Abstract
The ability of a nation to exert hegemony in world markets rests on the hegemony of a group of internationalists within that nation. In the USA, the hegemony of the internationalists was based on their control of the most productive segments of the economy, on the trade surpluses of the early post-war years, on their ability to secure raw materials from abroad, on the belieft that the Great Depression had been deepened by protectionism, and on anti-communism. Since 1971, trade deficits, and, more recently, the end of the Cold War, have undermined some of these foundations of their hegemony. Yet they were able to contain protectionist challenges and even to achieve further liberalization (e.g. NAFTA)... In this paper I want to explore the reasons for the adherence of the United States to a liberal world market order despite the erosion of the foundations for its original committment. My research will be guided theoretically by the Gramscian concept of hegemony, by the strategic-relational approach to political processes, and by the regulation approach to political economy.
Highlights
In the i1mnediate post -war period, the Ainerican co1mni t1nent to a liberal world 1narket order rested on its econo1nic predo1ninance and the perceived need to strengthen the ties with its Western allies in an effort to contain co1mnunis1n and the Soviet Union
In su1n, the deep seated skepticis1n of the public towards a free trade agree1nent with 11exico was neutralized by port raying North Ainerican Free trade Agree1nent (NAFTA) as a job creator, by discrediting trade unions as parochial fear-1nongers unable to adapt to the new i1nperatives of the 1narket place, and by invoking Ainerican leadership in the Western
What are the reasons for the adherence of the United States to a liberal world 1narket order despite the erosion of the foundations for its original co1mnit1nent? In this paper I have focussed on the strategic behavior of internationalists inside and outside the Ainerican state: trilateralis1n, unilateralis1n, dollar devaluation, Structural
Summary
Were at ease in explaining the do1ninance of free -traders. [1] Most industries displayed a foreign trade surplus and the United States of Ainerica reigned supre1ne a1nong nations. States' international predo1ninance eroded, the Ainerican govern1nent continued to espouse a free trade rhetoric This continued co1mnit1nent to a liberal world 1narket order is no surprise to world-syste1n theorists. The recent increase in exceptions to the free trade rule, while upholding the rule in principle, fits well with these statist These types of argu1nents, cannot explain how the ideological consensus of state actors is for1ned and how it is reproduced. Anti-co1mnunis1n served to functions: it tied together the ideological bonds between the diverse classes and class fractions, and it satisfied diverse 1naterial interests through state intervention in the accu1nulation process via a "1nili tary They were especially pro1ninent in the Council on Foreign Relations and a1nong the anti -co1mnunist labor leadership.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
