Suchergebnisse

After the Sands outlines a vision and a road map to transitioning Canada to a low-carbon society. Despite its oil abundance, with no strategic reserves, Canada is woefully unprepared for the next global oil supply crisis. There's no good reason for Canadians to use much more oil per capita than people in other sparsely populated, northern countries like Norway, Finland and Sweden--nations that use 27 to 39 percent less oil per person. In After the Sands, Alberta-based political economist Gordon Laxer proposes a bold strategy of deep conservation and a Canada-first perspective to ensure that all Canadians have sufficient energy at affordable prices. The most achievable way to gain energy security is to supply Canadians with their own oil, natural gas and renewable energy. And the best way to cut carbon emissions is by phasing out Canada's role as a carbon-fuel exporter. Canada has all the oil, gas and coal needed to transition to a low-carbon future. Remarkable hydro power resources give Canadians a large base of renewable energy, which can be expanded with wind, solar, geothermal and biomass. Few countries have these options in adequate quantities. But, as Laxer argues, Canada will not get there until we overcome the power of vested interests and untangle the trade agreements that block Canadians from secure and fair access to the nation's own energy resources. Impeccably researched, After the Sands is critical reading for anyone concerned with climate change and the future of Canada.

In the 1960s, the left branded US imperialism the major enemy of social justice in the world. Such talk faded after the war against Vietnam and almost disappeared after communism fell in Eastern Europe. It's not that the American brand of informal empire disappeared. It continued through US influences on other states' policies, the sway of US corporations abroad on host governments, US military power, and the power of the Washington-based financial institutions. But, the discourse changed and raged around the softer term globalization. In the past few years, imperialism talk has roared back, led this time by the political right, who gave it a positive sheen. Some on the left have joined in too, in an exciting new literature, revising Marxist and Leninist critiques of imperialism. But, much of the political left and centre are still mired in aspirations for cosmopolitanism, which inadvertently obscure struggles for popular and national sovereignty. This paper examines the limits of cosmopolitanism for democracy, critiques the nature of US power, and discusses how a reasserted US empire has sparked the revival of nationalisms by looking at the cases of nationalism in the six top oil-exporting countries to the US. The paper concludes with inquiries into people-to-people internationalism and whether citizen-based democracy is possible without sovereignty.

Benjamin Barber établit un lien entre la mondialisation des entre‐prises et la résurgence des nationalismes ethnoculturels. Selon lui, ces deux phénomènes affaiblissent la démocratie. Barber ne parle pas des effets de la mondialisation sur l'autre aspect du nationalisme — le nationalisme civique, Aetatisé, qui prédomine dans les démo‐craties comme le Canada. Cet article étudie les liens qui unissent ethos, traditions et État au Canada, et qui en font un pays différent des États‐Unis. L'auteur se demande si le nouveau libéralisme de droite des années 1980 et 1990 n'a pas remis en question le caractère distinct du Canada. L'article présente aussi les tendances qui s'opposent à la nouvelle droite libérale au Canada.Benjamin Barber draws a connection between corporate globalization and the resurgence of ethno‐cultural nationalisms. Both weaken democracy, he contends. Barber does not discuss the effects of globalization on the other variety of nationalism—the civic, state‐based kind that predominates in highly diverse, democratic countries such as Canada. This paper examines the state‐based ethos and traditions that have kept Canada distinct from the United States and explores whether the new right liberalism of the 1980s and 1990s has eroded Canada's raison d'etre as a separate country. Counter trends to new right liberalism in Canada are also discussed.

Dans cette étude, nous examinons les hypothèses des partisans de la «mondialisation» et proposons des solutions totalement opposées. Dans la première partie, nous réfutons les arguments suivants au sujet de la «mondialisation»: la souveraineté nationale s'érode dans tous les pays; la part de propriété transnationale est plus importante que par le passé; la «mondialisation» constitue la conséquence inévitable du changement technologique; et la libéralisation de l'économie à l'échelle mondiale renforce la démocratic Dans la deuxième partie, nous examinons les solutions de rechange démocratiques que peuvent offrir les anciens et les nouveaux mouvements sociaux. L'utilisation de fonds d'investissement gérés par le public et engagés selon les besoins des collectivités est considérée comme une solution de rechange à l'orientation axée sur le marché mondial des entreprises transnationales.This paper critically examines the assumptions of the advocates of "globalization" and develops an alternative that is the polar opposite. The first half of the paper challenges the following assumptions about "globalization": that national sovereignty is eroding for all countries; that the level of transnational ownership is higher now than in the past; that "globalization" has been the inevitable result of technological change; that democracy is strengthened by global economic liberalization. The second half of the paper examines the prospects for the creation of democratic alternatives to globalization in old and new social movements. Socially controlled investment funds that have "location commitment" to communities are seen as an alternative to the globalization vision of transnational corporations.

LA DESTRUCTION DES COMMUNAUTÉS a toujours été un trait du capitalisme. Déposséder les communautés aborigénes et paysannes de leurs terres et les artisans de leurs outils et de leurs competences a constitué l'une des conditions préalables à l'essor du capitalisme industriel. Son triomphe a exigé une révolution culturelle, car, comme E.P. Thompson l'a noté, « tout développement économique se traduit également par une transformation culturelle1». Les idéologies nouvelles ‐ individualisme possessif, sécularisme et scientisme ‐ faisaient partie de cette révolution culturelle de grande portée qui, pour la première fois dans I'histoire, accompagnait et légitimait un systéme économique, et le justifiait comme opérant selon sa propre rationalité, indépendante du social.

CAPITALISM HAS ALWAYS BEEN about the destruction of community. The removal of communities of aboriginals and peasants from their land and craftsmen from their tools and their skills were crucial conditions for the development of early industrial capitalism. The triumph of capitalism required a cultural revolution, for, as E.P. Thompson has written, "there is no such thing as economic growth which is not at the same time, growth and change of a culture."1 New ideologies of possessive individualism, secularism and scientism were part of this far‐reaching cultural revolution, which accompanied and legitimated an economy that for the first time in history was conceived and justified as operating according to its own rational laws, independent of community.

J'explore dans cet article le caractère Schizophrène de l'économie politique au Canada: le même vocabulaire marxiste est utilisé par deux traditions bien distinctes, qui toutes deux se logent à l'enseigne de 'l'économie politique'. D'un côté on trouve des historien(ne)s idiographiques, des nationalistes qui insistent sur la position dépendante du Canada dans l'économie mondiale et qui postulent que l'histoire canadienne est principalement produite hors du pays. L'autre camp regroupe les internationalistes, des théoricien(ne)s nomothétiques qui s'intéressent à des questions bien différentes: l'ordre social et la révolution. Bien que ces dernier(e)s admettent que le Canada fait partie d'un ordre capitaliste international, ils/elles postulent que la classe capitaliste canadienne est en grande partie indigene, comme c'est le cas d'autres pays capitalistes avancés. Les deux perspectives ont tendance àêtre grevées d'idéologie et souffrent d'extrémisme épistémologique et méthodologique. Ce qui produit un dialogue de sourds. Je conclus en suggérant des pistes qui devraient permettre à chaque perspective de se renouveler et d'ouvrir des avenues prometteuses.This paper explores the schizophrenic character of Canadian political economy. Use of the same Marxist vocabulary cannot hide the existence of two very different perspectives under the rubric 'political economy.' On one side are nationalist idiographic historians who focus on Canada's dependent position in the world economy and assume that Canadian history is largely made outside of Canada. On the other side are nomothetic 'internationalist' theorists who address entirely different issues ‐ those of social order and revolution. While the latter assume that Canada is part of an international capitalist order, they assume the Canadian business class is largely indigenous, as in other advanced capitalist countries. Both perspectives tend to be ideologically charged and engage in epistemological and methodological extremism. The result is a dialogue of the deaf. The paper concludes by suggesting ways by which each perspective can renew itself and lead in more fruitful directions.

The question of why Canada incurred so much foreign ownership of its economy at so early a point in its history has generated three standard explanations: the tariff, proximity to the US, & weak nationalism among Canadian capitalists. Here, it is argued that the key factor was rather the relative political weakness of the Canadian agrarian class during the crucial years of initial industrialization. Reviewing the course of development among advanced nations that began industrialization at the end of the nineteenth century, it is suggested that Canada had a potential for developing an independent & nationally based industry; however, Canadian government policies led to foreign ownership & dependent industrialization by entrenching a conservative banking system, squandering an enormous amount of capital on superfluous railways, & failing to develop strong armed forces before 1914. It is concluded that actual economic development was class-determined, & that the defeat of popular agrarian movements due to ethnonational hostility between English & French Canada sealed Canada's fate as a dependent industrial economy. AA