket that the statesuflte and establisha blocsnte.


15/18

1 5

The F.rrroneanT ninn is nol tlLeirstblo6 state 1 hjstor' r+ < nreda+edhvGermany's"Third Reich" andJapan's Greater EastAsiaCo-prosperity Sphere." both ofwfuch were planned in the 1%0s n order to counter he bloc cmarnies f Britain, France,and Amenca. Before he war, thesebloc states epresented hemselvesas ovucomingthe "modem world-syste4" that rs,capita-lism nd the natton-state.The design for aEuropeanuruon exrstedeven beforeNapoleon; ts ldeal is the old,Empire, hough it hasonly been actualized n Frenchor German ntperialism.

In forming the Ewopean Union, the Europeansdo not thereby forget the past. tisobvious that they are rying to actualizean Empfe that is not Lmperialstrc.Nonetheless, he Union is nothing bt a bloc tate uanedwithin global economy.Otherregions arern the samesltuaon: he oid world Emp[es of C:rin4 Indian, Oltoman, andRussi4which weremargrnalized n hemodem world sysFm,have cappea.red.

In each egrorgsince he naton-state was formed by separating tself ftom theworld empire, there s on the onehand ashared aollizaonand onle other hand, a pastfull of dlisions and struggles.Thestatesbracket heir memoriesas natrons and form acommuty by reducrng hor ovm sovereignry,Yet, his phenomenonoccltrspreclselydueto the pressureof world capitalismthat now dominates he states.Renanoncepointed out tL|atoblivion of history is necessary or a nationto be buil! his remark isapplicable o the fornLaonof thebloc state:ust like fhe natiorL t is also an "imagined"or createdcommunifz. Sucha restorationof the empres becomes alimt as he UnitedStatesdeclines. We have entered nto the "imperialistrC' stage n which there s nohegemon,and empires compete or the next hegemony. 120yearsago, his situationled up to the First World War, which made e United Statesanew hegemon. Henceaquestiorywill it be repeatedagain? My arswer is Yes and No. I say"Yes", beawe it


16/18

1 6

iscertainhat hestrfe for hegernonymongheempireswill be edoubled. I say No",becauset is unlikely hat thenexthegemon ill emergerom these ompetrtons,

For nstance,GiovanniArrighi predictshat Chinawill be he nexthegemonnplaceof the UnitesStates, But don t agreewith him. No doubtCrina and ndiawillbeeconomrciantsoverwhelmingheotherempres,but as owhetherChinaor Lndiabecomes hegemorLhat s aotherstory. To beginwitlL for onenation obecomehegemonequires omethingmore haneconomicreemjnence lone. Butthegreaterreasons that hevery development l Crina and ndia confrontworld capitalismwiththeend of itself. Thecycle havebeen alkingabout s peculiar o capitalstaccumulation, s the atterends, o does he epelous yc1e.

Maxshowed heprocess f capitalist ccumu.lationn the ormula M{-M'.Thismeanshat so ong as t mrftipes,capital anbe capital,but otherwiset ca'tThereare lueepremiseswhidr madeself-multiplicaonf lndusfial capitalpossible.The irst premisesthat natural esourcesutsidehe ndusrial systan are rfiruteandinexhaustible. Thesecond remjse that"humanresources" utside hecapita-ltmarketeconomy re nexhaustible. hisensueshe finite potentialol cheapaborandnew consulntrs. The hird premisesthat echnologlcalnovation s imitless. Thisprovideshe elatve urplusvaluewith industrialcapital.Thesefueepremises,owever,arebeing apidly udermined. Regardinghe ustpremise,ts demise ppears scrises uchasshortages resources d energyand also,asenvionmentalisis suchaschmate hange nd desertification. These riseswillcerhrnlybecomemoreserious. Asfor thesecond remise,when heworld'sagricultural ationswith the argestpopulatrons,amely,CbinaarLdndia,developntorLdustnal ocieties,his will entails he nseof abor orcevalue,and stagnatonof


17/18

l 7

consunpton The world capitalism has critically stagnad since he 170s. This isproved by the factthat the long-term interest atehas remained ow. Theworldcapitalism ried to survive by globalizalory especiallyentangling China and India rntothe world market But in e nea future, therewill beno room for firther economicgrowth, Therefore, he world capitalism as a whole is nearing ts final limit

Of couse,such imitations will not automatically bring capitalist economy o anend.The fact that industrial capitalism has a fahl limit is one hing but the fact drat tends s another thing. \Vhen we corsider the actual societyand econom, we shor-ldtake rnto accout the state as he actve agenl \44rencapitalism s in crisis, he statewillattempt to shore t up by all means. In this case,what is most like$ is the world wa.Ther our most important and imminent task wiil be to creab the transnationalsystemto deterwar, which is carisedby the crisis of capitalisn

I havesofar beendiscussingherepetifveness f stateand capital. Finallywould like to discusshe repetiveness f the courter movementagainsistateandcapital Of course his repettvenesss caused y that of stateand capital,bu1 o myregret, have itde time let let me say ory one hing. At the stageof imperiaiism120yearsago, ts culminatiory he FirstWorld War, resulted n the two worid-historicalevents; ne s theRussianRevolulonand he other s theLeagueof Natiors. It seemsthat Maoostsattaci rmportanceo the RussiaRevolutionand o restoring t somehowor other n the uture And they havebeenmaking itdeof the ,eagueof Natiors,or itssuccessor,nitedNatiors.

The RussianRevolutionwas a revolution hat tied to abolish he state romwithin. But it is impossible o abolish he state rom within, becausea stateexists


18/18

l 8

vrs--vis ther states.Ard ths gives he state ts autonomy, For istance,even f arevolution to abolisha state akesplace, t must reiJorce he stale to defendtherevolution rom the otherstateswhich interfereand seek o des'roy t. That was thecasewrth the RussianRevolutiorywhich produced a powerftd state. This wasengenderedy a Marxistway of thirkng ttratbelittled heautonomyof the state.

On theoths hard,although t waspracticallympoEnf theLeague f Natioruhasa argesignificancen making afirststep o build an rntemaonalegime o aboiishwar. The l.eague of Nations was basedupon an idea which Kant designed orpermanent eace. What Kantcalls theperrnanenteacd' s not ustthe absmce fwar,but the "end of all hosti[ties",m which there s no state,and rr whjch the Hobbesianstateof natureends.

Acloowledging hat a stateodsb vis-a-sothtr states, ant houghouthow tocontain he states, onceivinghe fedeation f states. Kant presentedhisasa realisticflrst step oward the "World Republic",ur which the sta and capitalare superseded.Neediesso say, he league of Naonswas powerless nd so is the United Naonstoday. But weshouldnot deny t for that eason. Weshould ather egard heUnitedNatioruasaprocess f supaseding hestates nd propel t forward,by connectingo tall he couter-movernentsgainst hestateand capital n eachnation Suchamovementisvital n thenm-imoerialistoeriod.

revolution and repetition0001

Documents