It’s always amusing to me when someone “independently rediscovers” the exact same things that Marx and Lenin had already figured out over a hundred years ago, give it a fancy name and then act like it’s some great new revelation. In summary: it turns out that geopolitical policy is driven by the financial and economic interests of the ruling class, and not simply by the rational self-interest of states as the “realists” like to believe. It’s almost as if imperialism is the result of a certain monopoly stage of capitalist development. If only someone had written a book about this. If only someone had explained to the “realists” that states are not mystical self-actualizing entities but instruments of class rule.
I haven’t read the book but it’s probably about how Australia is a running dog for the US rather than rediscovering the concept of imperialism.
It probably is. I was commenting more on the way in which the post on MoA discusses it. However even the bit about how the UK and AUS are willing accomplices/junior partners is not new. And we already have the term vassal state which encapsulates that same concept. A vassal in the feudal system was after all a subordinate of the feudal overlord who was endowed with certain privileges in return for their fealty. I suppose if the target audience is Australian then it may be shocking news to some of them that they are in this position, but it’s not a new realization to anyone outside of the anglo sphere.
I agree. Just want to also note that the article is a republishing of a tweet of a Twitter user. It’s not a product of b or whatever the author calls themselves.