“ In contrast to imperialism, Empire established no territorial center of power and does not rely on fixed boundaries or barries. It is a decentered and deterritorializing apparatus of rules that progressively incorporates the entire global reals within its open, expanding frontiers, Empire manages through modulating networks of command. The distinct blended in the imperial global rainbow.”
Hardt and Negrt suggest that the new Empire is better compared to the Roman Empire rather than to European colonialism, since imperial Rome also loosely incorporated its subject states rather than controlling them directly.
Next we turn toward ‘Cultural crisis’ and we have seen an example of ‘Modernity at Large’ by Arjun Appadurai . Simon Gikandi astutely observes that despite the fact that globalization is so often seen to have made redundant the term of postcolonial critique, newness of globalization, key terms of post colonial studies: hybridity and difference’.
One of the interesting things connected with it is ‘Market Fundamentalism.’ P. Sainath observes, far from fostering ideological openness, has resulted in its own fundamentalism, which then catalyzes other in reaction:
“ Market Fundamentalism destroys more human lives than any other simply because it cuts across all national, cultural, geographic, religious and other boundaries. It’s as much at home in Moscow as in Mumbai or Minnesota. South Africa- whose advances in the early 1990s thrilled the world- moved swiftly from apartheid to neoliberalism. It sits in early Hindu, Islamic or Christian societies. And its fundamentalisms. Based on the premise that the market is the solution to all the problems of the human race, it is, too, a very religious fundamentalism. It has its own Gospel: The Gospel of St. Growth of St. Choice…” (2001:n.p.)
While discussing market fundamentalism we have also discussed Movie ‘ Reluctant Fundamentalism’. What is ‘Reluctant Fundamentalism’, so it is a Combo of Religious and market fundamentalism.
No comments:
Post a Comment