The Sources of Social Power: Volume 4, Globalizations, 1945-2011
Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub
Distinguishing four sources of power - ideological, economic, military, and political - this series traces their interrelations throughout human history. This fourth volume of Michael Mann's analytical history of social power covers the period from 1945 to the present, focusing on the three major pillars of postwar global order: capitalism, the nation-state system, and the sole remaining empire of the world, the United States. In the course of this period, capitalism, nation-states, and empires interacted with one another and were transformed. Mann's key argument is that globalization is not just a single process, because there are globalizations of all four sources of social power, each of which has a different rhythm of development. Topics include the rise and beginnings of decline of the American Empire, the fall or transformation of communism (respectively, the Soviet Union and China), the shift from neo-Keynesianism to neoliberalism, and the three great crises emerging in this period - nuclear weapons, the great recession, and climate change.
marketization, democratic clubs demanded democratization and honest investigation of the Soviet past, labor groups demanded economic reforms to benefit workers, and nationalists demanded regional autonomy. Gorbachev was a democrat and rather optimistically expected that free elections within the party, including secret ballots and multiple candidates, would give him a mandate to continue reforms. But the party had long been more of an administrative agency than a party in the Western sense. When
stories up to about 1970. The impact of World War II To explain postwar developments we must start during the war. The United States did not declare war until the end of 1941 and for two full years before then had profited from selling war material to Britain and mobilizing for a possible war amid a recovering economy. There was military-led growth. Unused industrial capacity and unexploited technological improvements were brought onstream, aided by an increased labor supply (especially women), a
but it was hardly revolutionary. It merely manipulated the constitutional division of powers between state and federal authority, for it was believed (or hoped) that the federal government would have to step in and implement reform if violence in the streets continued. In the meantime nonviolence would give moral legitimacy to the movement, enabling it to win more black recruits and more sympathy from whites. Nonviolence is particularly suited to contexts (as in British India) where insurgents
world what Birmingham’s blacks already knew, that for men like Connor, the core of white supremacy was violence” (says Thornton, 2002: 311; cf. Lewis, 2006: 146–50). Selma, Alabama, saw similar events in 1965, when a mass march was met by violence led by Sheriff Clark, also captured on national television. Such white violence proved self-destructive. It inflamed black communities, drawing more support to the movement. If publicized – and it was great television – it generated national sympathy
from below for democracy. Between 1956 and 1960 ten military rulers in the hemisphere were deposed by movements promising political and social reform. The United States had supported 110 Globalizations, 1945–2011 most of the dictators until the last moment. A Democrat majority in Congress pressed for a more liberal policy. Yet only days before Kennedy took office, the United States thwarted a coup by reformists in Honduras, replacing them with conservatives. Note that the interventions and